Hate Crime or Incident Report

[Mr_J]

Step up! Let me pick your brain.

Someone wrote the "N" word on a poster. The poster was hung to a wall at a college campus. The poster was for a club, mixed race, open to all. There was a name of a public speaker on the poster. The public speaker is African American.

Is this a hate crime?

No one knows if the "N" word was targetted at the club or the speaker. The speaker does not own the poster or put it up. Other posters with the speakers name on it were close by but not defaced. The speaker says they were offended and feels intimidated.

I say no hate crime. Incident report, and/or 594 report.

Boss says hate crime. No victim needed, the college can be the victim.

What do you guys think ????

[Coronth]

Hate incident.

It's not a crime. The poster has no value and was abandoned so its not a vandalism. You wouldn't take a vandalism report, nor would anyone report it if someone wrote any other word on it or just tore it up.

[retired]

I don't believe in hate crimes anyway, so I say no hate crime.

[HI629]

No crime, sounds like someone was expressing their opinion. No direct threat was made, nothing like "187" after the "N" word or anything like that. Had there been more to it like the word "die" placed before the single word, it would have been a whole different story.

Sounds more like an issue against the club than the individual since other posters with the individual in question weren't defaced.

[L-1]

I say no hate crime.

422.6 PC offers two ways to violate the law. The first says you cannot willfully injure, intimidate, interfere with, oppress, or threaten any other person in the free
exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him or her by the Constitution by force or threats of force. Writing the N word on a poster is not force or a threat of force, so this option doesn't work.

The next option makes it illegal to knowingly deface, damage, or destroy the real or personal property of any other person for the purpose of intimidating or interfering with
the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to the other person by the Constitution or laws of this state or by the Constitution or laws of the United States, in whole or in part because of one or more of the actual or perceived characteristics of the victim listed in subdivision (a) of Section 422.55.

That would work her except for one thing. If I understand correctly, the property defaced (in this case the poster) is not the personal property of any other person, it is the property of the institution. No cigar here either.

I'm with you. The only elements that have been met are 594 PC. However, your boss is the one who signs your performance evaluations. On top of that, you are working at an educational institution where political correctnes always trumps truth. Like Winston in the book Big Brother, the school may occasionally show you four fingers, ask you how many there are and expect you to believe there are really five.

[District B 13]

Just say "hmm" and keep on driving. I'm sure the lyrics at the club are more racist.

[willowdared]

Boss says hate crime. No victim needed, the college can be the victim.

You answered your own question.

[nobodyjr]

Every county does things different with 422.6--- in my county the DA does not file it as a charge. They use it as an enhancement to another charge only. In San bernardino the DA would file 422.6 as a stand alone charge.

Because you are on campus and someone complained.. I would cut a vandalism report and be done with it. The victim would be the poster of the flyer (or the club since they owned the flyer). Here it's not relevant if it's a hate crime for an initial crime case or not, the attorneys decide that when they file charges.

I think you should just go with the flow man... your life will be easier.

[Garbage Man]

I say hate crime for stat tracking and crime trend purpose. A 594 alone will be lost inthe shuffle. maybe there are other incidents of that word being written and this would help track a pattern. Geting the exact right section only matters when you are arresting someone anyway. Could you charge someone with a hate crime for this? I doubt it, but at this stage its worth calling it that just to make the right detective or CAU person aware of it to look for similars.

In the end the point is it is a judgement call and could go either way. Which makes me wonder why argue about it? Go with the sgt either way. Its when the sgt is on crack that I would disagree.

[SgtCHP]

In my perspective, it is a Malicious Mischief caper (594 PC); however, you work for your supervisor and he has called it a Hate Crime; ergo, write it up as such. Let him debate with the detectives when they kick the report back.

[Mr_J]

Thanks for the info. I just wanted to make sure I was reading the PC right. I am the rookie here. I am not going against the brass.