Hate crime law enforcement and prosecutorial response in the United States

Hate Crime

Response to Bias-Motivated Violence

In the last three decades or so, nearly all American states have adopted a minimum of one statute, regarding a regulation for "hate crime." Such laws have assumed numerous forms, which include (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ):

• Laws prescribing criminal punishment for violation of civil rights;

• Specific "malicious harassment" and "ethnic intimidation" laws; and • Provisions of greater penalties in related laws already enacted for commission of an extant offense for prejudicial or bias reasons.

Several state statutes forbid organizational vandalism, religious objects' disfigurement or sacrilege, disturbance of or interference with religious worship, wearing masks or hoods, cross burning, distribution of ads and publications aimed at harassing specific groups in society, and secret society establishment (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ).

Social Control Efforts Undertaken

The categorization and understanding of any occurrence as being a hate crime is primarily important for front-line detectives and police officers. As has been explained by Martin (1996:459) in her article titled "Investigating Hate Crimes: Case Characteristics and Law Enforcement Responses," the preliminary identification of any incident as being potentially motivated by bias, perhaps, rests with patrol officials, in every police department. Police commonly use discretion on a routine basis, even if they clearly understand a given crime's definitions. However, in case of hate crimes, discretion is accompanied by rules and definitions which are not exactly clear to them, owing to the fact that this crime category is relatively new (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ). Martin claims that this scenario places unique responsibilities on officials tasked with ascertaining if an ordinary offence (arson, vandalism, assault, etc.) has taken place and assert if it is a "hate crime." Firstly, there are some officers who simply work on a case as though one can conveniently incorporate hate crimes into current police practices, failing to understand that enforcing hate crime statutes is different and challenging. On the other hand, there are some officers who register numerous complaints concerning hate crime law enforcement. For instance, some are of the opinion that laws in connection with hate crime are terribly ambiguous and vague, and hence, hard to enforce. Furthermore, law enforcers have more critical issues with which to deal with. In the year 1994, Congress passed a couple of hate crime statutes stipulating penalties as well as offering a legal solution (C219 Lesson 9: Social Control -- Law Enforcement and Legal Recourse ). VAWA (Violence against Women Act) stipulates that every individual in the U.S. will enjoy the right of being free from gender-motivated violent acts. Besides allocating more than $1.6 billion for educating society, justice personnel training, rape issue hotlines, victim services (particularly shelters for abused victims), and special prosecutor and police teams for addressing crimes against females, the VAWA offers a civil resolution for "gender-based crimes."

Future

Most likely, emphasis, in future, will not be given to laws but to what citizens can do by themselves. For instance, under the Hate Crime Initiative of the Attorney General, Community Relations Service (CRS) and the Hate Crime division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, in collaboration with the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center of the Treasury Department, the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training, and the National Association of Attorneys General, along with other United States Department Of Justice organizations, are creating a four model curricula in hate crime education (Hate Crime -- CRS -- Department of Justice). At demonstration organizers' or local authorities' request, CRS help with contingency planning for ensuring that demonstrations, marches, etc. take place without exacerbating ethnic and racial tensions, and the possibility of confrontations of any form is minimized. Additionally, CRS can conduct initiatives aimed at prevention of hate crimes in the community and in educational institutions. Such initiatives break down obstacles, foster mutual respect, forge trust across ethnic and racial lines, and decrease fear.