"We drove 300 miles to see him get six months in jail for killing my son"

Is that what a gay person's life is worth?

Disgusting.

species taking our place.

By 2050, I think you're going to get your wish.

Horrible.

Un-fucking-real. So this is what the Courts consider justice for the gay community? :mad:

cant forget that.

The judge gave the guy the maximum sentence available for misdemeanor assault. Chances are the district attorney wanted a fast and easy conviction rather than having to go to trial on involuntary manslaughter charges to get 12 to 18 months.

:(

any witnesses on the part of the defense to corroborate a sexual advance?

Do straight guys beat the shit out of women they dont find attractive when they hit on them? Gay panic is not a defense its an excuse IMO.

that the "sexual advance" is rationale for misdemeanor assault.

Which, if he weren't lying, would be sexual assault, and he would be within his rights to slug whoever's doing the groping.

'Course, given that his story wasn't to garner a self-defense claim and was instead used as a "gay panic" claim, I think we can all be pretty secure with the notion he was lying something fierce.

I host Karaoke in a bar and have had problems with a gay guy who hits on me (mainly when he's drunk) and has on occasion touched me inappropriately. I have never felt that I would have the right to hit him. I have done my best to let him know I do not like it, and have managed to get the message through to him in general, although I still have to be somewhat careful how close I let him get to me when he's drunk and headed out the door.

Not that it would matter if he were not drunk, I still would not feel the right to hit him for his inappropriate behavior. I would just have to be more forceful with my words.

whether you agree withit or not, sexual battery is a crime and you can defend yourself with force....

Was he completely alone with the guy and there was nobody around to help him if his alleged sexual attacker was actually attempting to rape him?

You're painting this in a very black & white manner. If you read the actual details, you'll see that this guy was with two buddies when the alleged assault occurred (one buddy corroborated his story, the other buddy said he hadn't seen anything happen).

If in fact he was touched, would it be reasonable for him to think he was gonna get sexually assaulted right there in the open while his buddies watched and did nothing to stop his attacker? Or did he in fact react with inappropriate excessive violence?

You think there's a law that protects that type of behavior in a situation where someone can not reasonably think they may be in actual danger of being sexually assaulted?

at that point the sexual assault has already taken place, the victim of a sexual battery can defend themselves and theres nothing that dictates the amount of force other than what a reasonable person deems neccessary. If a guy assaulted a girl even in front of her friends and she hit him as hard as she could and he fell and got hurt would you want the female charged with malicious wounding etc etc, no you wouldnt because the victim whether male or female has an absolute right to defend themselves.

so I won't continue the argument any further.

Hannah knocked him down with three punches, and Hunter cracked his head on the sidewalk when he fell. This is why even with a perfect case for the prosecution, the harshest charge available would have been involuntary manslaughter.

Personally, I wouldn't swing at a groper, either. I'm simply saying that legally, I would be in my rights to do so. And just for the record, all force is potentially deadly, which is why the idea of a "nonlethal weapon" is such a joke.

;-)

The perp intended to do bodily harm ~~ not to kill ~~ but a death resulted. Therefore voluntary manslaughter. Involuntary would be doing something that is grossly negligent, but no bodily harm was intended ~~ an example would be drag racing and a death resulted.

BTW: I don't buy the story about the sexual advance ~~ does not pass the smell test with me.

Hannah was not directly responsible for Hunter's death. Had it been that his punches gave Hunter a fatal brain hemorrhage, that would be voluntary manslaughter, but Hunter died from injuries not directly caused by the assault. it was blunt force trauma to the back of his skull - from hitting his head on the sidewalk when he fell - that killed him. Hannah created the situation that resulted in Hunters' death, but did not kill Hunter himself.

And even with as little sense as that makes, I'll take it over the mob justice at least one poster seems to prefer.

or maybe it's just a different guy who continually tried to grab my ass :) He's nice when he is sober but drunk he's just a complete whore....

Which is the whole reason he got off with assault - poor witnesses, contradictory testimony, and the like rendered a charge of involuntary manslaughter pretty much impossible.

WaPo article

It is remarkable that you can hit someone who subsequently dies and plea bargain it to a misdemenor.

or the evidence looks like it is the lesser charge,

i dont know this case, but there must have been reasons why it was only misdemeanour assault, the judge could only give a max of 180 days, of which the defendant will serve 90..

I'm not in favor of the death penalty by any means, but this kind of shit is why Repugs hate us. How is the victim's family supposed to feel about this? And how exactly does it get people on our side?

ed for sp

And if the Republicans hate us, good. That just means we're doing something right.

Take this subhuman murdering fuck out of circulation permanently.

if as he says he was the victim of sexual battery then hes entitled to defend himself using force, and im pretty sure he didnt try to kill the guy as was the investigating officers so it isnt murder....

At best, the victim made a pass at him, a story I'm skeptical of, and even if true, that doesn't justify any sort of violence.

But that's just a lame-ass defense made by the defendant trying to beat a murder rap. It was a hate crime.

then its sexual battery whether you like it or not, the defendant claimed that he was grabbed sexually as part of his defence, though it dosent seem as if there was any other evidence either way. If a guy grabbed a girl in the same area would you dismiss the girls right to physically stop the assault..

the girl would have the right to stop the assault, with the least amount of force necessary to do so. In a similar setting, she'd be with two of her friends against two men (only one of which was alleged to be involved in the alleged sexual provocation) and it shouldn't take a punch in the head to extricate herself from the situation.

its not the least amount of force, its the amount of force that you can articulate that you needed to use, so a women slapping a man or pushing a man and saying no is an example, but if that push resulted in his death unforseen as it was, then you wouldnt want the women to be charged with murder. If we are to believe the defendant he was the victim of sexual battery and responded by using force to defend himself, no idea why he didnt go down the self defence route unless he was and thats why the misdemeanour deal was offered...

If you and I get into a fight and by punching you I knock you into traffic or something, I'm not a murderer - I'm responsible for your death, but your death was accidental. i'm guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

If we're in the same brawl and the injuries you sustain from me result in your death, then I'm guilty of voluntary manslaughter.

If I beat you to the ground and keep punching until you stop breathing, then I'm a second-degree murderer.

if I set out to start a brawl with you with the intent of getting the above result, then it's first degree murder.

And... subhuman? Really?

Awesome. Better go double-check the list.

for decades. There's nothing new at all about this, and frankly, I was surprised to see the guy even get six months.

This is supposedly a liberal website. What would satisfy y'all? 30 years? Life? Death?

This person is sick. He can be rehabilitated. Why compound the tragedy by putting him away for years?

Has anyone compared his sentence to that of others who have committed similar crimes that were based on some other motive besides hatred for a particular minority group? Should the reason a person gets angry add time to their sentence? Would that actually deter such crimes? Do ya think this guy, in his temporarily insane condition, would have suddenly remembered "Oh crap, if I hit this guy, he might die, and they just doubled the sentences for hate crimes"?

Be real here, people. What really needs to happen is that the courts need to start focusing more on re-education and community service, and less on imprisonment (or execution) which solves nothing, is a waste of our resources and human potential, and in reality probably does not even make the victims (or families of the victims) any better off. If you had been the family member, which would satisfy you more? That the guy who killed him spent his entire life in jail, or that he was rehabilitated through community service and education, was truly remorseful, and did some work towards trying to prevent future hate crimes?

But if I agreed with this sentence, you would applaud my reasonableness.

So you can take your compassion and keep it.

He deserves life.

or killed. But that doesn't mean it would be better for you spiritually (or better for anyone). Irrational emotion is what got the person killed - irrational emotion makes you want to put his killer in jail for life. Irrational emotion is the problem, and cannot also be the solution.

Since it obviously doesn't matter to you how we would feel?

I'm not sure where this is leading. It's easy for me to be detached and rational about this because I'm not involved. Perhaps you feel more involved and are feeling attacked or otherwise insulted by me - if so I apologize. I'd be saying the same things I'm saying regardless of the facts of the crime (unless it was clear that the person could not possibly be rehabilitated and needed to be permanently removed from society for public safety reasons). I just think our society is sick in the way we treat our criminals; have seen other countries successfully deal with them in less harsh ways; and their crime rates are much lower than here. Isn't that what we all really want, a lower crime rate and safer environment in which to live? We're taught instead to relish vengeance. This is unhealthy. The same societal norm which makes you want revenge on the person's killer is the societal norm which made the killer feel he was justified in getting revenge on the person for the alleged incident. I'm simply saying that our entire way of thinking in this country is backward.

there is something to be said about your views. Peace. :hi:

It indicates our values. It is why we don't sentence someone who accidentally bounces a check to the same amount of time as someone who goes on a fraudulent check writing spree. It is why intentionally attacking someone is a crime, while true self defense isn't. And it's why attacking someone because they "hit on you" should get more time than some run of the mill bar fight. It's the equivalent of attacking a black guy because he had the nerve to "hit on" a white woman. Unacceptable bigotry that we will not tolerate.

I understand your point, I really do. But in reality, the Green River Killer avoids the death penalty while many less deserving murderers are put to death. You think that's gonna make your average person say, "Wow, I should become a serial murderer"? We need to stop using sentencing to "send a message" and "indicate our values", because that doesn't really work. We need to start actually finding more constructive ways to reduce crime. I'm not just being theoretical here - many other countries do this and have great success. Just watch the bonus dvd ending of the Michael Moore film "Sicko" and you'll see what I'm talking about.

And don't assume I haven't watched the part of Sicko that discusses the Swedish rehabilitative system. I have. I've advocated different means of dealing with criminals my entire life. I worked with convicts for chrissake. Has nothing to do with the purpose of the criminal justice systema and sentencing. There has to be some lines in the sand somewhere. That's what laws and sentencing are.

and it has always puzzled me why satisfying the vindictiveness of victim's families is expected to carry any weight in court proceedings. it shouldn't be a factor in the outcome or the sentencing.

But especially in districts where Judges are elected, there's a definite interest to go along with popular sentiment in the courtrooms.

would that husband only get six months!? I wonder. I think this is appalling.

and the guy died due to unforseen circumstances would you want her to ger jailed for murder...

If he violently beat this guy for coming on to him, that is one thing.

If the guy physically touched him, and he punched him and the guy hit his head on the ground (apparently that is what caused the fatality), that is another.

Since we don't know how the event happened, it is hard to make a judgement. It does seem an incredibly light sentence for a action that led to a man's death. If he attacked him full out and beat him to the ground, it is a disgusting atrocity with no justice. If he got into a altercation with the guy, and he hit his head when he fell and that was what did it, it is still awful, however the intent in that case would not be serious harm or murder.

The whole thing is incredibly sad.

:( I can't believe this.

Speaking as a bisexual male, there are gay/bi dudes out there who make unwanted advances to other guys, same as there are straight dudes who make unwanted advances toward women.

Let's say for the sake of argument that Hunter did actually try to grope this thug Hannah. A firm "Not interested," "No," or "Hands off!" would almost certainly made him back off.

If Hunter hadn't taken "no" for an answer, then a slap would have been an acceptable deterrent. Same way it's acceptable for a woman to slap a man if necessary.

Beating a man so badly that he dies of it is NOT an acceptable deterrent.

Anyone with enough brains to qualify as a human being should understand that.

Therefore, Mr. Hannah has proved himself to be a mindless sub-human animal. As soon as he steps out of jail six months from now, someone ought to put him down like the mad dog he is.

he did strike him but it was the unforseen head blow on the pavement that actually killed him, and if he did grope then you realise its actually sexual battery its not some innocent little thing.

a MISDEMEANOR!?

This poor family. The criminal that did it will commit another violent crime when he gets out. They always do.

my intention, my sentence would be longer. Whether he intended to kill this guy or not, he did. He should serve more than 6 months or whatever the maximum sentence is for aggravated assault. Period. A man is dead because if this man's violent actions.

I believe judges are allowed to deviate from the guidelines. Let them then appeal if they want.

I would hit him in the face as hard as I possibly could. More than once.

And being the daughter of a former Golden Gloves city champion who was well- by her father, my potential course of action would likely do a similar amount of damage.

That's assuming that the defense account is factually correct, of course.