This new video has emerged showing the brutal attack on a tourist in Baltimore on St. Patrick’s Day. The video also clearly shows a man who stands above the victim to take his picture as he and others laugh at his being beaten, stripped, and robbed on the street. In the meantime, the Baltimore Police Chief Commissioner Frederick H. Bealefeld III is being criticized for dismissing the possibility of a hate crime — insisting that this is nothing like the Trayvon Martin case.
Various commentators have asked why the attack by the black mob on the one white person shown on the street was not treated as a possible race crime. Bealefeld, however, insisted that the video shows that this is just a “drunken opportunistic criminality” by people on the street. Notably, he said that he did not want to hear people raising race and suggesting that this is another Trayvon Martin case with “race-baiting” and “fear-mongering.”
While I am not sure that race was a factor based on this evidence, I am unsure how the Police Chief can rule it out on this evidence. You have a single white individual shown on the street who is singled out for this attack. He was not simply beaten and robbed but demeaned. The stripping of this clothes and taunting of the victim was an act of hate not opportunistic crime. Without speaking with a single witness or perpetrator, it is unclear why this is being immediately dismissed as a random act of violence where in the Martin case the Justice Department Civil Rights Division intervened within days into the Florida case as a presumptive hate crime.
Part of the problem rests with the vague definition of a hate crime. Race is often a factor in crime. There are some areas of cities like Baltimore where a white person is unwise to go into out of fear of an attack. As mentioned once on this blog how my sister was once told by an African American police officer that she should leave a Chicago neighborhood immediately because she is white. The officer was doing this out of genuine concern for her. Conversely, black people have been followed and attacked in white neighborhoods, as alleged in the Martin case. Police know that, if they are honest about the role of race in crimes, there would be an explosion of cases defined as hate crimes.
Here is the Maryland law:
§ 10-304.
Because of another’s race, color, religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or national origin, a person may not:
(1) (i) commit a crime against that person;
(ii) damage the real or personal property of that person;
(iii) deface, damage, or destroy, attempt to deface, damage, or destroy the real or personal property of that person; or
(iv) burn or attempt to burn an object on the real or personal property of that person.
(2) commit a violation of item (1) of this section that:
(i) except as provided in item (ii) of this item, involves a separate crime that is a felony; or
(ii) results in the death of the victim.
The question is whether a crime occurred “because” of the person’s race. Many crimes are triggered by a person being singled out due to their race in a hostile neighborhood. Thus, many crimes begin with a confrontation with racial elements or identifications. Part of the controversy over hate crime prosecutions is the lack of a clear standard which crimes can be denoted as hate crimes. Some Maryland organizations insists that a crime is a hate crime when the “victim perceives it to be a hate crime.” That is a pretty low standard and dangerously subjective. One site advises readers that the victim’s perception is enough for a hate crime:
What is a Hate Crime?
A hate crime is a criminal act directed at an individual or group because of membership in a particular racial, religious, ethic or gender group. Vandalism to a house of worship, assault on an individual, or a bombing of a building – each may be a hate crime – if it meets any of the following criteria:When racial, religious or ethnic statements are made during the incident.
When hate group symbols are displayed.
When the motive of a crime is to harm, injure or intimidate a particular group or organization.
When the victim perceives it to be a hate crime.
Frankly, it is often difficult to have an objective and civil discussion of such cases with passions running high. I am not convinced that the Baltimore case is a hate crime and I certainly understand why the Police Chief does not want to add an inflammatory race element to a crime that is already causing public discord. However, the Baltimore and Martin cases do raise interesting questions on how certain crimes are defined as suspected hate crimes. The question is whether “but for” the race of people like the Baltimore tourist attack, the mob would have left him alone. He was the only person currently known to have been subjected to this demeaning attack on that day. It is unclear how that question can be answered from these videos alone. If he was initially singled out due to his race, does that make this a possible hate crime? In either case, do you believe it is possible to exclude race as a motivating factor based on this videos?
Source: Baltimore Sun
I spent 5 hours on the streets of Baltimore in 1962. Only one beer, Watching. I’ll never do it again.
Andrew,
Do I detect a little hate in your voice. Maybe even racial. A muttered “niggah” even? You are just the type of lawmaker who unites us in “we” vs “they” polarities. Thanks for the timely example.
As for egregrious, you don’t know shit about what is egregrious in those circles.
The application of hate laws must be broad and even. These people displayed a racial grouping consistent with hate crimes and an egregious attack on a person of another racial profile as a group, which should automatically make it a hate crime charge, since this is how hate crimes go down, like the one in Tulsa. I want hate crime charges for all three, with heavier hate penalties. We have to start using hate laws now, not later.
If you piss too much on folks, they piss on each other.
The New Testament makes clear that it’s not a new problem, but aggravated now by 200 years of false democracy.
How true, it seems we are in a downward spiral of inhumanity whether it is Ryan budget or the streets of Baltimore! -Ken McBride
“Death spiral” comes to mind… (We’re a crisis-oriented lot and, until something shatters the sensibilities…., it will be business as usual, for the most part, with a little outrage here and there, when something is blatantly obvious.)
Ken McBride,
And we know who are greasing the skids.
the white guy put himself into a dangerous place. he made that choice. he was self-destructive? these very damaged black people needed to beat someone down they way they were taught to do.
the black people who hurt him chose to be violent. are they being held responsible for their actions? is someone helping them see that what they did was wrong?
bullies beat people to feel some kind of power. they need to be taught how to gain power in a way that is productive.
AN and Frankly,
There is another question. Which came first? Were we better before and deteriorated to this condition? Or are we progressing from it?
I hope it is only a temporary societal caused disease with obvious causes which can be remedied.
AN,
An unfortunate situation happened recently in Dallas, where a black kid 12 or 13 years old was pushed in front of a moving train…. Why because some other kids that happened to be black wanted his iPhone….. The child is dead now…. The others are facing possible prison sentences…..
The end result no one got what they bargained for…… They were all black….. I guess race played out there as well…..
“But lets not kid ourseles into believing that any of this hate and anger belongs to any one race, nation, religion or color. This is the human condition -Frankly” How true, it seems we are in a downward spiral of inhumanity whether it is Ryan budget or the streets of Baltimore!
Frankly,
I swear I did not read or look at your link prior to my commenting.
Weird that we ended on the same theme.
Did you search on “campfires down South”?
And it should read “humiliation”.
But lets not kid ourseles into believing that any of this hate and anger belongs to any one race, nation, religion or color. This is the human condition -Frankly
In a nutshell.
AY,
Yes, he had something they wanted. The guaranteed dignity conferred by white skin, its economic advantages, and its surety of outcome.
But that could not be stolen and become theirs. So they took some valuables and as much of his humitiation as could be posted on the net.
They were in fact kind to him. They did not hang him, set him on fire, and scream in joy as the KKK has done.
Here is another picture of some fine men enjoing a little camp fire:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Red_Summer_1919_Omaha_Nebraska_lynching.jpg
Something about the mob mentality that just makes it seem so right to take pictures of the happy crowd enjoying the action.
That does not forgive this mob in Baltimore they need to be found & sentanced for their crimes just like the hundreds of people in these pictures – and thousands in other pictures just like them – deserved to be found & jailed. But lets not kid ourseles into believing that any of this hate and anger belongs to any one race, nation, religion or color. This is the human condition
I don’t think race had anything to do with this other than he happened to be different and he had somethings they wanted…..
The police chief can rule it out because it does not put the city in a good light. They need white tourists to keep the economy going. Certainly on the face of it this, like the Martin case appears to be a racially motivated attack. It needs to be investigated. Just like the Martin shooting now that it has gained attention it will be.
I can hardly wait for the next 80 comments in this thread as the racist rednecks crawl out of their dark holes to explain how horrible black men are and how whites would never behave this way.
google: Thomas Shipp and Abram Smith, lynched in Marion, Indiana on August 7, 1930
or
http://notmytribe.com/tag/lynching
all people can behave like animals when the crowd permits it
We dont know what victim was saying during the carousing. It might be that he was dissing Saint Pat, singing Ol Lang Syne, dissing women, dissing some person the rest did not know, but annoying them, or one or two of them. It looks like a robbery occurred. A watch. Possibly he was asking what time of day it was and someone took the watch in partial jest and in partial theivery. Perhaps his clothes were offensie in some way. Too Green? Not Green. Other things than race icould have singled him out.
I couldn’t rule that possibility out. The fact that this video was taken with the intention to have it posted to worldstarhiphop.com (0:07) underscores that the individuals knew this kind of targeted assault would qualify on a site that commonly posts similar videos, and that they were not at risk of being assaulted themselves.
That said, hate crime laws are actually dividing society by defining the groups that are perpetrators or victims rather than focusing on individual actions. Hate crime laws are also paving the way for the State to define and prosecute broader thought crimes.
Why should these defendants face fewer penalties if the victim was black?
We can sometimes deduce intent from actions but more so from words spoken. What may have started out as a random street crime could devolve into a hate crime depending on the words used. I’d like a clear audio of the event to make the call, but calling it suspicious would be an understatement.
Dear Professor,
“You have a single white individual shown on the street who is singled out for this attack. He was not simply beaten and robbed but demeaned. The stripping of this clothes and taunting of the victim was an act of hate not opportunistic crime.”
Sir, if it was a hate crime the victim would be brain-dead, sorely wounded by knives, face mashed in, and finished off with several shots followed by recorded shouts of vengance. (Plus much more, but that’s a sample)
This was simply an example of humiliating someone who gets so drunk he can’t hold himself up. It even occurs within a gang, not just to obvious outsiders. It is related to more gentlemanly rules known as “holding your liquor” down South. “If you can’t, draw yourself from the scene.”
I would suggest your experiences are limited and include no such carousal scenes.
As for being in the wrong place, I have lived in NYC for some 6 weeks.
But on an occasion years later wound up daytime in the wrong veighborhood in the lower East side, where It was not gentrified. Standing in the crossing, I went to a policeman to ask for an escort to the subway to get quickly out of there.
You write:
“He was the only person currently known to have been subjected to this demeaning attack on that day.”
Surely, that is odd. Perhaps the others attacked died, went home and slept it off, etc., etc. Speculating on these and the other grounds seems just that, “speculative”.
Yes, I will not deny the eventual motivation of “race”, but solely for it being fully motivated. 350 years of persecution leaves a taste which it is remarkable that greater “cleansing” with white blood has not been required.
But this is not race hatred.
And if you will define them as hooligans to justify condemning them—-then be glad they chiefly predate on their own kindl So frustrated are they, and cowed. The man has hard punishments.
.