Fierce FBI concludes not a hate crime for two Marines to knock a gay guy unconscious

[Bluebear]

Apparently the injury wasn't serious enough, the FBI and local police concluded. Mind you, they hit him in the head and knocked him unconscious. Not a serious injury:

In June two U.S. Marines were arrested in Savannah, Georgia after viciously beating a gay man they claimed had winked at them. The victim was hospitalized after suffering two seizures at the site of the attack. The case prompted national outrage and a local protest vigil after the men were only charged with misdemeanor assault. On Friday a joint investigation by the FBI and local police concluded that the case did not merit any hate crimes charges.

Johnson said after the FBI, the Savannah-Chatham Metropolitan Police Department and the DA’s office reviewed Daly's medical records and conducted further investigation, they determined this case had “no merit” to be considered a hate crime. “I can’t speak on the specifics because this is pending litigation, but for a crime to be considered a felony there has to be proof of a sustained injury,” Johnson said. “It’s my understanding Daly suffered only a punch. Based on his medical records we could not upgrade the charge from a misdemeanor to a felony.” If convicted of a misdemeanor, the Marines could face less than a year in jail and a fine of no more than $1,200, she added.




http://gay.americablog.com/2010/08/fbi-that-would-be-obamas-fbi-concludes.html

[uppityperson]

1. k&r

[RKP5637]

2. In this country, anymore, violence seems to be excused as not a big deal. Too much

crap goes on like this often not reported. All minorities in this country seem to be open season as prey. It must be so great in the US to be one of the bigoted elite that can go around bashing people and oh, that's OK guys, it's just not that big a deal. Disgusting.

[Touchdown]

14. What do you mean "anymore"?

For gays in America, this is SOP, and historical. "They were just boys being boys. The pervert asked for it!"

Gay Panic Defense- Sheppard's assailants
Twinkie Defense-Harvey Milk's killer
The list goes on.

[RKP5637]

17. Excellent point! Delete the "anymore." Thanks! n/t

[T Wolf]

3. The few. The proud. The recruiting poster models.

[Angry Dragon]

4. These two marines find that they have to beat a man that winks

at them?? I feel that these two men must be insecure in their masculinity.

Perhaps women should start carrying baseball bats and knee-cap any man
that talks to them. They could claim they were just protecting their virtue.

I have been hit on by gay men and found that I was not offended nor resorted to violence.
Perhaps these little boys need to grow up.

[GodlessBiker]

5. That's what they are...little boys. They haven't grown up. Their lives are a playground.

[mitchtv]

6. business as usual

Not even a crime in most of the nation,particularly the south.(not that things are any better in the rest of the country). what's suprising is an arrest was made. A conviction? I doubt it.

[Bluebear]

8. 'what's suprising is an arrest was made'

Now that's true. And whatever made me think they would have to pay for what they did? Bah.

[pgodbold]

7. One wonders how many women these two have winked at, wolf whistled, sexist remarked to and

harassed in in their shining careers.

[Arctic Dave]

9. Take a 2x4 to both their faces. It won't leave a sustained injury.

[jberryhill]

10. I guess it depends on how "bodily injury" is generally interpreted by the courts under 18 USC 249

I don't know how the term "bodily injury" has been applied under the relevant statute, but that seems to be what the decision turns upon:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000249----000-.html

(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.—

(A) In general.— Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person—

(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and

(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—

(I) death results from the offense; or

(II) the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

[pschoeb]

12. Well considering that seems to include attempts at bodily injury

I don't see how this doesn't apply to this case.

Also this says plain bodily injury, and the FBI seems to be using a serious bodily injury standard, which is not how the law is defined.

The federal law has:

bodily injury
(A) a cut, abrasion, bruise, burn, or disfigurement;
(B) physical pain;
(C) illness;
(D) impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; or
(E) any other injury to the body, no matter how temporary.

serious bodily injury
(A) a substantial risk of death;
(B) extreme physical pain;
(C) protracted and obvious disfigurement; or
(D) protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty; and


Permanent or life threatening bodily injury

[jberryhill]

13. Attempts are only included in connection with specified weapons..

I don't know where you got those definitions from, nor am I familiar with prior cases interpreting this particular statute. When you say "The federal law has..." it's not as if every term in every federal law is defined the same way for all purposes.

A decision not to prosecute under this particular statute is not some kind of exoneration, nor does it mean the attackers are not going to be prosecuted for other crimes. I sincerely doubt the decision that this was an edge case, made by a prosecutor with more than five minutes familiarity with the statute and cases under it, was motivated by some kind of "anti gay bias".

Notice the statement "Based on his medical records..."

Okay, what do we know? He is alleged to have "winked" and subsequently had seizures.

That leads me to wonder whether the winking was a symptom of an oncoming attack of an existing seizure disorder, and that the punch may have had nothing to do with it. If the guy had a seizure disorder - no way would you get a conviction. There's enough reasonable doubt as to causation to drive a truck through.

But, if that were the case, disclosure of all of the facts would violate his medical privacy.

[red red red]

11. They are sure going...

to have fun when they get home, reporting to the Klan how they got out of it.

[Dappleganger]

15. Gay people need to protect themselves.

IMO they should all carry, since it's been made clear that the courts won't protect you, the police won't protect you and the military won't do it either.

[RKP5637]

19. Pink Pistols - http://www.pinkpistols.org/ n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

16. Why do you hate American's right to hate?

[RKP5637]

20. Yep, Americas' #1 product, hatred. n/t

[QC]

18. Kicking sensibly. n/t

[stevedeshazer]

21. +1

[Bluebear]

22. Don't those two big brave hero's mugshots just look smug & smarmy?

Ecch.

[stevedeshazer]

23. Just completely creepy.

Guys who look like that scare the shit out of me, and I'm 6'1" 210. I'd cross the fuckin' street.

[dickthegrouch]

24. Blue Shirt terrifies me ....

He's soooo cuuuuute! I'd wink at him in a heartbeat :(