Dave Gibson, Norfolk Examiner, July 10, 2009
On the night of June 27, Marty Marshall and his family were standing outside a friend’s home in Akron, OH. The group had gathered to watch a fireworks display at nearby Firestone Park, the festive night ended suddenly, when the family as well as their friends were brutally attacked by a group of nearly 50 black teenagers.
{snip}
There was no incident which led to the attack, but as the black teenagers approached the Marshall family, they shouted: “This is our world” and “This is a black world.”
The only motivation behind this crime seems to be the fact that the Marshalls are white.
{snip}
Marty suffered a concussion and several deep bruises to his eye. He spent five nights in the critical care unit at Akron General Medical Center.
{snip}
Despite the obvious nature of the attack, Akron police have not classified the beating as a hate crime.
{snip}
Of course, many believe that this case is only the latest example of a possible bias by law enforcement in crimes which could seemingly qualify as so-called ‘hate crimes.’
In 2007, a mob beating of a white teenager in Norfolk, VA by black teenagers stirred-up racial tensions and had many of Norfolk’s white residents asking why the boy’s attackers had not been charged with a hate crime.
The case gained national attention, after a video of the attack was given to the news media and was posted on Youtube.
{snip}
Again, despite the overwhelming evidence, police did not charge the black teens with a hate crime and downplayed the obvious racial overtones to the case.
{snip}
Ultimately, six black teenagers were found responsible for the attack, and were only charged with, and later convicted of misdemeanor assault.
In 2007, there were 3,802 white Americans charged with hate crimes, while only 1,045 black Americans were charged with the same offense.
?
?
[Editor’s Note: A fuller account of the attack on the Marshall family can be read here.
Original article
(Posted on July 13, 2009)
Comments
While anyone who commits a hate criem should be charged, the fact is that 95% of hate crimes are perpertrated by Whites , especially White men. thus theyare the ones who are more likely to be prosecuted.
It is simply a fact.
It’s not the police. They get their orders from the politicians who are afraid of losing votes come election time. It’s time to get rid of the spineless and traitorous Republican Party and replace it with a true conservative one.
Hate crimes laws differ wildly.
Of course there is a double standard! From the Jena six, White girls being attacked and beaten severely by a majority black crowd at an attraction somewhere in CA to horrific murders blacks generally get either a slap on the wrist or miss out on the “hate crime” enhancement that is often tossed at a White person accused of a crime against a black person. Most of the time where there has been a vicious beat down like this one you will hear that the local police are not “investigating this as a hate crime” and then eventually the perpetrators are convicted of something like minor assault or battery and give a slap on the wrist sentence. When these cases make high profile status, Al Shapton or Jesse Jackson will show up and start making noise and threats or the perpetrator will say something like “they called me the N word” The victim, who is either dead or suffering from injuries that make him or her unable to remember much of the incident.
Of course there’s a double standard on hate crimes — both in police reluctance to charge blacks with them, and in the mainstream media’s squeamishness about using that term to describe attacks by blacks on Whites — like the Marschall incident. And as was mentioned by a poster on this website the other day, when the mainstream media do report on blacks attacking Whites, they usually disable any “Comments” section included at the end of the story to keep Whites from pointing out the obvious.
I also noted that one of the posters at the end of this original article pointed out how a home security company’s TV ads always are at great pains to show us that the “bad guy” breaking into a house is White — never black or Hispanic. When I placed a post on a local website in my hometown calling attention to that ad and criticizing it, I was immediately denounced by other posters as a “racist.” Naturally.
Some of the biggest black apologists in the country are the police brass. They’re nothing if they’re not disgusting.
So mentally challenged they believe playing down black on white attacks will make their jobs easier by preventing white reprisals. They’re too dense to understand they’re encouraging MORE black on white hate crimes and creating a growing rage in whites, which is going to surface at some point in all its horror.
We know who they are in my general area, and we’ve made note of them for future reference. The whole country should do the same.
That’s why I’ve always believed the title ‘hate crime’, along with differing levels of punishment applied for it is the most asinine and divisive categorization I’ve ever heard. Is a white man robbed and killed by a black any less dead than a black man robbed and killed by a white? What a boatload of hooey.
In 2007, there were 3,802 white Americans charged with hate crimes, while only 1,045 black Americans were charged with the same offense.
A telling statistic would be the number of White conviction/sentencings as opposed to the number of BLACK convictions/sentencing, the sentence itself could also be ….instructive!
In 2007, there were 3,802 white Americans charged with hate crimes, while only 1,045 black Americans were charged with the same offense.
It has long been obvious that ‘hate crimes’ were to be a Whites only offense. If the laws were applied equally, minorities would be convicted in the greatest number of offenses so far. From my own life experience I am convinced that Whites in general are the least racist and most fair-minded people. Sadly this is to our detriment.
Africans, Asians, Mestizo Hispanics, East Indians, tend to be openly racist/ethnocentric. Just be observant when you are around any non-whites, you see what I mean.
Pelosi and Kennedy figure only people like us and our kids will have to suffer in a multiculti Amerika that is why they are all for one-way hate crime laws.
This is just a reposting of the very appropriate video link posted here by Mr H.Dumpty on this story when it broke last week.
‘Holder Admits: No Equality Under Hate Bill - by Ted Pike’http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnziaXfYhc4&feature=channel_page
From Mr Holders own words…historic basis .”
That word “historical” specifically, means Whites are screwed.
It seems as a group , modern day Whites have to pay their penance for the crimes of some Whites perpetrated in the past.
I thought the post racial vision was something along the lines of “we are all equal individuals who are innocent until proven guilty”.
The ‘true equality’ ideal will probably be implemented around the year 2050, when it’ll be us Whites who’ll really be needing some help.
This re-affirms my belief that the reason black people act so heinously towards white people is due to the fact they face no punishment if they do. If a white person retaliates, then the question of racial motivation is raised. It may be hard to fathom, but at one time black people were afraid of white people, for good reason. Black people were a lot more polite than they are now, knowing that if trouble breaks out, they can always say someone called them a name or some such tripe and expect to be completely exonerated if not compensated.
When society tolerates injustice of one group by another, then the aforementioned “special” group acts irresponsibly. Societies goal should be to ensure individuals are not persecuted by groups. Hate laws are redundant. It makes no difference if you’re beaten to a pulp because you’re black, gay, white, etc. You’re no less violated and imposed upon, society should punish the parties responsible equally.
blacks are 16 times more likely to murder whites than the reverse, 34 times more likely to assault, 100 times more likely to rob, 600 times more likely to rape whites, and yet are only 2 1/2 times more likely to be charged with an officially designated hate crime. Which considering 2007 hate crime figures, 3,802 white Americans charged with hate crimes vs 1,045 blacks, they are pretty close to be evenly likely to be charged with a hate crime.
Provide another tramatic example of the double standard if you think so doing will be informative. But plaease after numerous such examples don’t pretend your asking a serious question concerning ‘if a double standard exists?’. This question was answered in the affirmative years ago!
Darius, have you got any statistics to back your “fact” up?
Darius, don’t you think that it’s a racist statement that only whites can be racist?
You think that blacks trying to “get one over on Da Man” isn’t racist and hateful?
I, for one, don’t hate blacks, but I sure do despise the sense of entitlement a good percentage of them have!
The attitude is:
This is what they live by. Thats why they see fit to print it.Thats what your mouth is for. Print the imagine over and over to people. The papers have already lost their credibilty.
Law enforcement officers around the country are frightened to say or do anything that could get Blacks or any non-White group upset. They have great difficulty in calling a spade a spade with respect to Blacks. There is no doubt this is a hate crime. If Fifty Black cowards outnumbering their victims 10 to 1, cries of “This is our world” and “This is a Black world” is not sufficient evidence of a hate crime against Whites, what is?
Two words: special rights. Had this been 50 white teenagers screaming “This is a white world”, then it would be daily, international news. Case in point, the private pool that denied blacks. It still is in the news while this story didn’t even make my local paper.
Lets see now! 50 blacks attack 4 whites screaming “blacks rule now, white trash” and the police need to CONSIDER if this crime is motivated by racial hate? The day the whiteman vanishes is the day (Amerika) tuns into South Africa. Preview of coming attractions = Detroit, Oakland, and on an on, blacks seem to be spoilers, they don’t build, they seem to wait until someone else builds and then they invade and infest, reducing what was once good into just another ghetto..
Hate crimes in general should not even be on the books. People should be charged for the crime that they commit and not for whatever opinions or beleif they hold. Case in point: If I were to be assaulted by a group of Black teenagers and I defended myself by beating them to a pulp all while screaming the “N” word, then I could get charged with a hate crime even though it was a clear case of self defense.
The reason that there are extr5emely few hate crime allegations against blacks is that blacks are merely attacking the weak and wealthy … who just happen to be white.
White people are perceived as weak in the black community. When attacked they hand over the wallet immediately. White women do not fight back when raped. Hence white people are easily dominated. It is logical to attack them first because the chance of getting away with the crime is great.
Similarly, white people are perceived as wealthy in the black community and therefore offer the best payoff when assaulted, further enhancing the payoff.
Thus, black on white violence is not based on “hate” but on rational criminal decisionmaking.
This is the rationale that the police use whenever they consider prosecuting something as a hate crime. It is also the classic defense offered by the defendants to hate crime charges.
I suspect it would not work for white people, however. Imagine a white man telling the judge that it wasn’t a hate crime because he only attacked black folks (or Jews or Asians) because they are weak and/or rich.
Why hasnt someone sued about this? Obviously hate crimes laws that are applied unequally violate the letter of the 14th amendment that gives “equal protection” under the law. Obviously if these miscreants are not charged with a “hate crime” then the victims are not getting equal protection are they? I am not sure why there are no constitutional lawyers screaming about this. Actually I am sure but that does not even need to be said does it?
So sorry to burst your bubble Darius but if you would check out the violent crime statistics, namely black on white crime as opposed to white on black crime, you would learn the real facts: Black people, as a group, are just plain violent. Making up fake percentages won’t change that fact.
One problem with our justice system is that the more people involved in an attack like this, the less time they serve, although it seems obvious that an attack by ten or by fifty is more aggravated than an attack by one.
“considering 2007 hate crime figures, 3,802 white Americans charged with hate crimes vs 1,045 blacks, they are pretty close to be evenly likely to be charged with a hate crime.”
So, instead of the incredible disparity in regards to hate-crime charges being addressed, the gap has actually increased.
Liberals are always so sensitive about even minute disparities, yet here the figure isn’t 10% or 20% or even 50%, here, whites who commit the same crimes are up to hundreds of times more likely to be labeled a hate criminal. That’s like thousands of percent difference.
If the official figures are close to 3000 and 1000, then the real figures for hate crimes are much higher. A white redneck type burned a cross on a black couples lawn. When they saw it in the morning, they didnt even know what it was, but the whiteboy can get ten years for committing this thought crime.When black multiple assaliants beat a white victim to death or nearly to death,which happens on a regulsr basis, this is almost never counted as a hate crime, because no racial slurs were used(they were only thought).
Darius claiming that Caucasians commit 95% of hate crimes is just so much mugabedung. Next, he’ll be saying he was Michael Jackson’s loverboy, and so is entitled to money from his estate.
If the authorities shy away or completely avoid prosecuting non-whites with hate crimes, what is the point of pointing out the stats?
The data will simply reflect the bias.http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/07/program_helps_i.php
And regarding Hate crime legislation favoring those who have had ‘historical disadvantages.’http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2009/02/white_men_meet_1.php
The 105 colonists who arrived in 1607 were so sure of finding gold they entered into what now seem very reckless contracts: In exchange for a one-way ticket to America and a share in the profits, they bound themselves to a set period of service in Virginia—it appears to have been seven years—during which they received no pay, had to obey orders, and could not leave. There were no women in this first group.
Ok you can say that they motivated by greed in signing this contract (though they found no gold), but they do not sound like ‘free men.’
On his return to Jamestown on January 2, 1608, Smith found the colony in a bad way. There had been more Indian attacks, and only about 40 of the original 105 settlers were still alive.
I appreciate all these connected issued are complicated, but the point I’m trying to here is we’ve all had it rough.
Another thing is that blacks (and most other “minorities”) are not very articulate. So while hatred may be present, and you may be very conscious of it if you’re the victim, if it has not been SPECIFICALLY articulated during the commission of the crime, then is will not be considered a hate crime.
For instance, they can rob you, beat you, rape you, nearly murder you —- but if they don’t use racial words like “Honkey” then you have no proof that the motivation was racial hatred. It will be assumed to have been just an ordinary crime. And even if they did say something racial, you still can’t prove it; and naturally they will deny it. Whereas if a white person did the same thing in reverse, it would be assumed to be an act of prejudice with very little burden of proof required. That is, to put it in a nutshell: whites are assumed to be racist and prejudiced, and blacks are not.
13 — openyoureyes wrote—-
“This re-affirms my belief that the reason black people act so heinously towards white people is due to the fact they face no punishment if they do.
There’s a lot of truth in this. After many years in the field of law enforcement, I can tell you that whatever crime you suffer, and whatever complaint you make, if you call the police, the black perp is almost guaranteed to hit you back with a counter-complaint that will make YOU look like the guilty party. I have seen this many times. Their alibis can be very inventive! No perp ever simply admits, “That’s right, I robbed him and stabbed him.” He/she will go you a step further and will accuse you of being everything from a bomb-making terrorist to a child molester. The police may have no way of ascertaining the truth of this, and YOU may be the one led off in handcuffs to face a hostile courtroom.
And remember that a great many blacks have been through the prison system, and almost all of them know somebody who has. They know the laws and how to manipulate them. These hate laws give them a whole new area to exploit.
