Transgender hate crimes recorded by police go up 81%

[chandlerp]

The fucking hate mail couldn't wait to dead name her yet again. Cunts.

 

[InArduisFouette]

Do you think that no one has threatened to rape Rowling, or that they have and that's actually ok?

Because the threat of rape against any woman, no matter how serious the threat, or how powerful and untouchable you may think the recipient is, is a message to all women that they deserve to be raped, or threatened with it, if they behave in the wrong way.

you are an utter , utter clown

begone you transphobic, homophobic, misogynistic waste of skin

 

[SpookyFrank]

Because the threat of rape against any woman, no matter how serious the threat, or how powerful and untouchable you may think the recipient is, is a message to all women that they deserve to be raped, or threatened with it, if they behave in the wrong way.

Who is it you think doesn't know that rape threats are bad, and needs this explaining to them?

 

[smokedout]

Daily Mail keeping it classy. Follow every twist and turn. Just entertainment.

 

[chandlerp]

Jesus Fucking Christ

 

[Cloo]

Disappointing the number of media sources that have deadnamed her.

Unfortunately, largely due to poor understanding as opposed to overt transphobia IMO, a lot of people when reading/hearing about a trans person want to know 'But what was their name before?' 'I wonder what he looked like as a boy?' - and too much of the media pander to this.

I mean, Jesus, how would a parent feel if their kid was murdered and then the media just decided to used an abbreviation of their kids' name that they never used when alive and went around calling them that?

 

[LeytonCatLady]

Disappointing the number of media sources that have deadnamed her.

Unfortunately, largely due to poor understanding as opposed to overt transphobia IMO, a lot of people when reading/hearing about a trans person want to know 'But what was their name before?' 'I wonder what he looked like as a boy?' - and too much of the media pander to this.

I mean, Jesus, how would a parent feel if their kid was murdered and then the media just decided to used an abbreviation of their kids' name that they never used when alive and went around calling them that?

I really hate that. I bet they wouldn't demand to know a married woman's maiden name in that manner! I'm cis but go by a shortened version of my full name and find it annoying enough when people go "Yeah, but what's that short for?" Like, you don't need to know what it's short for unless I'm filling in official paperwork. Deadnaming a trans person feels so fucking malicious. What's the point?

RIP Brianna, and I hope whatever universe you move on to treats you better.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

Disappointing the number of media sources that have deadnamed her.

Unfortunately, largely due to poor understanding as opposed to overt transphobia IMO, a lot of people when reading/hearing about a trans person want to know 'But what was their name before?' 'I wonder what he looked like as a boy?' - and too much of the media pander to this.

I mean, Jesus, how would a parent feel if their kid was murdered and then the media just decided to used an abbreviation of their kids' name that they never used when alive and went around calling them that?

I disagree, they know better so it’s clearly transphobia.

 

[Cloo]

The media certainly know better. What I was saying was that I think most of The Great British Public are unaware that their curiosity is really disrespectful and inappropriate.

 

[Pickman's model]

Does people gloating over the death of Magdalen Burns or sending rape threats to JK Rowling mean that people who support trans rights are utterly devoid of humanity?

You've scraped your way beneath the barrel

 

[frogwoman]

That curiosity is basically transphobia though, might not be conscious but it is.

Plenty of people go by their middle names or pick a name for themselves. Unless there's a very good reason why the dead name needs to be publicly known in the media then they should just call them by what they were known as and that's that.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

It is transphobia. The dead name is irrelevant except in a small number of circumstances and that doesn't include random members of the public and the media having an interest in what it was.

Plenty of people go by their middle names or pick a name for themselves. Unless there's a very good reason why the dead name needs to be known then they should just call them by what they were known as and that's that.

Exactly.

 

[frogwoman]

The media certainly know better. What I was saying was that I think most of The Great British Public are unaware that their curiosity is really disrespectful and inappropriate.

I disagree - lots of people change their middle names including as kids, lots of women change their surname to a different surname when married etc. When I meet someone who's married I don't wonder what their maiden name was ...

 

[BristolEcho]

*oops ignore.

 

[dylanredefined]

And despite the comments wondering whether she will scream like a girl or a boy, and the defendents referring to her as 'it', tranny and unnatural, the police and prosecutors decided not to pursue this as a transphobic hate crime.

It's pretty much an open and shut case. Loons obsessed with murder found a victim and killed them. Making it a hate crime doesn't increase the sentence.
No one needs to hear a bunch of transphobic shit it it's unnesscary shit.

 

[Kid_Eternity]

It's pretty much an open and shut case. Loons obsessed with murder found a victim and killed them. Making it a hate crime doesn't increase the sentence.
No one needs to hear a bunch of transphobic shit it it's unnesscary shit.

Hate crimes are against the law so clearly it being judged as one as well will increase sentencing if found guilty.

 

[SpookyFrank]

No one needs to hear a bunch of transphobic shit it it's unnecessary shit.

Probably why we have hate crime laws?

 

[smokedout]

I have reservations about hate crime laws but whilst they exist they should be applied equally to all protected groups. Boy Y's dehumanising language was clearly transphobic and likely to have contributed to her being selected as a victim if that's what happened. The only other person they are alleged to have made serious plans to kill was someone they considered a paedophile. It's not much of a leap to suggest they chose their alleged victims on the basis of some kind of perceived deviance.

Less obvious, but just as important, is that Girl X's fetishy, obsessive feelings about Brianna leading to violent ideation is pretty much a classic example of how transphobic violence happens. Admittedly it's usually men who are violent to trans women because they are uncomfortable with the sexual ambiguity they present and how it makes them feel but there are absolutely cis women who fetishize trans women as well.

I might be wrong but I think the judge has the power to aggravate to a hate crime in sentencing but it doesn't look like that's something the prosecution are aiming for.

 

[dylanredefined]

Probably why we have hate crime laws?

It can be read out in court and then repeated and used in attempt at mitigation/ Justification. Crime is terrible enough without need to drag the victim further into the dirt.. Or the cops cos might just have dropped the ball.

 

[dylanredefined]

Hate crimes are against the law so clearly it being judged as one as well will increase sentencing if found guilty.

To what ? Their already getting life. Life with no desserts? Some crimes are so horrific there is never going to an adequate punishment. This is one . Making it a hate crime changes little. Wether they are homicidal maniacs or transphobic homicidal maniacs is only needed by any professional trying to treat them.

 

[SpookyFrank]

It can be read out in court and then repeated and used in attempt at mitigation/ Justification. Crime is terrible enough without need to drag the victim further into the dirt.. Or the cops cos might just have dropped the ball.

Pointing out that the victim was trans and almost certainly wouldn't be dead if she wasn't doesn't seem like 'dragging her through the dirt' to me.

Go back to the OP, recall the actual topic of the thread even though it has been forgotten so many times now. What would happen if we didn't record these crimes as being motivated by anti-trans hatred? How would we even start to try and prevent these crimes if we didn't know why they happened, or didn't even know that they happened at all?

If we don't identify hate crimes as hate crimes, we falsely break the link between hatred and violence. We let the 'non-violent' hatemongers off the hook if we forget the consequences of their ideology and rhetoric.

 

[smokedout]

It can be read out in court and then repeated and used in attempt at mitigation/ Justification. Crime is terrible enough without need to drag the victim further into the dirt.. Or the cops cos might just have dropped the ball.

This is just nonsense. The fact they were transphobic would not be grounds for mitigation, it would be them admitting it was a hate crime and grounds for an aggravated sentence.

 

[A380]

You can’t have aggravated murder. Unlike (some) other offences.

If, or hopefully when, they get convicted of murder then they will get life ( or because of their ages *whatever detention at his majesty’s pleasure is called now) and the judge will factor all manner of things, including transphobia, and indeed any other hatred against any other protected characteristics that may or may not exist but haven’t made the press, into the punishment tariff, i.e. the earliest date of a parole application. This will a matter of record and can be appealed by both sides.

It does seem, just from the media reports - which are guaranteed to be shit and inaccurate, because they always are- that neither are going for a ‘not guilty murder, guilty manslaughter strategy and instead are both mounting a classic cut throat defence against the other. Good luck with that, as they say. But we will only know for sure as the trial goes on.

(* I always try to learn as little as possible about killers when I don’t need to know as I don’t want to give them any space in my head. That’s for the victims…)

 

[InArduisFouette]

To what ? Their already getting life. Life with no desserts? Some crimes are so horrific there is never going to an adequate punishment. This is one . Making it a hate crime changes little. Wether they are homicidal maniacs or transphobic homicidal maniacs is only needed by any professional trying to treat them.

1. it will impact on their tarriff ( as i doubt they will get a whole life tarriff due to their age and the fact it wa a single death )
2. it will be someothing which will be an issue at parole/ licence hearings in due course

 

[Puddy_Tat]

It's pretty much an open and shut case. Loons obsessed with murder found a victim and killed them. Making it a hate crime doesn't increase the sentence.
No one needs to hear a bunch of transphobic shit it it's unnesscary shit.

hmm

would you prefer that the fact that if a murder victim is black / gay / trans, and the motivation is racism / homophobia / transphobia, then both are hushed up?

not all that long ago, a victim being black or gay or trans could turn in to a mitigating factor or get a murder charge reduced to manslaughter - the assailant could claim 'i thought that black man was going to mug me' (this one still seems to work in some states of the USA) or 'i thought that gay man was going to proposition me and i panicked' (see 'gay panic defence')

i'm not a lawyer or police or anything like it, but my understanding is that while murder gets a mandatory 'life sentence', there isn't a single 'tariff' before a convicted murderer can be considered for parole, and the judge can take circumstances - mitigating or aggravating - in to account in setting this, in exceptional circumstances setting a whole life tariff.

i have slightly mixed feelings about this - it can arguably be taken as saying that lives taken are not of equal value, which i'm not entirely comfortable with, but are some murders more objectionable than others? (not that i want to turn this thread in to one arguing about sentencing...)

 

[Jennaonthebeach]

hmm

would you prefer that the fact that if a murder victim is black / gay / trans, and the motivation is racism / homophobia / transphobia, then both are hushed up?

not all that long ago, a victim being black or gay or trans could turn in to a mitigating factor or get a murder charge reduced to manslaughter - the assailant could claim 'i thought that black man was going to mug me' (this one still seems to work in some states of the USA) or 'i thought that gay man was going to proposition me and i panicked' (see 'gay panic defence')

i'm not a lawyer or police or anything like it, but my understanding is that while murder gets a mandatory 'life sentence', there isn't a single 'tariff' before a convicted murderer can be considered for parole, and the judge can take circumstances - mitigating or aggravating - in to account in setting this, in exceptional circumstances setting a whole life tariff.

i have slightly mixed feelings about this - it can arguably be taken as saying that lives taken are not of equal value, which i'm not entirely comfortable with, but are some murders more objectionable than others? (not that i want to turn this thread in to one arguing about sentencing...)

Trans panic defence is still a thing in both UK and US courts.

 

[JimW]

i have slightly mixed feelings about this - it can arguably be taken as saying that lives taken are not of equal value, which i'm not entirely comfortable with, but are some murders more objectionable than others? (not that i want to turn this thread in to one arguing about sentencing...)

Isn't the reasoning because it's about the mindset of the killer - a hate-driven premeditated murder deemed more deserving of severe punishment than a moment of anger?

 

[emanymton]

Trans panic defence is still a thing in both UK and US cocourts

Can you give any examples of cases where it has be used successful?

 

[A380]

Trans panic defence is still a thing in both UK and US courts.

Is it here? Genuinely I’m not being an internet twat, I’m interested but a bit out of date; have you got any England and Wales stated cases, I’d really like to have a read and bring myself up to date.

 

[A380]

Isn't the reasoning because it's about the mindset of the killer - a hate-driven premeditated murder deemed more deserving of severe punishment than a moment of anger?

The hate crime introduction and increase in sentencing ( in England and Wales ) was driven by two things. 1. That people who victimise others based on a protected characteristic are committing crimes that are more ‘random’ i’e any person who was black, gay, female, could have been a victim so the offender is ‘more dangerous’ . 2.Trying to reflect how society (should) disapproves of people who allow their bigotry to drive their offending.