Hate Crime

The prevalence and incidence of, “hate crimes”, has been increasingly rising in today’s
multicultural society, which may result in a damaged society under the fire of equal values,
standings and rights. The phrase, “hate crime” (Jacobs and Potter, 1997), to all intent and
purposes, misleads the motivation for criminal behaviour as many recognise it as hate, but
not by prejudice. However, these two factors undoubtedly sometimes overlap through
criminal conduct in relevance to prejudice, but distinguishes itself from crimes motivated by
lust, greed, politics and so forth. This expression, “hate crime”, tends to focus on individual
characteristics involving and emphasising values, character and attitudes to be of the most
important factors as, ‘prejudice’, has been identified to be one of the worst criminal
motivators in society (Crocker, 1992/93). Nonetheless, any culturally rich society which
operates with the factors of religion, race and sexual orientation is at the discretion of hate
which allows for identity politics as minority groups can overstate their victimisation for
their own interests (Epstein, 1989 & Sleeper 1993). This is the result of in-groups (white
society) being the vast majority in participating in hate crimes; primarily white young males
(Goleman, 1990 & New York Police Department 1995), as research has reported that young
white males represent 63.84% of reported prejudiced crime. On the other hand, for other
individuals, the importance of, “hate crimes”, extends to focus on the server punishment
suggested by hate crime laws on prejudice than any other abhorrent motivations

Annotated Bibliographies

1. Jacobs, JB & Potter, K 2001, Hate crimes : criminal law & identity politics, Oxford
University Press, New York.

The authors, writers from Oxford University Press New York, theoretically argue that
criminal law is mechanism that is misused can potentially generate the uprising of inter-
group conflict. Jacobs & Potter criticise such laws that that a significant impact on social
divisions rather than social solidarity, highlighting the problem to be new crimes and
punishment hierarchies in regard to demographic victims may aggravate social conflicts
considering the prejudice of offenders. However, critiques counter this argument by
stating that if, “hate”, crimes are not dealt with, meaning if their punishments are
penalties are not more severe than parallel crimes; the criminal justice system is
advocating racial harmony and equality are not considered to be part of highest values
held by society. Thus, stating that criminal law is an integral part in society in-regard to
bias crimes. However, Jacobs & Potter highlight how politicians create uprisings in
communities when impacting advocacy groups (LGBQT etc.) passing legislation declaring
their worth and identity but denouncing the problem.
2. Lawrence, FM 1999, Punishing hate : bias crimes under American law, Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Mass.

The author dually combines theoretical arguments and empirical data to argue that a
society which is solely based on dealing with inequalities and devoted to equality must
treat, “hate”, or, “bias crime”, distinctively from other crime; intensifying the punishment
for such crimes. Lawrence outline how the criminal law is a significant aspect in dealing with
the epidemic of, “hate crime”, through the mentioning of bias crime statutes (racial animus
& discriminatory selection), which showcase the criminals, ‘state of mind’; extending his
focus on object quantification (crime reports and statistics) and changing perceptions
(pranks becoming bias motivated), highlighting that perception and problem are cross-
sectionally correlated. However, it is critiqued that sample size of, “hate crime”, is relevantly
reliant on how the definition of, “hate”, is manipulated. Resulting in the argument that
there would be lesser appearance of hate crime if criminal conduct would have to
completely be relevant and generated by prejudice to label it a, “hate crime”.

3. Herek, GM, Gillis, JR & Cogan, JC 1999, ‘Psychological Sequelae of Hate-Crime

Victimization Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Adults’, Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 945–951.

The authors, researchers from University of Dallas and authorities at the National Institute
of mental Health, cross-sectionally integrated theoretical points and empirical data to
construct the theory that lesbian and gay hate crime victims and survivors manifested
consequential significant symptoms of depression, post-traumatic stress and mental
illnesses. However, these differences were not seen to be experiences and observed
throughout bisexuals but resulted in the recognition of special needs and importance of
rehabilitation and public policy. In addition, they explored the theory of how hate crimes
maybe integrated with world and societal views, further impacting the victim’s mental
states. Through the experiment and consensus to see if victims reported to authorities, the
limitation is that the relationship between victimisation and mental stress has not been
distinguished because one’s homosexuality can allow individuals to interpret that they being
victimised. Also, the experiment may have compact support for public policy as researchers
solely focused on lesbians and gays in regard to hate crimes and psychological functioning,
not observing the other sexual categories.

4. Glaser, J, Dixit, J & Green, DP 2002, ‘Studying Hate Crime with the Internet: What
Makes Racists Advocate Racial Violence?’, Journal of Social Issues, vol. 58, no. 1, pp.
177–193.

The authors, researchers from the University of Yale and New York, used empirical data with
qualitative and quantitative analysis in conjunction with theoretical statements to
investigate how chat-room interactions provide unusual perspectives on extremist attitudes
by manipulating the experiment. Researchers, influenced the nature and proximity of
threats by suggesting interracial marriage, the loss of jobs to Black people and Blacks
moving into White environments. The most integral part of this experiment was the use of
anti-Black hate crime as the prejudices vary as a form of function and because they are the
most frequently victimised group. The researches mainly tested out their thesis on
economic, geographic, genetic threats influence the mind state of white extremists as all
these factors are interrelated. However, it ignores the factors of propaganda and old White-
people values run in the generation of families as the genetic threat was the only one that
influenced extremist behaviour. Similarly, the impact of the internet on race relation has
decreased as watch dogs and governments monitor these websites and chat rooms and
how the internet has become transparent to society.

5. O'Keefe, Katherine B. 2010, ‘Protecting the homeless under vulnerable victim

sentencing guidelines: an alternative to inclusion in hate crime laws.’, William and Mary
Law Review, vol. 52, no. 1.

The researcher, uses empirical data and reviews in conjunction with theoretical ideas to
suggest that trends against the homeless have been increasing in trend and to the fact that
housing crisis are expanding the homeless population, resulting in increased violence and
dehumanisation. The researcher highlights the notion of how homelessness is a proxy for
vulnerability, thus, being a victim of, “hate”, or, “bias”, crime is very highly likely when
considering homelessness. As a result, Vulnerable Victim Sentencing legislation have
adjusted to undertake protection of particular groups with society and individual interests.
However, other research has critiqued this notion of crime statues acting as solutions as the
correct measure is to focus on the prejudices embedded in society as individuals that
commit crimes are already recognised as a problem; ignoring practices or institutions that
embody these prejudices in the first place. On the other hand, these adjustments to
legislature send out an message to the community and showcase how these particular
crimes are treated, thus, emphasising how criminal law can play a significant part in
combatting prejudice.
Reference list

1. Crocker, Lawrence. 1992/93. "Hate Crime Statutes: Just? Constitutional?

Wise?" Annual Survey of American Law 1992/93:4.

2. Epstein, Joseph. 1989. "The Joys of Victimhood." New York Times

Magazine (July 2).

3. Goleman, Daniel. 1990. "As Bias Crime Seems to Rise, Scientists Study
Roots of Racism."
4. New York Times (May 29), p. C1.

5. Jacobs, JB & Potter, KA 1997, ‘Hate Crimes: A Critical Perspective’, Crime

and Justice, vol. 22, pp. 1–50.

6. New York Police Department. 1991. Untitled document. Bias Incident

Investigation Unit, September. - . 1995. Bias Incident Investigation Unit
Year End Report-19.

7. Sleeper, Jim. 1990. The Closest of Strangers: Liberalism and the Politics
of Race in New York. New York: W. W. Norton -. 1993. In Defense of Civic
Culture. Washington, D.C.: The Progressive Foundation.