Coverage of the Hate Crime

Today's News and Record sported a front page banner headline on the incident at Guilford College: Victim calls attack 'hate crime'.  The fact that such prominent coverage was given must have been based on some assessment of the newsworthiness of the incident.

Based on any objective indication of the injuries sustained by the victims, the incident was not terribly newsworthy.  Kids get beat up in school across the country, probably every hour of every school day, here and elsewhere.   Comparable injuries are seen all the time.

Consider how murders are typically covered.  Murders are, of course, much more serious, but they occur with some regularity in Greensboro.  They are not typically profiled with banner headlines even though a life has been taken.  Sometimes, murder stories seem to be buried, by my recollection.   But since they occur periodically, I suppose the argument can be made that they are not as newsworthy.

Some of us might question whether a putative "hate crime" should be treated or regarded in a different manner than a comparable crime not motivated by ethnic animosity.  If someone is beat up, it is a terrible thing regardless of the motivation. 

Palestinians happen to be an affirmed victim group currently protected and supported, to some extent,  by the political left.   Attacking a Palestinian based on ethnic animosity, therefore, would be regarded as much more serious than, say, attacking someone of Polish descent.

We will be all watching with interest as the investigation unfolds.  Some of us, however, will have difficulty mustering additional outrage on the basis that the incident has been portrayed as a hate crime, and that it is being covered very prominently in accordance with that portrayal.

Comments

[John Robinson]

I'd suggest that kids don't get beat up on college campuses in Greensboro nearly as often as you suggest, Joe. I'd also suggest that they don't get beat up by athletes shouting ethic slurs, if the police reports are true. I'd further note that the police charged them with ethnic intimidation, adding an additional newsworthy layer to this story.

Many murders don't get the treatment we gave this, it's true. Honestly, many of the murders in Greensboro are drug deals gone bad or domestics, cases of less community-wide interest than an alleged racially-oriented beating on a college campus.

[Joe Guarino]

John, you're right, of course, that kids don't get beat up on college campuses too often. They do, however, get beat up on high school and middle school campuses. But the college angle is a bit different.

The ethnic slurs and intimidation are bad, but does the wrongness of the physical attacks or the physical injuries sustained somehow become that much worse because of them? Some would say yes, some would say no.

And while murders may not hold as much interest because they often may follow a predictable pattern, they do represent taking a human life, as opposed to bruises and other types of minor physical trauma. While I am not arguing that every murder should be a banner headline, I am merely trying to offer some perspective. There were value judgments, of course, associated with the presentation.

[John Robinson]

Agreed, Joe. Good post, by the way.

[PotatoStew]

Joe, we've discussed your notion of "affirmed victim groups" before:

http://bubbanear.blogspot.com/2006/07/hate-crime-in-seattle.html

The specific identity of the victim is irrelevant to whether something is considered a hate crime or not. As I pointed out then, even whites and Protestants are protected by hate crime laws. Whether hate crime laws are a good idea or not is certainly debateable, but the whole "affirmed victim group" thing is essentially irrelevant.

[Joe Guarino]

Anthony, the protection of affirmed victim groups is likely what drove the passage of hate crime legislation originally. I do not even remotely consider the manner in which these culturally sanctioned groups have been protected as irrelevant.

It is one thing to discuss how the law is written, but another to suggest what the real intent was behind the law, and what the agenda was of those-- Republican or Democrat-- involved in passing it. It is also another matter to discuss how it ends up being enforced in aggregate.

I think the fascinating aspect of the case is the Palestinian identity of the victims. It would be hard to envision everyone trumpeting it as a hate crime as loudly if you and I-- Italian-Americans from the northeast-- had been the victims. I do not bemoan that, or seek victim status. It is just reality.

(In fact, I am told that, during my parents' and grandparents' generation, neighborhoods in NYC were sharply demarcated by ethnicity, and if you wandered into the wrong neighborhood, you placed yourself at risk. No hate crime legislation then.)

By the way, I am impressed with your recall of that thread on Bubba's blog, during which I played the devil's advocate.

[PotatoStew]

We'll have to agree to disagree I suppose. You speak of how the law is enforced in aggregate, and what the intent was, but haven't really supported those arguments with any data. I've pointed out what the law actually says, and the fact that there have indeed been prosecutions for hate crimes against groups that you don't consider "victim groups". Both of these things suggest that the "victim group" canard is irrelevant.

Sure, there may be *fewer* prosecutions for hate crimes against whites or protestants, but this could easily be due to there being fewer of those crimes to prosecute. To support your point, you'd need to show that there are a significant number of those crimes going unpunished.

And the idea that there would have been less "trumpeting" if the victims were Italian American is just speculation. The fact is that if all else was the same, it would still fit the definition of a hate crime (or "ethnic intimidation" I suppose) and would more than likely be prosecuted as such, just as the case in Seattle was.

As for my recall of the thread at Bubba's: There are just so many pointless runarounds in the blogosphere that good conversations that stay on topic tend to stick out in my mind. :)

[Joe Guarino]

Anthony, going back to that thread, there was one statement that you made that tends to support my point of view:

"Most states have approached hate crime legislation by creating penalty enhancements for pre-existing crimes when those crimes were motivated by hatred, bias, or prejudice, based the victim's inclusion in one of several legally-specified protected minorities."

I have no idea what the North Carolina statute does. But I can assure you that these laws were not passed to protect White Anglo-Saxon Protestant heterosexuals.

As I pointed out on that thread, the reports of white-on-black hate crimes were greater than the reverse direction, despite the fact that black-on-white crime is much more common. Yes, I know, only the former were motivated by bona fide hate...:)

I think we will probably disagree on this one, Anthony, but I appreciate your courteous, challenging debate.

[waitingforvizzini]

FYI this was a Quaker college that is supposed to emphasize nonviolence. And yes the ethnicity of the victim is an important part of the designation of an incident as a hate crime though ultimately the decision of what criminal charges if any are filed rests with the D.A. and prosecutors. this incident didn't occur in a vacum. This attempt by Guarino to downplay it's significance is disingenuous and questionable at best reprehensible at worst. whats the point Guarino are you playing a "Move along! Nothing to see here." role?

[Fred Gregory]

The below were real murders and real rapes of real people and not just meaningless stats in the body count of drug deals gone bad to be tossed on the rubbish pile of stories lacking in newsworthiness, JR.. No, I don't know they made Drudge redline status. I sorta doubt it.

Hate crimes ?? Jus' askin'.

The tragic and brutal incident at Carter Finley several years ago hardly made more than a couple of news cycles. The attempted vehicular homicide at Chapel Hill has all but fased into the archives except for a 15 second sound bite every 6 months or so.

But by all means hype away on this latest one and be sure and cover all anniversaries of it to come.

I don't have all the facts as yet thus I must depend on the N & R get to the bottom of this street brawl at Guilford College before making any hasty judgements.That is risky business . Ask Mike Nifong.

As mentioned above, here they are:

The Wichita Massacre

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/11/15/190420.shtml

The Family Is Grateful

http://www.knoxnews.com/kns/local_news/article/0,1406,KNS_347_5274125,00.html

[Bubba]

We already see how the N&R is treating this story.

Look on the front page of today's edition: Nothing new (of any significance) to report on the incident, yet the story gets center stage, top of the fold, with a type size on the headline that suggests some earth shaking news is being reported.

This incident is being blown out of of proportion to it's real importance in this community.

Joe is right.

[mebloginm]

I wonder how this would have been handled if the 3 victims had turned the tables after being attacked and kicked some jock butt. Would the 3 be terrorists?

I believe this fight deserved coverage btw.

[Bubba]

"I believe this fight deserved coverage btw."

Which it's already gotten in ample quantity in relation to the impact caused.

[Joe Guarino]

Juan, thanks for commenting. What's the point? First, I question the usefulness of creating separate crime categories based on "hate". Kids should not be beaten up regardless of the motivation. Second, I question what it means to emphasize it so strongly when other offenses or motivations are not necessarily given near the amount of emphasis-- even when the damage is considerably greater. Juan and Meblogin, this is a story that warrants some coverage, but it is not nearly as catastrophic an incident as is being represented.

Fred and Bubba, we are now treated to displays of vigils and crowds of 300 at Guilford College behaving as if there had been a holocaust.

[Bubba]

"....we are now treated to displays of vigils and crowds of 300 at Guilford College behaving as if there had been a holocaust."

And protests about the way the school is handling the situation.

My take is that Guilford College deserves better than what they're getting from their own students, and from the continuing media hype.

[Fred Gregory]

Joe and Bubba,

Praying that none come our way but I am saving my candles for the ice storm ...Dei Gratio

[Brenda Bowers]

The Administration of Guilford College is carefully and as quickly as possible trying to determine just exactly what happened. It would have been only decent and good journalism for the N&R to refrain from this sensationalize story a few days to get the true story. If it turns out that it was a hate crime I am sure the perpetrators will be suitably dealt with.

I remember a “hate crime” that Wal-Mart employees were supposed to have committed against an elderly lady. And after all the hullabaloo and Mayor Happy Holiday running down to the hospital to apologize (the hospital that Wal-Mart insisted the lady be taken too by the way), and the N&R blaring the story it turned out the whole thing was caught on tape and the elderly lady was in fact beating the tar out of Wal-Mart employees! The Mayor didn’t bother to apologize to these employees.

Then there was the fuss with the silly Mohammed cartoons and the Greensboro Muslims insisting we honor their laws of their native country and forego our greatest law; the freedom of speech. The N&R was all over that one too as a hateful crime.
Conclusion: So what’s new? The people at the N&R are biased jackasses!

(I'm sorry Joe, perhaps I should have said biased donkeys, but the other seems so much more appropriate. BB)

[Wendell Sawyer]

Here we go again. The news media is busy sensationalizing this incident and, like it or not, the five accused athletes are being tried in the press. Unfortunately, the result will be a rush to judgment before all the relevant facts are known. Haven’t we learned anything from the Nifong/Duke lacrosse case in Durham?

The five football players are charged with assault and ethnic intimidation. They may or not be found guilty in a court of law. However, at this point in time, they are presumed to be innocent. I don’t know what happened; I wasn’t there. I have read the allegations against these five men. But, I haven’t heard their side of the story. And, maybe, there is another side to this story. At the present time, it would be an injustice to conclude that these defendants are guilty and to condemn them. As we should have learned in the Duke lacrosse case, such incidents aren’t always what they appear to be.

If the five athletes are proven to be guilty of the accusations, they should be punished and their actions should be condemned. If they are shown to be innocent, all of this prejudicial condemnation will prove to be an embarrassing folly.

The News & Record reported today:

“About 100 students gathered in front of Founders Hall as part of a walk-out on the Guilford College campus this morning to express their feelings about the fight, although some didn't have class today.

“…About 300 students, faculty and community members met on the campus quad and marched to Dana Auditorium.

"…’When any incident on this campus happens to a white student, it is dealt with right away, the next day," senior Tommario James said. "But when something happens to a person of color, well, then we have to take our time to find the truth about what might have happened.’”

Compare the above-mentioned news report with those early reports in the Duke lacrosse case:

CBS NewsMarch 29, 2006:

“News of the attack has sparked days of protest at Duke and in Durham, culminating Tuesday in Brodhead's decision to suspend the team.

"…They need presidents, they need administrators, they need faculty, to tell them that it was wrong behavior and that they are not going to be coddled because they are athletes, because they come from privileged backgrounds, because they have money," Christian told Durham's WTVD-TV.”

WRAL-TV; Mar 30, 2006:

“…about 300 people wearing purple and white ribbons marched across Duke's campus. Protesters handed out flyers to marchers bearing the photos and names of the lacrosse team, and taped them onto garbage cans in front of the student union.”

In a previous post on the Duke lacrosse/David Wray controversies, I wrote the following sentence: “We can only scratch our heads and ask ourselves why the news media feels compelled to fan the flames of prejudicial conclusions before all the relevant facts are known in such racially charged incidents.”

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Once again, Wendell nails it.

[Bubba]

“We can only scratch our heads and ask ourselves why the news media feels compelled to fan the flames of prejudicial conclusions before all the relevant facts are known in such racially charged incidents.”

Why?

Because they can.

[Joe Guarino]

Thanks, Brenda, for your comments. And Wendell, I appreciate your substantive post. Of course, you are right that we should not rush to judgment of the accused.

[aaron]

I think this crime is detestable, just as all attacks are. The sad thing is that Guilford College Security did not even call the police. They attempted to handle it internally until the victims went to the magistrates office to take out charges and the magistrate contacted the police.

Isn't it about time that the administration at Guilford College wakes up and smells the what is happening on thier campus. Sure, they are a Quaker School, and they are suppose to be of high moral standards. C'mon folks, the majority of the students are not Quakers and do not have the same fundamentals of Quakers. This is not the first time a major incident has occurred on this campus and the police were not notified.

As a Guilford College Aumnist, I am disgraced by this incident, but outraged by the way the Guilford College Security handled this, and the way the Administration is currently handling this. I do hope they do the right thing and not try to sweep this under the rug.

As far as the other bloggers are saying about assaults occuring at schools all over the nation, yes, there are assaults but not all assaults are hate crimes. The added fact that racial slurs were allegedly shouted at the victims is detestable. There should be no sympathy for those football players and thier actions. The sympathy should be for the two victims. One of the football players was a standout and had, (passed tense), a possible future in the NFL. He should have thought about his future, his family and the actions he took part in, but he chose his fate.

[Bubba]

Thanks for being the prosecutor, judge and jury in this case, aaron.

I love it when people like this pass judgment without all the evidence being heard.

Let's give then the death penalty.That's what we need to do in cases of a "hate crime", right?

[Joe Guarino]

Aaron, thanks for commenting. Again, a couple of local attorneys, including Wendell above, have warned against a rush to judgment. Certainly, physical attacks are detestable, and should be held to account. My question is whether the law, or the media, should treat it so much more prominently because there may have been elements of hatred based on ethnicity or religion. Is this type of hatred worse than other types of hatred? Is there an objective basis for deciding that one type of hatred is worse than another?

[inkslinger336]

According to this discussion:
http://community.myfoxwghp.com/blogs/FOX8WebTeam/2007/01/24/Guilford_College_Nothing_to_hide
some of the "details" are aleady unraveling.

One student who knows the "victims" Faris and Osama, said they were always looking for fights. It looks like they may have looked in the wrong place this time.

He also says Osama struck the first blow and the "brass knuckles" turned out to be a watch.

From the picture it seems that one of the big, intimidating football players got his fair share of injuries.

When the football players went to file their own charges, they were denied by our magistrate.

What's up with that?

[Sue]

Joe: "...we are now treated to displays of vigils and crowds of 300 at Guilford College behaving as if there had been a holocaust."

Do you really mean that, Joe? Do you want to revisit that analogy?

[Jim Rosenberg]

Joe - You are already on record as to the appropriate level of media coverage on matters of race. There weren't any injuries involved in the David Wray story, so it would seem like you might find Jerry Bledsoe's 20+ part, front page, top-of-fold exploration of race and politics to be disproportionate. Not so much. In fact, you love it so much you've added your own weekly Cliffs Notes version. When it comes to that series, you are all about "shining a light on wrongdoing." With the Guilford College incident. the light's making you squint. It doesn't seem like you have much problem at all "mustering outrage" at racial injustice. You are so deep into the Wray affair, someone's going to have to send in a probe to retrieve you. It seems like your mustering problem applies only to particular strains of outrage.

I love the idea that you right-wingers now don't trust your own police.

That's too rich.

Funny thing is, I bet those drunken neanderthals would take one look at you dweebs and pound you into the ground, too. But you defend them.

Blockheads.

[sean coon]

another brilliant sun burst.

[Wendell Sawyer]

The charges against the five football players were not filed by the police. There is an interesting discussion about this topic on JR’s blog.

Please read the following post that I made
on JR's blog earlier today:
__________________________________________

John:

In a previous commentary on this topic, you indicated that the Greensboro police filed the charges against the first three football players that were arrested. You wrote:

“The police have arrested the three players and charged them with crimes. While some may wish that the charges – again, made by police, including ethnic intimidation, not the newspaper –are worth only a paragraph or two, this kind of alleged beating on a college campus is bigger than that.”

However, it now appears that the charges were the result of affidavits filed with the magistrate by the three alleged victims. Therefore, the charges were not "made by the police." This is an important distinction.

When I read the article in the Thursday edition of the News & Record, my impression was that the Greensboro Police filed the charges against these three defendants. In Friday's article, the newspaper was specific about the source of the arrest warrants for the last two defendants charged: "The charges were taken out by the alleged victims and do not represent Greensboro police findings in the case."

I imagine that there are many of your readers who believe that the first three football players were arrested as a result of charges filed by the Greensboro Police as the result of a criminal investigation. In fairness to the accused men, I think that the newspaper should make it clear that ALL of the defendants' charges were based on affidavits filed by the alleged victims and not by the police.

[Joe Guarino]

Sue, I think some of the activities at Guilford College this week were overwrought.

Inkslinger, it is true that we do not know the whole story. We may be surprised at the facts that may emerge. What we do know is not pretty, but may not be nearly as cataclysmic as is being represented.

Jim, the owners of the local paper and much of the local political culture buys into a certain view of racial justice-- and you seem to be defending it. I think racial justice is extremely important, and in my mind that means treating everyone the same. It is my prerogative to use my blog to express my views and to comment upon the public record when I think it is wrong or when it doesn't make sense.

If you go back to my original post, Jim, you will see that I expressed that if someone is beat up, it is a terrible thing regardless of the motivation. I think what happened is awful, regardless of why it happened. It is true that I refrain from bowing before the local pieties on matters such as these.

[Fred Gregory]

Wendell,

As a former magistrate in the 18th judicial district I appreciate you pointing out the manner by which the charges were filed in this incident. Many times I was confronted with the " cross warrant " situation. A wife comes in with a fat lip and I would issue a warrant for assault on the husband upon her sworn affadivit. Later during my shift the husband comes before me with 6 stitches on his forehead. He alleges that his ( the afore mentioned ) wife hit him with a beer bottle. I decline to issue a "cross warrant " and suggest to the husband that he surrender down the hall to the warrant squad and sort it out as a single case in District court I suppose there were instances in which a cross warrant would have been justified depending, perhaps, upon the circumstances such as the ones in this matter. If the football players were denied their warrant I would like to examine the magistrate as to his/her justification/reasoning or other outside influences.

As lawyers are fond of saying a DA can indict a ham sandwich ..same for this process at the magistrate level in getting a warrant for a misdemeanor.

Joe..you are hanging tough.. Essere bravo

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

These "crimes" were misdemeanors . . . not felonies?

[Joe Guarino]

Thanks, Wendell and Fred, for illuminating us on dynamics that would not have been immediately obvious to the layman.

[Wendell Sawyer]

Fred:

I think that it is an important distinction. As you know, anyone can go down to the magistrate's office and provide an affidavit alleging facts that a criminal offense has been committed against them. Based on those sworn allegations, the magistrate can make a finding of probable cause and issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused.

As you know, some people will go to the police first and ask them to file charges. Sometimes, for good reason, the police don't want to get involved and they will tell the alleged victim to "go to the magistrate to see if he'll help you with this."

It's my opinion that the news media has overplayed this incident. This inclination to sensationalize a news story usually occurs when there is a racial angle to it. If the Greensboro Police filed the charges after a criminal investigation into the incident, there may be more justification for such coverage. However, these charges were initiated by affidavits provided by the alleged victims. It may well end up being a "he said; she said" case.

I don't know what happened in this case; I wasn't there. I have read the accusations against the defendants. But, I still haven't heard the football players' side of the story. If the defendants did, in fact, do what they are accused of doing, they should be punished. If they are shown to be innocent, the news media should be shamed for sensationalizing such a story and tarnishing the reputations of those accused.

[Bubba]

"I love the idea that you right-wingers now don't trust your own police.

That's too rich.

Funny thing is, I bet those drunken neanderthals would take one look at you dweebs and pound you into the ground, too. But you defend them.

Blockheads."

Another useful comment on the situation from yet another clown who wants to make this incident a political situation.

Very helpful.

[The CA]

Wendell is right of course. A magistrate has a constitutional duty to be "neutral and detached", that means not passing judgment on either party in a cross warrant situation. If a party comes in to obtain a warrant and swears that the facts alleged are true and the facts if true are a crime, the magistrate has a duty to file the charge.

Passing judgment on cross warrants is unfair to a party because it makes justice a race to the courthouse. A person who is a victim of a crime should not be forced to settle for a verdict of "not guilty" against them as justice for the wrongs inflicted on them.

[Bubba]

"It's my opinion that the news media has overplayed this incident. This inclination to sensationalize a news story usually occurs when there is a racial angle to it."

Sure looks that way, doesn't it?

When will they realize that they are part of the problem?

[Sue]

Would you please consider your two statements?

"...we are now treated to displays of vigils and crowds of 300 at Guilford College behaving as if there had been a holocaust."

"Sue, I think some of the activities at Guilford College this week were overwrought."

[italics mine]

Overwrought? A holocaust? Joe, are you losing your grip on comparisons? How do you defend such illogic of a campus fight and the premeditated deaths of 11 million people?

[Joe Guarino]

Sue, I think what I was trying to say must not have been clear. I was trying to suggest that the Guilford College community was acting as if a holocaust had occurred. I was not at all suggesting that the incident was even remotely comparable to the holocaust-- indeed, I thought I was implying otherwise.

Again, in that spirit, I think the response of the Guilford College community has been overwrought.

[Bubba]

"I was not at all suggesting that the incident was even remotely comparable to the holocaust-- indeed, I thought I was implying otherwise."

Some people have a knack for reading into other people's comments meanings that were not suggested.

"...behaving AS IF there had been a holocaust" is pretty clear to me.

On the other hand, the near-hysteria over this incident seems to be infectious for some people.

[Dr. Mary Johnson]

Sue, Joe said "a holocaust", not "The Holocaust".

[Stormy]

I find this whole incident being called "racist" and a "hate crime" to be interesting and somewhat contradictory given the fact that two of the five charged happened to be black. This whole thing being about racism or hate crime leaves me a little cold. My uninformed assessment at this point, while lacking much information about what actually happened, is that it was a culture clash. Football players, and competitive athletes, probably just don't mix well with people dedicated to non-violence.

[Joe Guarino]

I think you have a good point, Stormy. These students clearly were not dedicated to non-violence. In fact, many colleges founded by various denominations and major religions have watered down their religious emphases to attract more students. It is not just Guilford or the Quakers.

[Stormy]

Oh, good the TRC committee has put in their two cents on this event, and they seem to have already decided who the racists are. Hint: it wasn't the Palestinian students. Guilford administrators really needed this sort of help.

These groups can't help inflaming the matter before its even investigated or adjudicated.

[Joe Guarino]

Stormy, I agree. Their statement was distinctively unhelpful and unwise. Does anyone know who sits on that committee? Is it the same folks who are most active in the Pulpit Forum?

[Wendell Sawyer]

Joe:

I posted the following column on Sam's blog. I thought you might enjoy reading it. Interestingly, the author, John Leo, writes about a "racial incident" that occured at Guilford College some years ago. It was the strange case of Molly Martin.

IN CAMPUS RACE AND GENDER CRIMES, PRINCIPAL VICTIM IS TRUTH

By John Leo
05/28/2000
For three weeks this spring, minority students at the University of Iowa's College of Dentistry were the targets of menacing e-mail and a bomb threat. Red noodles were left on the doorstep of a black student with a note suggesting that they represented a dead black person's brains. Surveillance tapes were set up. The FBI located the computer used in the e-mail threats. A black dental student, Tarsha Michelle Claiborne, was arrested and confessed.

In the midst of an anti-rape rally at the University of Massachusetts, a woman cut herself with a knife, tossed it under a car, and then walked across the street claiming to be a victim of sexual assault. After a month's negotiations between police and her attorney, she admitted she had made up the whole thing.

This was the fourth in a series of reported sexual assaults. In one of the previous three, a woman said she fought off three male attackers and ran for help after being hit with "a pepperspray-like substance." This may well be true, but some on campus believe it's hard to fight off three assailants and harder still to escape at all after a chemical spraying.

Campuses are developing new doubts about reports of race and gender crimes. Last year the Chronicle of Higher Education published a round-up of campus hoaxes, cautioning that this "flurry of fabrications doesn't necessarily suggest a trend." But it certainly looks like a trend. Race and gender are the dominant concerns at colleges today. Sometimes the temptation to prove that racism and sexism pervade campus life leads people to fake incidents.

At Spokane (Wash.) Community College, a racist and sexist letter from "Whitey" appeared in an advice column of the student newspaper last year. After campus protests about the letter's derogatory language about women, gays and minority students, the newspaper's editors admitted that "Whitey" was a fictional character they had created to raise awareness about racism on campus.

Jerry Kennedy, a gay residential assistant at the University of Georgia, reported he had been the target of nine hate crimes over a period of three years, including three acts of arson. But during questioning, Kennedy admitted he had set the fires.

Two weeks after the murder of Matthew Shepard, a lesbian student at St. Cloud State University in Minnesota said two men shouted anti-gay slurs and then slashed her face. Outraged students raised nearly $12,000 as a reward for information about her attackers. Then the student confessed she had made up the story and cut her own face. In a similar incident, a lesbian student at Eastern New Mexico University said she had been attacked after her name was included with seven professors on an anti-gay "hit list" posted at a local Laundromat. Police arrested her after a surveillance camera at the Laundromat showed her posting the list.

Without a confession, convictons are rare. Two black students at Miami University in Ohio were accused of posting 55 racist and anti-gay fliers and typing racist computer messages. Their fingerprints and palm prints were found on 42 of the 55 fliers, but the defense argued that they had touched the papers when they were blank and someone else must have printed and posted the fliers. The jury acquitted them.

Sometimes even dubious reports of race and gender offenses pay off, leading to an institutional payoff (more minority jobs or titles, more money for women's studies). Molly Martin, president of the student senate at Guilford College in Greensboro, N.C., said she had been assaulted, with the words "nigger lover" scrawled on her chest. Martin, who is white, had endorsed a proposal to create a full-time director of African-American affairs on campus.

Police dropped the case, calling Martin "a reluctant witness." She later dropped out of Guilford and apologized for "acts that were inappropriate and that were injurious" to the college. She insisted that the attack had taken place, but declined to say what acts she was apologizing for. Though many people on campus think the attack never took place, Martin achieved her goal: Guilford installed a director of African-American affairs and created new programs for minorities.

Like Tawana Brawley's hoax, some recent fake hate crimes seem intended to cover personal embarrassment. Such was the case with a black student at Hastings College in Nebraska who said he had been forced into a car by whites and dropped far out of town. He was cited for filing a false police report.

But more of the college hoaxes seem to reflect an acted-out commitment to a cause, not just personal difficulties. One factor is that colleges now stress the need for each identity group to express its "voice" or "narrative," without much scruple about whether the narratives are literally true. (Postmodern theory says there is no such thing as truth anyway.)

After the Tawana Brawley hoax, an article in The Nation magazine argued that it "doesn't matter" whether Brawley was lying, because the pattern of whites abusing blacks is true. And when Rigoberta Menchu's famous account of class and ethnic warfare in Guatemala was revealed to be largely false, many professors said this didn't matter much because her book contained emotional truth.

Blurring of the line between fact and fiction is far advanced in our university culture. Hoaxes are just one symptom of the truth problem.

COPYRIGHT 2000 JOHN LEO
©2007 uclick, LLC

[Joe Guarino]

Thank you, Wendell. I was unaware of this story.