On 25/08/2011 21:29, Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In message
,
1506 wrote:
If I am mugged it is a crime. If a homosexual is mugged it is a
hate crime.

False.

If a homosexual is mugged *because* she is homosexual, it is a hate
crime. If she is mugged because some low-life wants cash for his drug
habit, it is not a hate crime, just a crime.

What happens if she believes it was because she is homosexual, but the
mugger disagrees? What standard of proof is needed?

IANAL, but I'm slightly uncomfortable with some classes of victims being
told their incident is "just" a crime. But I am somewhat biased as a
result of having been a young white male English-speaking locally-born
atheist heterosexual victim of an assault that I was quite lucky to survive.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In message , Arthur
Figgis wrote:
If a homosexual is mugged *because* she is homosexual, it is a hate
crime. If she is mugged because some low-life wants cash for his drug
habit, it is not a hate crime, just a crime.

What happens if she believes it was because she is homosexual, but the
mugger disagrees? What standard of proof is needed?

Since we're talking criminal law, "beyond all reasonable doubt".

IANAL, but I'm slightly uncomfortable with some classes of victims
being told their incident is "just" a crime.

I didn't mean "just" in that sense, only in the grammatical sense.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: