What's Fair is Fair

Guess again.

CNN.com - Epithet could increase sentence in baseball-bat beating - Jun 9, 2006: "NEW YORK (AP) -- A white man accused of pummeling a black man over the head with a baseball bat was convicted of second-degree assault as a hate crime after a three-week trial that focused the defendant's use of a racial slur during the beating.

A jury deliberated for eight hours over two days before finding 20-year-old Nicholas Minucci guilty in the assault of Glenn Moore last June in the predominantly white Queens neighborhood of Howard Beach -- the site of another notorious attack that inflamed racial tensions in New York 20 years ago."

So it would stand to reason that in a court of law due to this precedent that an Asian person, or a black person for that matter committing a crime against another who is white would garner the same treatment...well so much for reason when you see this story also from New York city:

Racial Taunt In Slaying June 3, 2006 -- One of the three men charged with killing a young New Jersey man outside a Chelsea club yelled: "Get the white motherf-----" as they set upon the victim and beat him to the ground before robbing him, prosecutors said yesterday.The three men - who were nabbed after police released video surveillance footage of them using victim Thomas Whitney's credit cards - were charged in Manhattan Criminal Court with second-degree murder and robbery.The three men, Najob Noor, 19, Walliullah Hashimi, 22, and Daryush Omar, 20, were held without bail. All three face 15 years to life in prison if convicted.

The alleged assailants are Asian and the victim was white. Despite the racially charged language used before Whitney's fatal beating, prosecutors declined to say whether they would seek to raise the charges to hate-crime status and raise the potential minimum penalty to 20 years to life.

Can somebody explain this disparity to me besides the age old "whitey has gotten away with everything since the beginning of time" argument. I am aware that in the 1st article the perpetrator has been convicted whereas the second article's perp's have only been charged. But the charges are what lead to the conviction, so therefore one cannot be convicted of crime they are not charged with in the 1st place. Reverse discrimination I guess. Hate crime laws are bs if their not going to be applied to all victims from every race, creed color blah blah blah.

Update 6/11 23:00

Here is yet another instance of a hate crime charge being filed against the alleged attacker of a homosexual singer also in New York. So for the week thats 1/1 homosexual victim, 1/1 black victim, 0/1 white victim. So as I said above: "Hate crime laws are bs if their not going to be applied to all victims from every race, creed color blah blah blah," in other words everyone.

CNN.com - 4 charged with hate crimes in attack on singer - Jun 11, 2006: "NEW YORK (AP) -- A singer whose songs have topped the Billboard dance chart was attacked by a group yelling anti-gay slurs Saturday, and four people were arrested on hate-crime charges, police and his publicist said.

Kevin Aviance, 38, underwent surgery for a broken jaw after the attack, said his publicist, Len Evans.

Police said the singer, whose song 'Alive' hit the top of the chart in 2002, was in stable condition.

A group of six or seven men attacked Aviance early Saturday, and passers-by did not stop to help as they threw objects at him, Evans said.

The New York Times, quoting Evans, reported that the attack took place in New York's East Village about 1 a.m. Saturday, as Aviance was walking home from a bar"

---