 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
I WAS DRUNK SO IT'S NOT A HATE CRIME By PETER SALTER / Lincoln Journal Star JournalStar.com | Posted: Saturday, July 23, 2011 Lucas Clifford doesn't necessarily have a problem with gay people -- he has a problem with booze. "I can understand the fact that 19- and 20-year-olds drink beer," Lancaster County District Judge Jeffre Cheuvront told the 20-year- old, who has been cited four times for minor in possession. "I'm stunned that somebody can be so unlucky and unskilled at underage drinking." Cheuvront then sent Clifford back to his parents' farm near Hayes Center to serve probation for a crime that, originally, could have landed him in prison for five years. Clifford had been charged with a hate crime: Beating a 23-year-old man outside a gay bar in early September after hurling anti-gay insults. Under state law, the hate crime designation raised the stakes, from misdemeanor assault to a felony. But prosecutors dropped the hate crime designation, Clifford pleaded guilty, and, on Friday, he was sentenced to 15 months' probation. The charge was downgraded for two reasons, County Attorney Joe Kelly said after the hearing. First, the court date was approaching but the victim was scarce. "We were having extreme difficulty contacting or producing our victim for trial." And prosecutors likely could have lost at trial. Under the law, they would need to prove motivation -- that Clifford hit the victim because the victim was gay. But in this case, Clifford likely would have hit the victim anyway. "The facts seemed to tend to show he was saying some very offensive things, but at that point he had every intent to assault regardless," Kelly said. On Sept. 3, Clifford used a fake ID to drink inside the Q Club. Then, outside the club, he was accused of shouting anti-gay insults at a man before punching him in the face. A police officer saw the attack; witnesses heard the insults. At the time, it was the 29th hate crime of the year reported in Lincoln. And, at the time, it was first one that resulted in the formal hate crime charge. Clifford originally gave police a fake Indiana ID, leading them to believe he was 22-year-old Luke Stevens and leading to additional charges. After his arrest, Clifford enrolled in an anger management class at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, his attorney, John Stevens Berry Jr., told the judge. He also attended a UNL drug and alcohol program until February -- when he was cited again for underage drinking. "He's made some mistakes with alcohol," Berry said. "He has to make a decision and decide whether to use alcohol or to stop. He intends to stop." Clifford's drinking cost him his chance to attend UNL, Berry said. He's on probation for his latest charge. And he's back on the farm, which is a good thing, because there are fewer temptations. With his parents watching, Clifford apologized for his actions. "I don't plan to continue to live this way, to keep coming back to court and everything." Reach Peter Salter at 402-473-7254 or psalter@journalstar.com. |
| NO JUSTICE... Sentences like this one will only serve to further silence victims and encourage homophobic violence and harassment in our schools, workplace's and COMMUNITIES |
Shocking sentence for shocking crime By David M. Tanovich, The Windsor Star August 8, 2011 Section 718.2(a)(i) of the Criminal Code makes crimes motivated, in part, by hate, bias or prejudice based on race, national or ethnic origin, language, sexual orientation, mental or physical disability, sex or age an aggravating factor on sentencing. This section was, unfortunately, given short shrift in R. vs. Meloche. In that case, a Windsor judge imposed a suspended sentence on a 28-yearold man convicted of assault causing bodily harm for breaking the jaw and cheekbone of Justin Jarecki, a gay man. It was in the early morning hours of May 2010, when Jarecki and Denton Callender were in line at Pizza Pizza on Ouellette Avenue in downtown Windsor. According to two witnesses, Meloche referred to the two men as "fags." When he was confronted about his homophobic language, he punched both Jarecki and Callender in the face. He then fled the scene. In his reasons for sentence, Justice DeMarco indicated that he suspected that the attack had "an element of gay bashing" but refused to apply section 718.2(a)(i) because he was not satisfied that it was a homophobic crime. He then cited the accused's "exemplary" background, which included his previous clean record and his work with autistic children, cancer fundraising and church activity as the reason he avoided jail time. Sentences are meant, in part, to denounce and deter. And there is a real need for both when it comes to homophobic violence and harassment. According to Statistics Canada, hate crimes against the LGBT community are on the rise and are the most violent of hate crimes. A recent national high school study found that two-thirds of LGBT students do not feel safe in their schools, with 21 per cent reporting having been physically assaulted or harassed at school. In Windsor, this was the second high-profile case within a two-week time frame involving attacks on gay men. Unfortunately, we probably don't have the full picture of the violence experienced by the LGBT community because most crimes against vulnerable and marginalized groups largely go unreported. Sentences like this one will only serve to further silence victims and encourage ho-mophobic violence and harassment in our schools, workplaces and streets. It is hard to understand why Justice DeMarco was not satisfied that the assault or its severity was motivated, in part, by bias or prejudice based on sexual orientation. While it is true that this aggravating factor has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, there was a strong body of evidence to support such a finding. First, homophobic slurs accompanied the assaults. What better evidence is there that the crime was motivated by sexual orientation? "Fag" or "faggot" are extremely derogatory, hateful and offensive words to describe a gay person when one considers how it came to be associated with gay men. The ordinary meaning of faggot is kindling or bundle of sticks. At various points in history, gay men were used as kindling while witches and others were burned at the stake. Returning back to the circumstantial evidence of bias - both men perceived by the accused to be gay were assaulted, one of the assaults was particularly vicious, requiring reconstructive surgery, and there was no other reasonable motivation for the attack. Ironically, the so-called good character evidence that was used by the trial judge to keep Meloche out of jail was compelling evidence that the crime was, in fact, motivated by hate since it provided the only explanation for why an otherwise "law- abiding person," to quote his lawyer, would lose control in such a violent manner. So much of this case appears to have turned on the evidence of Meloche's "exemplary background." While this is certainly relevant, the real question is whether it trumped the need to send a message that hate is unacceptable and that those vulnerable to hate and violence will receive recognition and protection from the criminaljustice system. If Meloche had broken the nose and cheekbone of a religious leader referring to him in a derogatory manner, no one would have any difficulty concluding that it was a hate crime requiring a sentence of imprisonment. We need to ensure that we apply the same standards to all communities who face hate and discrimination on a daily basis. Hopefully, the Crown will appeal. David M. Tanovich is a professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Windsor. Apparently It’s OK to Attack Gays if You Go to Church, Do Charity Work |
