"This case is a classic illustration of why the hate crime statutes are problematic, says Bronx lawyer David Feige, an outspoken critic of them. 'These laws sound good--that's why they were passed. But they serve no purpose except to give prosecutors an even heavier bat. They don't deter criminal acts in the least. It's complete political posturing.'"
Outspoken? Moi?
my controversial book about a day in my life as Public Defender in the South Bronx is finally available for Kindle and Ipad.
2 comments:
Gotta admit, I'm with you on the whole "hate crimes" thing. Just a way to criminalize unpopular viewpoints. If someone knocks the crap out of someone else, is it a greater offense because the motive is anti-Black/Jew/Catholic/Arab/etc., vs. the victim was dissing my momma?
Hope we never get as bad as the UK or France, where they actually fine/imprison people for "hate speech."
I disagree. Whatever the motive for passing the laws, if felony murder makes you death penalty eligible -- say the defendant's gun actually did just 'go off' during a botched robbery attempt -- it's appropriate for hate-based crimes to be punished more severely. I say that a defense attorney.
Speech is protected. Violent crime is always judged by what motivates the actor; it's why we have degrees of murder.
Post a Comment