Wow, just wow. WTF, Kentucky? Can he be charged with a federal hate crime?

[catbyte]

That is, if there is anybody at the DOJ even remotely interested in hate crimes against minorities anymore.

Link to tweet

Authorities say the shootings at a Kentucky grocery store appear to be racially motivated. But a prosecutor said that because the state's hate crime statute does not include homicides, the accused gunman was not charged with a hate crime https://cnn.it/2Qb1tmb

[jberryhill]

1. He's charged with murder, which is a capital offense in KY

It's like the stoning scene in Life of Brian, "You're only making it worse for yourself."

While, yes, KY has introduced legislation to include murder in its hate crimes statute, I'm confused by what that does other than some weird optics.

Typically, a crime like "assault" will have a range of penalties, and where there is a hate crime statute, the penalties will be enhanced for an assault motivated by race, gender, etc..

However, in KY, their murder statute is pretty straightforward and it is a capital offense. So the idea of an "enhanced penalty" for a crime that can yield a death sentence is kind of an interesting idea.

What additional penalty, on top of being executed, would you suggest?

[ProudLib72]

6. Why do you say "weird optics"?

I would think that would be the number one reason for labeling it a hate crime. While I agree that it adds nothing to sentencing portion, I believe it would expose this as, truly, a crime inspired by prejudice.

[jberryhill]

7. "While I agree that it adds nothing"

Here is what is being suggested here.

In order to convict him of murder, and execute him, it must be proven that (a) he killed people, (b) with the intent to do so.

In a criminal prosecution, each element must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. You got TWO elements here.

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=19717

But instead of that, in order to convict him of the "hate crime" of murder, you would propose that the prosecution be required to prove:

(a) he killed people, (b) with the intent to do so, and (c) was motivated by racial animus.

That's THREE elements.

So to, as you put it, "add nothing to the sentencing portion", you want to require the prosecution to prove an additional element in order to reach the same result?

The reason why murder was left out of the KY hate crime statute is because it adds nothing but an extra element of proof in order to reach an identical result.

It makes sense in the context of, say, some form of assault, where it would be the difference between X years and X+N years. But in the context of a charge where the guy is going to be executed if found guilty, then I guess I just don't see the point. He'll be executed twice?

[ProudLib72]

9. Ok, now I get it

Thanks for the explanation. I agree we don't want to add to the burden of proof.

[WillowTree]

8. Kind of reminds me of the line from "The Rock".

Goodspeed: "Well I'm having a hard time concentrating. Can you do something about it?"

Mason: "Like what? Kill him again?"

[marble falls]

2. That's the problem with Cracker Jack box law degrees, anybody can get one.

[Locutusofborg]

3. To answer the question

Yes, the DOJ does charge alleged perpetrators with hate crimes. Two well known cases, the Charlottesville Unite the Right rally accused murderer, James Fields, Junior and the Pittsburgh synagogue alleged shooter, Robert Bowers are charged with federal hate crimes.

[Iggo]

4. Capital Murder should be enough.

[MineralMan]

5. And yet, he remains charged with a capital offense.

It's not like he's walking free, after all. He's in a heap o' trouble!