Jennifer Guilbeault, 23, shown on video assaulting Shohel Mahmud after he began reciting prayer in Arabic
A New York woman who pepper-sprayed a Muslim Uber driver while he was praying has been indicted by the Manhattan district attorney on hate crime charges.
Jennifer Guilbeault, 23, is shown in a surveillance video repeatedly pepper-spraying her Uber driver, Shohel Mahmud. The assault took place in August on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, near the corner of east 65th Street and Lexington Avenue, shortly after Mahmud began reciting a prayer in Arabic.
…
Guilbeault’s former employer, the public relations and marketing firm D Pagan Communications, wrote on X it is aware of her actions and “don’t condone this behavior”.
Good decision.
Why is it called “hate” crime
Edit: im not sure what warning i should add to make it clear my question was an actual question instead of “an attempt to derail the debate” or whatever people said. Jesus fk people are reactive
Because it is an attack on somebody for belonging to a group rather than something about themselves specifically.
https://www.justice.gov/hatecrimes/learn-about-hate-crimes#hatecrime
Hate crimes, by definition, are not an attack only against an individual, but cause deliberate harm to an entire community.
The crime is different, so they’re treated differently, of course. We also have different degrees of murder depending on the person’s motivation.
It’s treated differently because it is a different predictor of violence. I’m not a violent person (but, like most people, I could be brought to assault a person under the right circumstances), so as long as someone’s not terrorizing me or someone else, I probably won’t get violent. That’s not a big risk, but if all it took for me to get violent was someone exercising a different religion in front of me, I’d be a much bigger societal risk.
In short: seems like hate crimes would have a high risk of recidivism.
Why are yall downvoting a question? Fr there’s no indication this was asked in bad faith. Are yall just morons?
There are people asking questions and there are people “asking questions” in an attempt to derail debate.
Honest question: what is up for debate regarding the case? I think all the facts are clear, no?
That’s correct, which is where my comments comes from. They aren’t curious about the definition of a hate crime, they are trying to insert doubt while feigning ignorance.
Again, with sincerity: did the woman who perpetrated the assault or her attorney give any public statement re: her motive? I saw in the video linked to the article said that the attorney, when asked by this reporter, had no comment. Was there anything ever released or documented about why she snapped?
What I’m getting at is did she attack him for being a man, a muslim, or a muslim and a man?
Furthermore, it’s not clear to me if she’s being charged with “vanilla” assault and battery or if there’s a hate crime charge on top of it. This may be my own fault for reading too quickly.Nevermind that. I re-read the aricle.
You’re a dingus.
I wish I could have seen this comment, too bad.
lol I called you a dingus for making a what I saw as a dumb comment and the mods took offense and deleted it to protect you.
I agree that some people will ask bad faith questions in bad faith as an effort to derail or disrupt actual debate. But I think this a poor example and debatable at best. Sorry I called you a dingus I guess. That better mods?
Yeah, sort of borderline “begs the question” here… A good indicator of sincerity in asking would be if OP of that question stuck around and actually engaged and thanked people that gave good answers - AFAIK they have not.
So again, borderline.
Sometimes I’ll ask a sincere question worded in a way that I didn’t realize implied anything, and get downvoted to hell. If anybody answers I’ll upvote, but I rarely want to stick around to explain why I don’t kick puppies or whatever.
Definitely a fair assessment.
“I’m just asking questions!”