As already stated, there are no other examples I know of that include an assailant recording the assault on video.
This latest instance is a milestone in thug stupidity. It's possible he wanted to be "famous".
When a white man does it, it's a hate crime
- Thread starter Big Money
- Start date
As already stated, there are no other examples I know of that include an assailant recording the assault on video.
This latest instance is a milestone in thug stupidity. It's possible he wanted to be "famous".
Yeah, but you can't cite any of these other cases either. Your argument seems to be a bunch of vague empty nothing.
It does?
An angry mob of youngsters brutally battered a man who told them to stop playing basketball outside his home - and allegedly then told him 'that's justice for Trayvon'.
Matthew Owens was hit with bricks, chairs, pipes and paint cans on his own front porch by 20 people after complaining about the noise.
Owens' sister, Ashley Parker, claimed the group attacking her white brother were all African-American as she told wkrg.com: 'It was the scariest thing I have ever witnessed.'
She alleged that, as they walked away leaving him badly bruised and bleeding on the ground, one of them then said: 'Now that's justice for Trayvon'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2135549/Trayvon-Martin-case-Black-teenager-admits-beating-white-man-revenge-Martins-death.html#ixzz2oiDjKPot
It does?
An angry mob of youngsters brutally battered a man who told them to stop playing basketball outside his home - and allegedly then told him 'that's justice for Trayvon'.
Matthew Owens was hit with bricks, chairs, pipes and paint cans on his own front porch by 20 people after complaining about the noise.
Owens' sister, Ashley Parker, claimed the group attacking her white brother were all African-American as she told wkrg.com: 'It was the scariest thing I have ever witnessed.'
She alleged that, as they walked away leaving him badly bruised and bleeding on the ground, one of them then said: 'Now that's justice for Trayvon'.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2135549/Trayvon-Martin-case-Black-teenager-admits-beating-white-man-revenge-Martins-death.html#ixzz2oiDjKPot
This is what you are comparing to the knockout game? The story clearly says the motivation was that he told them to stop playing basketball. How is that a hate crime?
You suck at this troll.
As far as I know, he was told the attack was "for Trayvon".
Was this assault prosecuted by the DOJ as a hate crime?
How about the attacks on Jews in New York?
Here's a sidewalk near where the attacks took place.
http://www.ablxboston.com/national/26609-brooklyn-teen-gang-playing-knock-out-the-jew-attack-man-in-shocking-video.html
As far as I know, he was told the attack was "for Trayvon".
Was this assault prosecuted by the DOJ as a hate crime?
How about the attacks on Jews in New York?
Here's a sidewalk near where the attacks took place.
http://www.ablxboston.com/national/26609-brooklyn-teen-gang-playing-knock-out-the-jew-attack-man-in-shocking-video.html
What was supposedly said AFTER the crime by by ONE supposed assailant is not proof that the crime was motivated by racial hatred. The sidewalk proves what? This is not a knockout case.
I suggested you were comparing apples to oranges and you have proven it. The guy video taped his confessed motivation prior to the act. Your example does not compare at all, troll.
So unless there is video of an assailant uttering racial remarks prior to an attack, no hate crime was committed?
I already answered that. It is still no. The taped confession that he was going to target a black person is very solid proof and would likely result in a hate crime charge 100% of the time. There is almost no real proof of a hate crime in this example you offered and it's not an example of the so called "knockout game." It's a fail for you troll.
The difference being the testimony of witnesses and victims instead of a video "confession".
Can't wait to see your argument that this wasn't a racially motivated hate crime:
A 78-year-old white man says he was savagely beaten by a gang of six youths shouting: 'This is for Trayvon. Kill that white.'
Six youngsters aged between 11 and 17, both white and black, allegedly launched a merciless attack on Dallas Watts in East Toledo, Ohio.
The frail pensioner says he was on the way home from the shop after buying treats for his dogs when the boys approached him and one said: 'Take him down.'
For the next four minutes the youths continued to punch and kick Watts, until he lost consciousness.
At one point, the slight father-of-four recalled, he was lifted from the ground so one of the boys could drop-kick him in the chest.
According to a police report, as the boys beat Watts they shouted: 'Get that white. This is for Trayvon ... Trayvon lives, white. Kill that white.'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126003/Trayvon-Martin-case-6-youths-beat-man-78-twisted-racial-revenge-attack.html#ixzz2oimsqyas
Yes, that's a big difference. Is this part of your troll act or are you just that dumb? Prosecutors choose what to charge someone with based on the strength of the evidence.
Again, your article establishes that there is almost no proof of a hate crime. You got the word of some old guy with a barely plausible story. "Get that white," yeah that sounds like the way people talk. /sarcasm
Toledo police say its still not clear whether the attack on Mr Watts was meant in revenge for Trayvon's killing or whether the old man's 'Remember Trayvon' statement was misunderstood as threatening or racist.
Mr Watts has said he meant the statement in a 'peaceful way', telling the Blade: 'All I meant by saying "remember Trayvon" is to remember what happened to him, don't duplicate it here.'
The attack took place several hours after a peaceful rally in the town to show support for the Trayvon's family.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sted-racial-revenge-attack.html#ixzz2oirXZUlI
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Victim and or witness testimony aren't admissible in your court, apparently...does that mean the DOJ is justified in failing to file hate crime charges in cases where the accused neglects to video their confession beforehand?
Of course it is admissible. The testimony of a single witness is pretty weak evidence, though. A video taped statement that you are going to target a black person followed by taking that action is pretty solid evidence.
Again, idiot, it's not a sign of any sort of hypocrisy that the a prosecutor is more likely to charge when the evidence is strong. You have not offered a single example of a knockout case. Of the examples you did offer there is little to no proof of a hate crime and nowhere the sort of conclusive evidence in this Barrett case. In one case, you are basing it on what was said AFTER the fact and with a stated motivation that the victim told the assailants to stop playing basketball. In the other case you got some crazy looking old dude that may have threatened his attackers with comments about "remember Trayvon." Where is this epidemic of racially motivated black on white "knockout game" attacks if you can't reference a single one?
I provided a link and you deemed it irrelevant.
http://www.ablxboston.com/national/26609-brooklyn-teen-gang-playing-knock-out-the-jew-attack-man-in-shocking-video.html
Both claims are wrong or just lies. You have given no example of a clear case of a "knockout game" hate crime. Nothing you cited is remotely close to the sort of evidence there is against Barrett. You cited two cases that were not examples of the "knockout game" where there was almost no support for a hate crime charge. I never said any of it was irrelevant. I have not used that word in this thread. I said you are comparing apples to oranges.
Taft2016
Verified User
In about the year 2000, I was reading the DOJ website page about hate crimes. They described white males as the demographic most likely to commit a hate crime. What struck me at the time was that this was when racial profiling was a hot topic, having come up even in the Gore-Bradley debates. Yet here was the DOJ racially profiling. A perusal of other crimes on the website did not mention that black males were the demographic most likely to commit those crimes.
This crime classification was designed to carve out one category in which white males were the leading offenders. Charging minorities with hate crimes simply undermines the law's obvious goal.
There was an incident in Brooklyn years ago where a mob of black teens attacked smaller white kids in a playground shouting racist taunts. The NYPD refused to look into it as a bias incident (NYPD jargon for "hate crime"). The major NYC daily newspapers would not even run the story. A local Brooklyn on-line paper ran with the story at the time and the local white community had to band together to get the obvious hate crime investigated as such.
http://violenceagainstwhites.wordpr...outing-honky-and-crackers-wasnt-a-hate-crime/
There's no question this was a hate crime. But adding 30 black perpetrators to the statistics would completely unbalance the relatively small number of such incidents in NYC, and probably would have moved blacks into the category of "most likely perpetrator." Which, of course, would run contrary to the goal of hate crimes.
This crime classification was designed to carve out one category in which white males were the leading offenders. Charging minorities with hate crimes simply undermines the law's obvious goal.
There was an incident in Brooklyn years ago where a mob of black teens attacked smaller white kids in a playground shouting racist taunts. The NYPD refused to look into it as a bias incident (NYPD jargon for "hate crime"). The major NYC daily newspapers would not even run the story. A local Brooklyn on-line paper ran with the story at the time and the local white community had to band together to get the obvious hate crime investigated as such.
http://violenceagainstwhites.wordpr...outing-honky-and-crackers-wasnt-a-hate-crime/
There's no question this was a hate crime. But adding 30 black perpetrators to the statistics would completely unbalance the relatively small number of such incidents in NYC, and probably would have moved blacks into the category of "most likely perpetrator." Which, of course, would run contrary to the goal of hate crimes.
I answered this question several times you useless troll. The evidence for a hate crime in the two cases you cited (not knockouts game examples) was very weak or non existent. The evidence in Barrett's case is extremely compelling.
The difference being the self-recorded video.