Hate Crimes: Can Gays Perpetrate Hate on Other Gays?
[CR Note: One of our first and favorite guest bloggers, Rick R. Reed, is back today with another post -- this time about the Michael Sandy case. Rick is the author of the crime thriller, IM, released in earlier this year from Quest Books. IM is about a serial killer preying on his victims high-tech style on internet hookup sites. The book is is available online or in bookstores. You can visit Rick on MySpace.]
Guest blog by Rick R. Reed
Sometimes, the things we writers write come back to haunt us in the most unexpected ways. In May, my book IM came out, and it was about a serial killer who preyed on gay men using internet hook up sites. The thing that made it frightening, I thought, was the very real risk people put themselves in when they hook up online and arrange to meet a stranger. We all take comfort in the belief nothing like this could ever happen to us, and sometimes our desires usurp common sense.
And then I read a disturbing news story that, if it had occurred prior to the publication of IM could have had people using the old saw, “ripped from today’s headlines” to describe it. The news story concerned Michael Sandy, a young man in the New York City area who, like my victims in IM, couldn’t resist the digital lure of another young man he had met online. This young man convinced Sandy to meet him at Plumb Beach, an area notorious for gay cruising in Brooklyn. Sandy, again like the victims in IM, probably assumed he was going to meet another man for a harmless hook-up. Whether meeting people like this to engage in sex is wise or right or wrong is not the question. The question I wonder about is: did Sandy have any idea he was being lured to a very final and fatal encounter?
What happened to Sandy when he arrived at Plumb Beach to meet his online paramour (A
nthony Fortunato, 21) wasn’t at all what Sandy had probably imagined. Fortunato, along with three cohorts, plotted to rob the young gay man because gay men were easy targets who would not fight back. Bravely or foolishly, Sandy resisted the men and managed to run away. They gave chase and the men ended up on the nearby Belt Parkway where Sandy thought he might get away. He did…into the path of an oncoming car. Sandy later died of massive head injuries.
Fortunato and his friends were all caught and Fortunato is the only one so far convicted (of manslaughter as a hate crime). The others, as of this writing, are still awaiting trial. The interesting thing about this case, aside from its similarities to a scary piece of fiction I plotted out as a novel, is that Fortunato, during his trial, attempted to say that he was also gay. By admitting having the same sexuality as his victim, Fortunato hoped to wriggle out of the hate crime charge. The defense tried to bring in some bizarro witnesses who claimed to have been same sex partners of Fortunato.
Fortunately, for Sandy’s survivors, and the rest of the world, the court did not see his being gay as a reason to let him off the hook for a hate crime. This raises a question: if one is gay (or black, or Asian, or name a minority of your choice) are you immune to prosecution from hate crimes if you kill one of your own kind?
I’m glad the courts did not see it that way. I’m glad that they saw hate for what it is: evil and reprehensible. For once, anyway, people looked at hatred with clear eyes and said “no” and punished the hater, regardless of his orientation.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:40 am
I dont understand hate crime legislation at all. If this dude did this to a straight woman it would he get less time?
October 17th, 2007 at 8:46 am
This is unbelievable, Sandy was lured to his death, even if that wasn’t Fortunato’s intention. I am also glad the court saw this as a hate crime.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:47 am
Hi, Rick!
You raise an interesting point with the Michael Sandy/Anthony Fortunato case–would it have been a hate crime had Fortunato been gay (and not merely trying to avoid a harsher sentence by claiming to be)? Hmmm…
This is a clear example of a hate crime, in my opinion. Fortunato and his gang clearly hated gays, and targeted them because, in their opinion, gay men are weaker and will not fight them back (echoes of Matthew Shepard there).
In a case of gay-on-gay hate, the situation would have to be much different, I think. Such as a gay man who preys on, say, gay escorts. Had Fortunato met Sandy alone on that beach, engaged in sexual relations, and then attacked him and chased him into the path of the oncoming car, it would have been much harder to say it was a hate crime… because, as most people would reason, who would have sex with someone they hated? Of course, it might be seen from the angle of a racial hate crime (Sandy is African-American and Fortunato, I am guessing from his name, is not), which is much easier to identify as a hate crime. Then you would lose the impact of it being a gay-on-gay hate crime.
So clearly identifying a gay-on-gay hate crime will be difficult unless the circumstances are particularly aggravated. Sure, there are gays who dislike other gays, just as there are blacks who dislike other blacks, but any such attacks are so easily filed under other labels (assault and battery, for example) that the label “hate crime” seems forever reserved for attacks that cross ethnic, religious, and lifestyle lines.
Great blog!
October 17th, 2007 at 8:50 am
I don’t know how Fortunato would have been sentenced if this had been a “straight” (in every sense of the word) robbery that went awry. I would think manslaughter would still apply. I don’t know if the hate crime portion of the sentencing actually carries any more weight than the manslaughter. You’d need to ask a lawyer those questions. The point of my piece is that Fortunato tried to say he was gay as a defense against the hate crime charge. I’m not even convinced he was gay and my point is whether he was or wasn’t, this was an issue about hate, because these guys deliberatly lured Sandy to that park to rob him because of their perceptions about gays being weak and not fighting back.
October 17th, 2007 at 8:55 am
I’m gay and, sorry, but this doesn’t sound like a hate crime to me.
Hate crimes differ from conventional crime because they are not directed simply at an individual, but are meant to cause fear and intimidation in an entire group or class of people.
These idiots may’ve targeted the victim because of their misguided belief that gay men are less likely to fight back than gay men, but the purpose of the crime was not “to cause fear and intimidation” among gay people as a whole – their purpose was to rob a person who they perceived as vulnerable.
Whether or not the perpetrator was gay or straight has NOTHING to do with whether it’s a hate crime. Afterall, most true hate crimes against gay men are probably committed by self-hating, closeted, tormented gay men.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:00 am
I see your point, John, but I’m glad the courts didn’t see it your way when they tried Fortunato. I see it as a hate crime because these guys didn’t just hang out in some dimly lit area of a park and prey on someone who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (like many muggers). They went online to a gay site to attract a gay man as their victim. To me, that’s targeted enough at gay people to qualify.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:03 am
i can stand when i gay person get attack.I am bi and my straight self what to hit him
October 17th, 2007 at 9:33 am
I have to agree with Melissa. Although this does sound like a hate crime, what makes this a hate crime and a pedophile picking a child because they’re too weak to fight back? Or a woman being raped because she’s too weak to fight back? Or a husband beating his wife because she’s too weak to fight back? You get my point, I’m sure.
I suppose that in this case and the judge that was assigned, Anthony should change his name to Unfortunato. Sorry, had to go there.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:39 am
Regardless of whether it’s a hate crime which I believe it is. Anyone who would use the lure of sex in order to rob someone is a pretty sorry excuse for a human being in my book.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:41 am
“I dont understand hate crime legislation at all. If this dude did this to a straight woman it would he get less time?”
Exactly….I don’t understand hate crime legislation either. All crimes involving violence or the threat of violence ARE HATE CRIMES.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:57 am
FIRST OFF I RUN A HORROR REVIEW MYSPACE. ITS OFTEN A HIDDEN HORROR WHAT GAY FOLK GO THROUGH. AROUND EACH CORNER OR HIDDEN PASSAGE THERE IS HATE HIDING READY TO BURST AND THAT IS SAD. IT’S A HATE THAT I SEE OFTEN. I AM SOMEONE THAT IS NOT SURE ABOUT HIS SEXUALITY BUT I REALLY BELIEVE I AM GAY AND YET I GET HATE ALL THE TIME FOR RESPECTING AND PROMOTING GAY HORROR ON MY MYSPACE, JUST THE OTHER DAY I GOT A MESSAGE ABOUT MY FAG PICTURES ON MY MYSPACE, HERE I WAS HAVING TO DEFEND MYSELF AND OTHERS. IT’S IS SUCH A HORROR THAT WE STILL LIVE IN A CULTURE THAT IS LOCKED IN THE 14TH CENTURY WITH OLD IDEAS OF SEX. AND NOW A NEW TOOL IS BEING USED TO CAUSE HATE AND THAT IS THE ONE THING THAT IS HARD TO TRACK AND THATS THE INTERNET.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Dear Rick,
Despite the fact of Fortunato’s conviction, Snady’s death was after all, a tragedy. Hate has no color but only preferences. I was releived that Fortunato was convicted. However, there seems to be no end to prevent this kind of crime happening. After all, there is no safety net to catch us because these potential predators(regardless of their motives) are immense but invisible most of times until they act. Right now, we allocated all our resources to deal with aftermath but nothing for the prevention.
My question to all of you will be: “How can we prevent similar tragedies happening in the future? “
October 17th, 2007 at 10:32 am
If it was a random mugging then ‘hate crime’ wouldn’t necessarily be applicable, unless the crime became more viscous once the muggers realized their victim was gay and so became more aggressive as a result. But this was not random. This was an intentional baiting; ‘meet me at this place for a homosexual encounter.’ And since that was a lie from the onset, the meeting was NOT for sex but for robbery, the crime is more calculated and therefore more heinous. Whether they targeted a gay man because they hate homosexuals or because they perceive gay men as easier pickings, THEY TARGETED A GAY MAN. This makes it a crime against Sandy’s sexual orientation as much as it is a crime against him. If you are targeting a homosexual for a crime, whether it is for gain or malice, you are marginalizing that group in addition to whatever your nefarious intentions are. And the criminal’s sexual orientation becomes irrelevant. Gay on gay crime is hate if the homosexuality is exploited in the transgression of the crime. Black on black crime is hate if your skin color is exploited in the transgression of a crime.
If a gay person picks someone’s pocket at a gay bar, this is not hate – just theft, opportunistic crime instead of calculated malice.
But this raises the question, isn’t all violent crime hate crime? Once a crime crosses the line to violence something is triggered that taps into the part of people to allow them to go from mere transgression to brutality. And isn’t that a leap to hate? How can we consciously physically assault another person without tapping into that darker primal aspect of ourselves?
You cut me off on the road. I give you the finger. – You’re actions have surfaced my anger.
You cut me off on the road. I force you to the side of the road and kick your ass. – You’re actions have surfaced something far more brutal and primal. To physically assault you I have to be feeling hate. Unless there is some gap in my emotional and psychological development where I didn’t get the memo that we do not intentionally harm someone else.
But Fortunato’s defense wasn’t, ‘I didn’t know it wasn’t OK to hurt someone.’ His pathetic attempt at defending the hate element to his crime was claiming to also be gay. If he is gay, shouldn’t that make his hate all the more brutal and egregious?
But again, once you cross the line of perpetrating wanton violence, you are giving in to you’re ability to hate without reason. Hence, violent crimes are hate crimes by nature. So why delineate between violent crime and hate crime? In theory we shouldn’t.
But since, as homosexuals, we have been so marginalized by society that (since the inception of this country called the ‘land of the free’) our civil liberties and status as fully vested citizens have been nonexistent, this is a step in the right direction towards claiming our citizenship and humanity. To delineate a crime directed towards our sexual orientation as hate is to say that our sexual orientation no longer excuses violence because we are no longer perceived as less than equal.
Violent crime is atrocious, no matter who the victim. It breaks the contract of decency that we, as human beings, must subscribe to in order create a reality that is not governed by chaos. Violent crime against a particular subgroup is a statement, whether conscious or not, that THAT group is less deserving of the safety afforded the rest of the populace. It is a statement, in action, saying – this group is less human. And if you can marginalize any group to be on a level of sub-humanity you are manifesting HATE on a grand and monstrous scale.
That is what the Nazi’s did to the Jews, and homosexuals and gypsies etc. That is what our country had to do to Africans in order to justify slavery. That is what religious groups do to differing religious groups in order to justify all manner of violence.
To say ‘hating homosexuals to the point of violence is intolerable’ is a profound leap in the development of this society that has disenfranchised us for too long. It acknowledges our humanity, even more than being allowed to get married.
On the subject of violent crime, we have finally been emancipated to the legal status of human beings. We still have a long way to go before we are fully vested. It is horrifying to think that we have existed this long without this human recognition. But as sad and long overdue as this step in the right direction is, it is profound and welcomed.
October 17th, 2007 at 11:24 am
Rick R Reed said: “Isee your point, John, but I’m glad the courts didn’t see it your way when they tried Fortunato. I see it as a hate crime because these guys didn’t just hang out in some dimly lit area of a park and prey on someone who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time (like many muggers). They went online to a gay site to attract a gay man as their victim. To me, that’s targeted enough at gay people to qualify.”
So how does this differ from men who use the internet to prey on women and children????
October 17th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Deb,
I think Venus answers your question better than I could when she says,
“To delineate a crime directed towards our sexual orientation as hate is to say that our sexual orientation no longer excuses violence because we are no longer perceived as less than equal.”
October 17th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
Hate crimes apply whether they are directed at a group or one individual, regardless of what the misinformed “John” says in an earlier post. They also do not take into account the race, nationality or sexual orientation of the perpetrator(s). The court made the right decision in this case, and upheld the law as it is written.
October 17th, 2007 at 12:39 pm
Can I weigh in again on another facet of the topic being discussed here? Hate crimes and violent crimes are not the same thing, necessarily. Most violent crimes are committed by people who know their victims. A Husband who kills his wife in a jealous rage, parents who physically abuse their children, a brother or cousin who kills to “get even” for a perceived wrongdoing. In all these cases, the perpetrator still loves his victim, but his rage and anger have driven him over the brink, he can no longer control himself and he expresses it in a most violent and abhorrent way.
If someone flips you off or cuts you off on the freeway, you get angry, you don’t hate him. How can you hate someone you don’t even know? And that’s the difference. Hate crimes are based on the premise that one is capable of hating a total stranger, simply because of the color of his skin, country of birth, or sexual orientation. Capable of hating him enough to do unthinkable, evil, deeds against him.
The majority of other violent crimes involve poverty and drugs. The perps don’t know you, they neither love nor hate you, they just need your money. If you don’t give it willingly, they will resort to violence to get it.
“All violent crimes are hate crimes” is a conservative rubric, used often in the halls of Congress in an attempt to block hate crime legislation. It is a gross falsehood, and you shouldn’t fall for it.
October 17th, 2007 at 1:07 pm
i don’t understand hate crime legislation either, but i’m happy the courts saw it the way they did, thank you, Rick…
October 17th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
I read the blog and the responses and I, too, agree that the definition of hate crime can be a little muddy. I believe we should have hate crime laws. Many argue no because the crimes accompanied by hate can already be prosecuted. I consider “hate” as much a variance as the difference between manslaughter and murder with its degrees. This situation does not read as a hate crime to me. It is an opportunistic crime based on the fact that many gay men will put themselves in danger for a more thrilling sexual encounter. But it does not appear to be generated by the perpetrators venomous hatred of gays. I, too, wonder if it had been a woman would it have been a hate crime? If the answer is no…it should be no across the board. Let’s not allow an emotional reaction to cloud our judgement.
One last thought, a crime is a crime whether or not the victim had a part to play in his own victimization. Fortunato and his buddies should be convicted to the full extent of the law. This was a terrible thing to have happened. My only hope is that we can gain some wisdom in making choices for ourselves.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Kim,
Unfortunato . . . totally hilarious.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
As others have said, a hate crime is a hate crime is a hate crime.
October 17th, 2007 at 6:36 pm
I don’t think we have such a thing as a ‘hate crime’ here in Australia (I means in terms of the law) so this is very interesting to me.
What happened was deplorable and manslughter would still apply whether it was a hate crime or not but I understand the point you are trying to make Rick in that whether or not Fortunato was gay or straight, his actions were a deliberate attempt to lure a gay man to commit a crime against.
I am not fmailiar with what is required for a hate crime but I think a gay attacking a gay can still be a hate crime if they are attacking that person because he is gay.
This is very sad and I hope a message to all that meeting strangers always carries a risk.
Cheers,
Kell
October 18th, 2007 at 12:14 am
As the mother of 3 GAY,happy and healthy adult children,this crime is a death penalty crime in my book.
October 18th, 2007 at 2:48 am
http://tinyurl.com/2p86tb
We don’t have ‘hate crime laws’ here in Australia but this is a snippet of the stance the government has taken.
I believe it was an opportunistic crime also but it was the ‘targeting’ of a specific social group that would have bumped it over the line into hate crime territory.
What if they had targeted a swingers group or chubby lovers or foot fanciers (don’t know the term)…… would this have been a hate crime?
Maybe the definitions should be changed and we can have a term for people who hook up on the net and classify it hate crimes when they are targeted…..are they not as victimised?
October 18th, 2007 at 6:06 am
“Deb,
I think Venus answers your question better than I could when she says,
“To delineate a crime directed towards our sexual orientation as hate is to say that our sexual orientation no longer excuses violence because we are no longer perceived as less than equal.””
Um, not really, and secondly, my question was actually rhetorical in nature.
October 18th, 2007 at 7:15 am
I agree Deb, I thought Venus’ answer was terrible. If a person wants to be equal then why a special law for crimes against them? How does that make them equal?
Like I said, I just dont understand hate crime legislation. This is a henious crime for sure, but why is it worse because it was done to a gay person?
October 18th, 2007 at 7:20 am
After reading the article and all the comments. I have to say that I just don’t see this as a hate crime.
They made an assumption to look on a gay site for an easy mark. They were correct. They found one. It has been done many times by straight men towards straight woman on straight websites. They troll for someone who can be duped. The they lure them and either rob, rape, or kill them. The severity of their penalty should have been based on premeditated murder. This didn’t involve hate as much as claculated violence. The sexual orientation of the victem is irrelivant.
I see a hate crime as one the likes of Tina Brandon or the Paul Broussard case that was just posted on ICB. Those crimes were based purely on hatred towards a specific type of person.
The actual question was, Can a gay on gay or black on black crime be a hate crime.
Yes they can. I have known hispanics that hate the fact that they are of Mexican descent. That is exactly the type of person who would commit a crime against someone of their own because they hate their own origins.
October 19th, 2007 at 6:56 am
Hate crime or not, this is very simply a tragedy.
I am glad Fortunato’s gay claim didn’t lighten the charges. Perhaps the era of the Twinkie Defense is coming to an end. Too often, such as in the case of Matthew Shepard, charges are reduced because the victim supposedly brought it on themself.
KimPossible, thanks for the chuckle!
October 19th, 2007 at 9:04 am
I agree with TXMichelle.
October 20th, 2007 at 5:59 am
I think Craig hit the nail on the head. It seems to me, however, that most of u are believing this was a robbery. This was clearly about lureing (did I spell that right?) a “fag” to beat him up, the robbery part was just the bonus. They couldn’t know that he’d have money on him.
As for Fortunato, he’s gonna figure out whether he’s gay or not once he gets to prison…his just desserts! Having been bashed (7 guys & me), I’m always amazed that these guys think they’re tough. Why is it always 3 or more guys asaulting 1 gay? I’ll tell u why: Contrary to steriotypes, all the gays I know, know how to fight…the toughest ones being the drag queens! Surprised? We’ve had to defend ourselves all our lives! Know this, mess with us & all fighting “ettiquette” goes out the window…we fight dirty & we WON’T lose. These morons who go bashing would never have the balls for a 1 on 1 fight…who wants to explain that they got beat up by a fag?
For those of you that don’t understand the hate crime law…it doesn’t pertain only to gays. It’s about people seeking out a particular gender, race, sexual orientation or religion and assaulting them. It’s not about attacking a specific person, it’s about attacking (again) a gender, race, sexual orientation or religion. That’s what makes it a hate crime.
Thanks for letting me say my piece. Hope I was able to clarify a few things!
Mark
October 20th, 2007 at 10:35 am
Sandy’s not dead because he was gay. There’s nothing about being gay that requires a person to engage in risky hookups. He made himself an easy target.
Blacks and male gays seem to be the only groups entitled to hate crime victim status. It’s all about gaining power through victimhood.
I’ll be happy to change my opinion if anyone can show me some cases where hate crime charges were filed in crimes with female or white victims.
October 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I forget the name of the case but it’s what solidified the hate crime law… When the gang of black guys killed the Hascidic Jew in Brooklyn or Queens. U know what I’m talkin about… after that incident is when they made the law. Reguardless, it’s a good law & adds time onto the prison sentances of these offenders. I don’t understand why u find it offensive? Pinola, maybe you should know what it’s like to walk down a street & have a bunch of guys come running up behind u, kick u in the back so u fall over, then form a circle around u & start kicking & punching & spitting on you, calling u faggot …then file a report with the cops, hearing them snicker as they walk out of the room, I even gave them the liscence plate # of the car those bastards were driving. They never did anything…this happened b4 the hate crimes law. Lets see it happen to you, then you can tell me tell me about seeking power through victimhood. It happened, I got over it… I haven’t even spoken about what happened all those years ago, but reading your insensitive & uninformed comment, I thought u should know. Oh by the way, I’m white. U wanna know what was goin through my head the whole time? Like it or not, I’ll tell you… I couldn’t grasp why a bunch of black guys, who have probably been faced with prejudice all their lives, would go fag bashing. That’s all that kept going through my head (besides oww & eeewww). Still feel the same Pinola?
Mark
October 20th, 2007 at 9:33 pm
What I said, Mark. You’re white. There are plenty of places where I’d be a target because of my race and sex, but no one would be charged with a hate crime for assaulting or murdering me. Tough luck. The downside of whiteness.
October 20th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Well if they cut a swastika into your forehead, it’s a hate crime. Does that make u feel any better? LOL, I know that was aweful! But seriously, if a woman gets attacked by a strange man & he calls her a bitch or the C word it qualifies as a hate crime. This law is a good thing for everyone. So please don’t generalize & say that particular groups of people are trying to gain power through victimhood, it’s not fair. I know a whole lot of gays & none of us ever play the victim, it would be playing into a stereotype that most of us want nothing to do with.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:00 am
Pinola says: “Sandy’s not dead because he was gay. There’s nothing about being gay that requires a person to engage in risky hookups. He made himself an easy target.”
So he got what he deserved, right? And a woman who dresses provocatively and gets raped was asking for it? I’ve seen your “logic” before and it doesn’t hold water. There is no excuse for hurting someone else, no matter how misguided the victims actions may have been.
October 21st, 2007 at 10:58 am
What’s wrong with you, Rick? I didn’t say Sandy got what he deserved. My point, which you didn’t get, was that there was nothing about Sandy’s being gay that required him to agree to that risky hookup. If he’d been a woman hooking up with a man online (and had met the same fate), there’d have been no hate crime charges against the perps. I can’t remember hearing of anyone charged with a hate crime for raping or killing white women. I do know of one case in which a white man was charged regarding his assault against a black woman, but that case was the perfect perp/victim configuration and quite a rare bird.
October 21st, 2007 at 6:41 pm
Mark,
I agree that the crime committed against you was certainly a hate crime. They picked you and were violent towards you ONLY because you are gay.
Those crimes should not be accepted and should be punished severly. Still, I don’t see this one as a hate crime. I have to agree with pinola on this one. They chose a victim based on his niavete (sp?).
They went onto a gay website because they were gay. It is much easier to talk to and dupe someone when you know what you are saying. I would fail miserably at that. Straight men and women go onto straight websites looking for victims for the very same reason. Not hate involved, as much as being comfortable in the environment that you are trying to con someone in.
October 23rd, 2007 at 8:36 am
WTF Rick? Nobody said anything like that.
August 9th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
no only stupid people make hate crimes against us not other gays