When they were subsequently arrested, the bloody gun, along with Shepard’s wallet and shoes, was found still in McKinney’s truck. The off-handed discarding of his wallet proved that robbery was not the main motive for the attack.
Late in the afternoon of the day after the beating a man discovered the 21-year-old college student still tied to the fence, barely alive, but in a coma. He was so badly beaten that he was at first mistaken for a scarecrow with a red painted face. He later said the only part of Shepard's head not covered with blood was where tears had apparently washed tracks down his cheeks.
His skull was fractured from the back of his head to his right ear. He was so badly beaten that he suffered brain stem damage, which meant his brain could no longer regulate his body temperature and heart rate.
As the night’s temperature fell to near freezing, Matthew probably slowly suffered the cold in agony until mercifully lapsing into a coma. Because of the blood loss from dozens of deep cuts to his scalp and face, the doctors at Poudre Valley Hospital in Fort Collins determined there was nothing they could do to save him. Though he remained on life support, he never woke from his coma and died days later on October 12, 1998. His story inspired candlelight vigils all over the world and made national headlines.
Fast-forward ahead in time to 2009.
Inspired by Shepard’s story and many like it over the years, hate crime legislation bearing his name has been introduced in the U.S. Congress.
Republican Representative Virginia Foxx of North Carolina argued that Shepard was killed accidentally as part of a robbery, not because he was gay: "The bill was named for him, the hate-crimes bill was named for him, but it's really a hoax that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills."
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Glen Boyd
After considerable attempts, this is now up.
2 - Glen Boyd
No pun intended (sorry, couldn't resist)..
3 - Jet Gardner
No problem Glen, thanks for your efforts.
I noticed we're no longer getting e-mails when comments are posted on our articles, nor when their published?
Now, no matter which article I log onto, I have to keep putting my name and URL in even though the remember name box is checked.
groan
4 - Jet Gardner
Hey Glen, when you get a sec, click my name/url and tell me what you think of my new BC link icons!
5 - Doug Hunter
I'm not sure I understand the difference between a 'Hate' beating and murder and a normal loving and caring beating and murder. This legislation is part and parcel of the leftist divide and conquer strategy. It reminds people of their differences, sews mistrust, and instills fear into groups reminding them to go to the polls and vote for their valiant defenders.
What is there to fear 'hate' crimes or normal loving crimes?
Avg annual 'Hate' murder: 9
Avg annual Loving murder: 16,900
Avg annual 'Hate' rape: 4
Avg annual Loving rape: 90,427
Avg annual 'Hate' A. Assault: 800
Avg annaul Loving A. Assualt: 825,000
'Hate' crimes are less than .1% of all violent crimes and they don't warrant special legislation. This is a political stunt by divide and conquer leftists to garner votes.
6 - Doug Hunter
Also, as '1984' references are so prevalent in politics. Readers should look up 'Hate Week' from the book and see if the strategy seems familiar.
7 - Clavos
It is incomprehensible that an elected official could stand on the hallowed floor of the U.S. House of Representatives and verbally spew what are essentially prejudiced and ignorant statements based on slanted and inaccurate accounts.
It shouldn't be incomprehensible, Jet. The "hallowed" [floor of the] House of Representatives is the country's preferred and principal location for stupidity -- a hallowed tradition that dates all the way back to the 18th century.
8 - Jordan Richardson
So somehow American politicians and pundits managed to turn hate crimes into a political issue too?
Doug, we have similar hate crimes legislation up here in Canada and it isn't opposed by any political party nor is it considered a controversial issue. What is and what isn't a hate crime is pretty simple; it's based on prejudice or bigotry of gender, race, religion, and so forth. While that reminds people of their differences (heaven forbid!), it certainly also offers just punishment against those crimes committed solely on the basis of said hate.
I think, as usual, the American discourse is playing semantics and the details are forgotten, as are the victims of very real, very relevant hate crimes.
Also, the twisting of Orwell to meet one political party or the other is hilarious. I'm pretty sure he would have despised the whole damn scene.
9 - Jet Gardner
to paraphrase...
They came after the Catholics, but Doug didn't care he wasn't one
They came for the pawn brokers, but Doug laughed and cheered them on because he wasn't one
They arrested all the Democrats, but Doug didn't care he wasn't one
They shot the faggots, but Doug didn't care, in fact he cheered them on
They excused the Klan for beating Jews and encouraging their neighbors for turning them in for abuse, but Doug didn't care he wasn't one
Then eventually they came for Doug, but there was no one left to defend him against them...
10 - Jet Gardner
Point taken Clavos
11 - Jet Gardner
I got a chuckle out of that myself Jordan.
12 - Jet Gardner
It's pretty bad when I can't even get my own article to remember my name and URL... Yes I checked the little remember me box.
13 - Clavos
If I kill someone because he's black and then kill someone else because I enjoy killing, is there any difference to the victims?
Will the law punish me differently?
"Hate crime" is a superfluous concept at best.
McKinney and Henderson killed Matthew Shepard, so society should kill them. The "why" of their killing is irrelevant to the proceedings, except to establish motive.
14 - roger nowosielski
"It is incomprehensible that an elected official could stand on the hallowed floor of the U.S. House of Representatives and verbally spew what are essentially prejudiced and ignorant statements based on slanted and inaccurate accounts."
I happen to agree with Clavos, Jet. Why should you find this incomprehensible is incomprehensible to me. They do it all the time. They're politicians, aren't they?
15 - Jet Gardner
Clavos, there are additional penalties for attacking a police officer, because some people attack them only because they're police officers.
Until we can teach people like McKinney that it's wrong to target someone because they don't like their ethnic background, religion, or sex preference or race solely for hatred reasons, and that they can suffer additional consequences because of it, what's the problem. When likeminded people finally get the message, the legislation can be repealed, or ignored.
16 - roger nowosielski
Is this entering and re-entering the user's name and the url going to be a permanent feature of the new BC?
Is there anyone who knows?
17 - Jet Gardner
Roger, I already conceded the point to Clavos.
The point remains that the ignorant bitch should've made sure she had her facts straight before she opened her mouth.
It was ignorant and naive of me that I should be appalled that she got away with it on the House floor.
18 - Jet Gardner
The tech guys have the weekend off-well deserved-I'm sure they'll tackle it on Monday... or maybe Thursday.
As much as I like the "look" they've created, I still maintain that they should've worked out the missing nuts and bolts before releasing it to the public.
I WANT THE FRESH COMMENTS PAGE BACK!!!!
19 - Jet Gardner
Maybe it's to make a person think twice before adding a comment... Is it worth the hassle or re-entering all that stuff?
I'm glad I'm not the only one having that problem. I entered mine last night and it stuck, but this morning I had to start doing it all over again, and the memory seems to be article exclusive, so if you comment somewhere else, you have to start all over again.
groan
20 - roger nowosielski
Jet,
I am still rather conflicted about "hate crimes" - although less so now than before - so perhaps you can help me out here.
I see two elements here.
1) a deterrent. Now, that's the only aspect of the law I saw before, and even now I'm not certain to what extent a deterrent element ought to be build into sentencing phase. I know that lawyers may have ready-made answers (probably they're divided, too), but I also believe one could try to think through this from outside, as it were (e.g., from the vantage point of the philosophy of law). So that's one point.
2) This is a recent find for me and tends to sway me to thinking that "hate crimes" are justifiable. And the element here is similar to what we call "aggravation" with
respect to the offense, adding thus additional penalty because of circumstantial or other factors attending the crime.
One, perhaps not the best example: "homicide as a result of a drunk driver. One would think that being drunk here would constitute an excuse. Well, judges frown at this kind of defense and usually accord even stiffer sentences (not just for deterrence reasons but of the "aggravation factor" - e.g., he willfully put himself/herself in the position of being impaired), and I tend to agree.
Your thoughts
21 - Doug Hunter
Jordan, technically speaking the ones bringing the legislation are the ones politicizing the issue. I use statistical facts to demonstrate the very limited extent of the problem (less than .1% of violent crimes) and Clavos has attempted to show logically why a 'Hate' crime is no different from a normal loving and caring crime. On your side, Jet has accused me of cheering people on while gays are killed and you have accused me of the emotional fopah of ignoring the victims.
This is why political discourse is so useless, we simply speak two very different languages. Some prefer to try and determine reality based on the facts regardless of how that makes people feel, and others do what makes people feel good regardless of the reality or facts. Too much hard sciences and maths growing up made me an evil right winger!
22 - roger nowosielski
I'll take your reply shortly. Out to get some smokes.
23 - Clavos
Good point about "aggravated," Roger. It illustrates that there already are sufficient laws on the books to cover circumstances wherein a crime is committed solely for "hate" reasons.
And Jet: For obvious reasons, it would be difficult to escalate the appropriate punishment for murder, which is execution of the murderer, although I suppose we could do something like torture the perp before killing him.
24 - Doug Hunter
The additional sentencing for crimes against police are silly as well. I don't see how a policeman's life is any more valuable than anyone else's. If the object is deterrence, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on the 99.9% of crimes not covered under special status?
25 - Clavos
And are the statutory punishments actually deterrents? One of the arguments put forth by those opposed to capital punishment, many (if not most) of whom also support hate crime laws, is that capital punishment offers no deterrent to those bent on mayhem. I would, to some degree, grant that point, except in the case of the executed criminal, who obviously will never again commit any crime.