[Khepera]

People fighting usually call each other names. They also pick words and phrases that offend their adversary. This in and of itself does not indicate a hate crime. What about the black person involved? Did they use racial or ethnic slures as well? Who started the altercation and for what reason? Do we know all the facts here? I doubt it.

A disagreement leading to a fight does not a hate crime make.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

People fighting usually call each other names. They also pick words and phrases that offend their adversary. This in and of itself does not indicate a hate crime. What about the black person involved? Did they use racial or ethnic slures as well? Who started the altercation and for what reason? Do we know all the facts here?

See previous post to Clara.

The whites alleged that the black woman used slurs also. She denies it. They admit using racial slurs against the black woman.

In any event, it does look like the whites went out of their way to attack this woman with relatively little provacation. How that makes the grocery store culpable or proves "institutionalized racism" is the real whackiness here.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

The paper also has an interview with the victim.

http://www.theithacajournal.com/news/stories/20020713/topstories/216223.html

Interestingly enough, the victim was raised by white parents and has white siblings.

She, unlike the "activists" also seems to appreciate the work the police did on the case and issued a call against any sort of retalitory violence.

I only hope as this case progresses some Al Sharpton type doesn't get ahold of her and turn her head around.

[nicmarlo]

A disagreement leading to a fight does not a hate crime make

Unless, of course, there's more whites than blacks....then it is.

And, it's not a hate crime if a black woman runs over a white man, hides him in her garage, leaves him to die a tortured death, and disposes the body in a field with the help of black men.