Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Justice Shouldn't Be Tilted by 'Hate Crimes'
Two awful things happened in Laramie, Wyo., six years ago. First, a young man — a small, gay man — was beaten beyond recognition and left tied to a fence. It was a foul murder. In its wake came a polite murder, sober in its execution: the slaying of justice.
November 26, 2004
COMMENTARY
Justice Shouldn't Be Tilted by 'Hate Crimes'
Tinkering with criminal law is no solution to homophobia.
By JoAnn Wypijewski,
JoAnn Wypijewski is a journalist in New York City.
Two awful things happened in Laramie, Wyo., six years ago. First, a young man — a small, gay man — was beaten beyond recognition and left tied to a fence. It was a foul murder. In its wake came a polite murder, sober in its execution: the slaying of justice.
The bloody horror of the first assault blinded almost everyone to the sterile wrongfulness of the second. Tonight, ABC's "20/20" will revisit the murder of Matthew Shepard, providing an occasion to consider what was neglected and to rethink the notion that anyone is safer, freer, wiser or more generous in spirit because some murders might be defined as worse than murder, some victims considered special, and some perpetrators punished more harshly — all on the basis of something as measureless as hate.
Shepard was killed in a town, like many towns, inhospitable to gay people, with no protections against sexual discrimination and only disincentives for being openly gay. Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, the men now serving life sentences for murdering Shepard, grew up on the milk of violence that America feeds its sons and on the language of easy slurs — "faggot," "sissy," "girlie man." They were homophobes in the way that passes for normal.
They were also broke and drunk or drugged up on the night of the murder. McKinney, bingeing on crystal meth, had not slept in a week. Henderson, impaired by drink, suggested McKinney might let up on Shepard and got slugged in the mouth. Afterward, they were headed to burgle Shepard's house when McKinney picked a fight with two men and cracked another skull, wielding his .357 magnum like a baseball bat, just as he had against Matthew Shepard.
So was Shepard's murder a hate crime or was it something else? "20/20" comes down on the side of something else, amplifying the meth connection, which I first reported in Harper's in 1999, and exploring Laramie's drug subculture, through which Shepard seems to have become acquainted with McKinney. Some gay advocates of hate crime laws have already blasted the network for raising the question. Michael Adams of Lambda Legal Defense says ABC is trying to "de-gay the murder."
Scrapping over the nature of Shepard's victimhood is the wrong debate. Whatever his killer's degree of homophobia, Shepard is dead. Powerless to restore him, society is obligated to ask what is owed to the living — to gay people, who have suffered ages of abuse, and also criminal defendants. Tinkering with criminal law is a backward step in countering the deep cultural realities of homophobia, racism, sexism. Prosecuting murder as a hate crime only lets the rest of us think we're off the hook, while it tramples on justice.
Amid the drumbeat over hate, Matthew Shepard was made a holy martyr for enhanced penalties. McKinney and Henderson were made monsters. And the legal machinery of Albany County, Wyo., made itself the tool of a family's vengeance. Wyoming doesn't have a hate crime law, but it does have the death penalty, which the prosecution demanded for McKinney and Henderson. Matthew would have wanted it that way, his family said, adding that the prosecutors did nothing without the Shepards' permission.
With the death penalty as a weapon and the media as an echo chamber, the prosecution extracted a plea from Henderson. He was the driver that night. He never hit Shepard, but, on McKinney's order, he tied him to the fence. Having followed that terrible instruction, he retreated. Did he fear McKinney? Mitigating circumstances went unconsidered. The county had money to mount only one capital trial, and the prosecution gauged correctly that Henderson would be easier to break. He is serving two consecutive life terms, with no chance of parole.
McKinney, who struck Shepard 18 times and kicked him in a frenzy of violence, is serving an identical sentence. After a jury found him not guilty of premeditated murder, and with only one count left that might have brought death, the prosecution moved for a plea agreement.
"I am going to grant you life," Matthew's father declared in court, the ultimate expression of privatized justice. Under the agreement, McKinney waived his right of appeal and consented to a gag order. ABC's interviews assert a public claim against the Shepards' effort to turn the story into their sole property.
It is understandable that the family would be intemperate, which is why justice has no place in the hands of a victim's grieving relatives. What happened in the Shepard case wasn't justice, but special treatment.
A third awful occurrence in Laramie should have drawn bright circles around the inequities of that kind of treatment. In January 1999, Henderson's mother, Cindy Dixon, was found dead. She had been raped and struck and left in the snow to die. No powerful advocates spoke for her. She was likely to come to a bad end, people said, what with the drinking and the men, and then her son….
Nobody took the measure of hate. By the time the Dixon case was wrapped up, they weren't even talking murder. A man pleaded guilty to manslaughter, and the same judge who sent Dixon's son to prison forever sentenced her killer to four to nine years. He got out last year.
If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.com/archives. http://www.latimes.com/archives
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-wypijewski26nov26,0,2450554.story
Los Angeles Times
COMMENTARY
Justice Shouldn't Be Tilted by 'Hate Crimes'
Tinkering with criminal law is no solution to homophobia.
By JoAnn Wypijewski,
JoAnn Wypijewski is a journalist in New York City.
Two awful things happened in Laramie, Wyo., six years ago. First, a young man — a small, gay man — was beaten beyond recognition and left tied to a fence. It was a foul murder. In its wake came a polite murder, sober in its execution: the slaying of justice.
The bloody horror of the first assault blinded almost everyone to the sterile wrongfulness of the second. Tonight, ABC's "20/20" will revisit the murder of Matthew Shepard, providing an occasion to consider what was neglected and to rethink the notion that anyone is safer, freer, wiser or more generous in spirit because some murders might be defined as worse than murder, some victims considered special, and some perpetrators punished more harshly — all on the basis of something as measureless as hate.
Shepard was killed in a town, like many towns, inhospitable to gay people, with no protections against sexual discrimination and only disincentives for being openly gay. Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson, the men now serving life sentences for murdering Shepard, grew up on the milk of violence that America feeds its sons and on the language of easy slurs — "faggot," "sissy," "girlie man." They were homophobes in the way that passes for normal.
They were also broke and drunk or drugged up on the night of the murder. McKinney, bingeing on crystal meth, had not slept in a week. Henderson, impaired by drink, suggested McKinney might let up on Shepard and got slugged in the mouth. Afterward, they were headed to burgle Shepard's house when McKinney picked a fight with two men and cracked another skull, wielding his .357 magnum like a baseball bat, just as he had against Matthew Shepard.
So was Shepard's murder a hate crime or was it something else? "20/20" comes down on the side of something else, amplifying the meth connection, which I first reported in Harper's in 1999, and exploring Laramie's drug subculture, through which Shepard seems to have become acquainted with McKinney. Some gay advocates of hate crime laws have already blasted the network for raising the question. Michael Adams of Lambda Legal Defense says ABC is trying to "de-gay the murder."
Scrapping over the nature of Shepard's victimhood is the wrong debate. Whatever his killer's degree of homophobia, Shepard is dead. Powerless to restore him, society is obligated to ask what is owed to the living — to gay people, who have suffered ages of abuse, and also criminal defendants. Tinkering with criminal law is a backward step in countering the deep cultural realities of homophobia, racism, sexism. Prosecuting murder as a hate crime only lets the rest of us think we're off the hook, while it tramples on justice.
Amid the drumbeat over hate, Matthew Shepard was made a holy martyr for enhanced penalties. McKinney and Henderson were made monsters. And the legal machinery of Albany County, Wyo., made itself the tool of a family's vengeance. Wyoming doesn't have a hate crime law, but it does have the death penalty, which the prosecution demanded for McKinney and Henderson. Matthew would have wanted it that way, his family said, adding that the prosecutors did nothing without the Shepards' permission.
With the death penalty as a weapon and the media as an echo chamber, the prosecution extracted a plea from Henderson. He was the driver that night. He never hit Shepard, but, on McKinney's order, he tied him to the fence. Having followed that terrible instruction, he retreated. Did he fear McKinney? Mitigating circumstances went unconsidered. The county had money to mount only one capital trial, and the prosecution gauged correctly that Henderson would be easier to break. He is serving two consecutive life terms, with no chance of parole.
McKinney, who struck Shepard 18 times and kicked him in a frenzy of violence, is serving an identical sentence. After a jury found him not guilty of premeditated murder, and with only one count left that might have brought death, the prosecution moved for a plea agreement.
"I am going to grant you life," Matthew's father declared in court, the ultimate expression of privatized justice. Under the agreement, McKinney waived his right of appeal and consented to a gag order. ABC's interviews assert a public claim against the Shepards' effort to turn the story into their sole property.
It is understandable that the family would be intemperate, which is why justice has no place in the hands of a victim's grieving relatives. What happened in the Shepard case wasn't justice, but special treatment.
A third awful occurrence in Laramie should have drawn bright circles around the inequities of that kind of treatment. In January 1999, Henderson's mother, Cindy Dixon, was found dead. She had been raped and struck and left in the snow to die. No powerful advocates spoke for her. She was likely to come to a bad end, people said, what with the drinking and the men, and then her son….
Nobody took the measure of hate. By the time the Dixon case was wrapped up, they weren't even talking murder. A man pleaded guilty to manslaughter, and the same judge who sent Dixon's son to prison forever sentenced her killer to four to nine years. He got out last year.
If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at latimes.com/archives. http://www.latimes.com/archives
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-wypijewski26nov26,0,2450554.story
Los Angeles Times
For more information:
http://www.latimes.com
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$230.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network
[Amid the drumbeat over hate, Matthew Shepard was made a holy martyr for enhanced penalties. McKinney and Henderson were made monsters.]
Excuse me, but I think that they already established it by what they did to Matthew Shepard, just one example of how the reporter tries to turn the tables and convert the victims, broadly defined, into the bad guys
[With the death penalty as a weapon and the media as an echo chamber, the prosecution extracted a plea from Henderson. He was the driver that night. He never hit Shepard, but, on McKinney's order, he tied him to the fence. Having followed that terrible instruction, he retreated]
the bottom line here is that Henderson acknowledges that he tied Matthew Shepard to a fence to be beaten to death
and, there was no evidence, contrary to the subsequent implication of the article, that he was "afraid" of McKinney, and if he was, he could have refused to enter his plea, and gone to trial
just imagine if two black men had killed a white man to death in this fashion, with one of the men tying the victim to the fence
can anyone imagine Wypijewski making these kinds of excuses made for his behaviour?
I guess the answer is YES . . . . . if he was smart enough to help someone kill a gay man
And, then, this transparent attempt to put feminists and gay and lesbians into a false opposition:
[A third awful occurrence in Laramie should have drawn bright circles around the inequities of that kind of treatment. In January 1999, Henderson's mother, Cindy Dixon, was found dead. She had been raped and struck and left in the snow to die. No powerful advocates spoke for her. She was likely to come to a bad end, people said, what with the drinking and the men, and then her son….
Nobody took the measure of hate. By the time the Dixon case was wrapped up, they weren't even talking murder. A man pleaded guilty to manslaughter, and the same judge who sent Dixon's son to prison forever sentenced her killer to four to nine years. He got out last year.]
And, then, this bizarre section:
["I am going to grant you life," Matthew's father declared in court, the ultimate expression of privatized justice. Under the agreement, McKinney waived his right of appeal and consented to a gag order. ABC's interviews assert a public claim against the Shepards' effort to turn the story into their sole property.
It is understandable that the family would be intemperate, which is why justice has no place in the hands of a victim's grieving relatives. What happened in the Shepard case wasn't justice, but special treatment.]
The tipoff here is the use of the term, "special treatment", religious right code for opposition to any public acknowledgement of gays and lesbians, opposition to granting gays and lesbians the rights the rest of us enjoy.
This particular statement is especially weird: "ABC's interviews assert a public claim against the Shepards' effort to turn the story into their sole property."
Somehow, I don't think that the Shepards view the death of their son as a "story" that they own as property. Furthermore, the idea that ABC, as a private corporation, is asserting "a public claim" is oxymoronic
Wypijewski's crude effort to characterize the Shepards as having a ghoulish proprietary interest in their son's death is grotesque, and reflects more on the bigotry of the author than it does on the Shepard's
--Richard Estes
Davis, CA
(1) The mainstream writer talks about privatization of law. That's actually part of Muslim law; for example, the state will often commute a death sentence if the victim's family so requests. There's plenty of room for argument about whether this is good or bad. (And I'm not engaging in that debate.)
...............
(2) What mainly concerns me here is that somebody
(probably queer and/or progressive)
reposted a mainstream commentary
without identifying it as such;
and posted it in full;
and didn't bother to add any comment of their own.
Strong suggestions for next time:
(2A) Write an introduction or comment; in your own words;
even if it's only a sentence or two.
(Here's an example: "Here's an opinion piece from the Boondocks Confederate. As a queer progressive, I disagree with the comments on orange giraffes; but I think the point about purple baboons deserves our attention.")
(2B) If the source is nether queer NOR progressive, post just a brief summary and a link. (This is easiest if the item is from NY Times,
which provides a short summary for each article.)
(2C) If the source is nether queer NOR progressive,
post it as a mere "comment" on another IndyBay article on a related topic; thus giving it less prominence on our LGBTQI page,
while still making it available.
(2D) In choosing stuff from the mainstream press, I look for items which
provide FACTS.
As for mere opinions, we can supply those by the ton...
(2E) Yes, I realize that some of these suggestions would take another minute or two of your time.
But your queer progressive readers deserve that small extra effort, IMQO. (Or, if the canned mainstream article isn't worth
that small extra effort, then please ask yourself
whether it's worth posting at all.)
-- amateur journalist
but, if you want another one, here it is: the author clearly conveys more emotional support for the perpetrators of the crime than the victims, the parents of Matthew Shepard, but, of course, I guess that's to be expected from someone who doesn't like gays
and, just imagine, how many times do you see major television networks strive to interview murderers so that they can give credence to their frequently hackneyed, after the fact rationalizations? apparently, it seems to only happen when the victim is gay
as the media scrambles to catch up to the perceived emergence of red state, "moral values" America, expect more of this kind of shoddy journalism
as for "facts", here are some more:
[Junk Show: Did '20/20' Deceive The Public?
By Mary Grossman
12.1.04
Six years ago, a vicious beating in the freezing outskirts of Laramie, Wyo., resulted in the death of 21- year-old gay University of Wyoming college student Matthew Shepard. Local boys Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson were convicted of the murder, which fell under the definition of a hate crime and are currently serving two consecutive life sentences each.
"What [Henderson and McKinney] did to Matt was way beyond meth rage," said O'Malley. "I just don't believe it."
Last Friday, ABC aired a much-anticipated edition of "20/20" titled "A Murder in Laramie: The Mystery and the Myth" that claimed to re-examine the case and put forth new evidence surrounding the murder. The producers of "20/20" and its host, Elizabeth Vargas, suggested that Shepard was not murdered because he was gay, but because of drugs - specifically methamphetamine - and money. Those closest to the case said they were stunned and sickened by ABC's report, and claimed "20/20" deliberately massaged and omitted facts in their retelling of the story. The centerpiece of the show was Vargas' unprecedented interviews with McKinney and Henderson. The fact that these interviews took place at all is controversial, because to avoid the death penalty both McKinney and Henderson entered into plea bargains with prosecutors and Mathew's parents, Dennis and Judy Shepard, which included promising to never speak to the media about this case. It remains unclear how "20/20" was granted the interviews and if they have violated McKinney and Henderson's plea agreements.
The interviews were typical prime time newsmagazine fare - Vargas, as the hard-hitting yet sexy reporter (sporting five-inch heels and a flirtatious manner), questions two apparently remorseful, clean cut, boy-next-door type inmates. The producers literally and figuratively attempted to portray the murderers in a good light - think of the warm honeyed lighting of a Barbara Walters celebrity chat. On Friday's program, McKinney and Henderson contradict their initial defense strategy of "gay panic" and deny that Matt's homosexuality had anything to do with the murder. McKinney claims he was simply coming off a meth high and may have been suffering from some form of meth rage.
Vargas presents the rest of her case through a patchwork of edited sound bites from Judy Shepard, Laramie Chief of Police Dave O'Malley and a slew of self-confessed meth addicts. They all appear to agree with Vargas that McKinney was strung out on dope, desperate for money and drugs, and simply snapped from meth rage. A portrait is painted of Matt Shepard as a well-known drug user and dealer who suffered from questionable behavior, dark mood swings, depression and HIV - suggesting that Matt somehow deserved his fate.
Bias and creative editing (a la Michael Moore) may have played havoc with the truth. In recent interviews with Planet Jackson Hole, two lead investigators who played key roles in the Shepard case - then police chief Dave O'Malley and current Albany County Sheriff's office lieutenant Rob DeBree - expressed anger and dismay that "20/20" producers omitted significant testimony and facts that lead law enforcement investigators to believe anti-gay issues, not drugs, were the primary motivation behind the murder. O'Malley, who dealt directly with the "20/20" crew during interviews in his own home, is angry because the producers did not present an objective report as they promised, and because he felt deceived by "20/20" producers and wasn't able to respond to their questions effectively. "I'd be naive to say that McKinney and Henderson did not have drug issues and the initial motive was robbery," O'Malley said Saturday. "That's not an arguable point for me." But O'Malley said "20/20's" claim that McKinney was in the middle of a meth binge simply wasn't true. In the initial police interviews with McKinney's girlfriend, Kristen Price - who also appears on the show - she told investigators that McKinney hadn't had any meth in days. O'Malley also said that neither McKinney nor Henderson exhibited any symptoms of withdrawal at the time of arrest. In fact, the officer who arrested Henderson that night "shortly after they left Matt tied to a fence" was a narcotics officer trained in identifying people who are under the influence. He said they did not exhibit any symptoms.
According to O'Malley, during pre-taping interviews, "20/20" producers assured him that they weren't working from any particular angle, they just wanted to get the whole story and promised an objective report. But once the tape was rolling, the interview rapidly shifted to the meth issue, for which O'Malley was not prepared. "They made me extremely mad and they cut that from the tape," said O'Malley. "I sure got the wool pulled over my eyes."
Matt Shepard's mother, Judy, also offered similar complaints in an online statement (http://www.matthewshepard.org), commenting that "the editing by '20/20' of my interview seems to leave out all of my relevant comments regarding the potential bias of the show. My remarks were reduced to a few very personal maternal comments taken out of context to make it appear as if I agreed with '20/20's' theories. That couldn't be farther from the truth."
"20/20" producers could not be reached by press time. DeBree rejected an invitation from "20/20" for an interview. "I just had a feeling that this would be tabloid style journalism and I didn't want to have anything to do with it," he told the Planet. He agreed with O'Malley and Shepard regarding the misleading information presented to viewers and was particularly disturbed that "20/20" seemed to be rejecting the hate crime conclusion based on the fact that there were other possible motivations. DeBree noted that the legal definition of a hate crime is a criminal offense committed against a person, property or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin. DeBree emphasized the "in part" part of the definition and suggested an amalgam of elements - anti-gay bias being one of them - were behind the killing. During the initial interview with McKinney following his arrest, DeBree's first impression was that it was just a robbery. But as he received word of Shepard's devastating injuries and the unusual details emerging about McKinney and Henderson's actions, the motive of robbery just didn't fit.
"The level of viciousness and violence in which this was done, it just didn't fit," he said. "The $20 in Shepard's pocket wasn't the answer."
However, "20/20" suggests that "meth rage," not homophobia or gay panic, was the reason for McKinney's excessive violence. During the "20/20" interview, McKinney claims he did not know Matt was gay. But DeBree disagrees and said that McKinney was well aware of Matt's sexual orientation. He also said that during initial interviews, McKinney referred to Shepard as a "queer guy" and that even when he was first incarcerated he bragged to fellow inmates that he would only get "15 to 20 because he killed a faggot."
According to DeBree, the drug motive was never an issue until the very last moments of the trial when McKinney's lawyers realized the gay panic defense wasn't working. "We did an immediate and thorough investigation on the drug issue when the defense brought it up," said DeBree, "and we blew it out of the water."
DeBree couldn't believe that "20/20" latched on to what he considers a completely disproved theory.
"What [Henderson and McKinney] did to Matt was way beyond meth rage," said O'Malley. "I just don't believe it." Both O'Malley and DeBree are troubled by the matter-of-fact admission that Kristen Price, McKinney and his lawyers concocted the "gay panic" story as nothing but a defense strategy, hoping to gain leniency from a homophobic Wyoming jury. During the "20/20" show, Price admitted to committing perjury on the stand and McKinney expressed regret regarding their decision to use gay panic as a defense because "it just didn't work." Though this is juicy stuff, it seriously damages the credibility of McKinney and Price.
O'Malley questions the character of the sources presented by "20/20." "These are methheads that are dragged out of the gutter and nobody's heard of them." DeBree said he found the sources used to support the meth rage theory "laughable" and wished "20/20" would have taken the time to find credible sources. The theory "20/20" relies on to a great extent is information provided by a shady character named "Doc" O'Conner, who owned a limousine service and befriended Henderson and Shepard. O'Conner claims to have had homosexual sex with McKinney. A known bisexual and drug user, O'Connor's accounts are used to show how the two worlds of McKinney and Shepard were actually connected via drugs and sex.
Though Doc O'Connor declined to comment specifically on his experiences with "20/20," he said, "Hey, it's a onehour show - there's not much you can do in one hour."
He added, "Of all the people who've played me, Steve Buscemi and HBO did it the best."
Steve Buscemi could not be contacted for comment.
"Doc O'Connor has an extremely wide variety of criminal activities behind him," said DeBree. "This guy has zero credibility." Gay rights advocacy groups GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) and the Matthew Shepard Foundation, headed by Judy Shepard, lashed out against the episode of "20/20," as expected. Both groups co-published a viewers guide to "A Murder In Laramie: The Mystery And The Myth." The online guide (http://www.glaad.org) "calls on the media and the viewing public to scrutinize the sensationalistic claims and distortions offered by '20/20' in its attempt to rewrite the history of Shepard's murder case."
GLAAD Executive Director Joan M. Garry said in a statement released to the press "'20/20's' misleading oversimplifications and distortions do a tremendous disservice to a complicated case. This simply is not a credible piece of journalism." What at first comes across as a show containing some serious hard-hitting evidence that could change the entire landscape for Hate Crime legislation, "A Murder in Laramie" eventually ends up just a notch above "Entertainment Tonight." This shoddy rewrite of the Matthew Shepard murder revealed nothing but a lineup of sleazebags who lack credibility. Though "20/20" attempts to tackle one of the most persistently nagging questions regarding Matthew Shepard's murder - was this a drug crime or was this a hate crime? - in the end they didn't have the chops or the sources to create any new evidence and failed to present a convincing case because of the circus parade of weirdoes. DeBree makes no attempt to hide his disgust: "If it wasn't so sickening, I'd be laughing my head off."
PLANET EXCLUSIVE: E-mails Give Insight
On Sunday Planet Jackson Hole obtained copies of e-mail correspondence between ABC producer Glenn Silber and Elizabeth Vargas and other producers of the show. The two sets of emails describe in detail interview strategies and potential questions for Dave O'Malley and Doc O'Conner.
O'Malley, who saw the e-mails prior to Sunday, was stunned to see in-depth research on his professional life and descriptions of how deeply invested he was in this case. In the e-mails, Silber speaks with great respect of O'Malley, but also hints that O'Malley will be a tough nut to crack because of his tight connection to the issue of hate crimes. A portion of the O'Malley email reads, "Although Dave is a veteran, highly skilled investigator who was the key to solving the crime quickly, he's signed onto the 'hate crime' motivation of Shepard's death and our piece will, ultimately, contradict that flawed theory."
O'Malley asked, "How can they come in and say they're doing an objective report but in their emails it says this? When you come at it with this kind of attitude, that's not objective."
Other e-mails detail the interview plan for Doc O'Connor suggesting only questions that will provide answers in support of the meth theory.
The depth of research provided by Silber in these e-mails is impressive, however. He is self-questioning, thorough and deeply concerned that the crew is on the right track. So what went wrong? Why didn't they produce a strong piece of journalism? The e-mails also reveal a course of action that circumvents any significant testimony or key evidence related to the trial or hate crime theory. Major pieces of evidence were not addressed in their questioning. Why wouldn't they bring opposing evidence up and then dispute it?
- Mary Grossman]