According to WIST tv, the solicitor in Columbia,SC says that the fact that eight black teens attacked a white kid, dragged him a couple of blocks down the road, beat him and left him for dead doesn't necessarily mean it was a hate crime.
He says "no evidence suggests the beating was racially motivated other than the race of the people involved."
Glad that's all cleared up.
http://www.wistv.com/story/14993157/solicitor-no-evidence-that-five-points-beating-was-racially-motivated
Well of course it wasn't a hate crime, Max. It's not like, say, eight white kids beating up on one black kid.
Posted by: metrosucks | June 30, 2011 at 04:16 PM
This is good news. Now we can drop the term "hate crime" from our vocabularies and the courts.
If not that, it provides a great defense for miscreants: "no, your honor, I didn't beat him senseless because he was [insert ethnicity]. I beat him senseless because I was suffering from "beating-people-senseless withdrawal".
Posted by: ZZMike | June 30, 2011 at 05:28 PM
I've never liked the whole "hate crime" thing anyway - trying to read "thought" or intent into violent crime is just an exercise in futility. The crime is the crime.
Posted by: Max | June 30, 2011 at 05:57 PM