Media Coverage of the Matthew Shepard Murder

Colleen Feeney

3-9-10

Media Coverage of the Matthew Shepard Murder

In a chilling moment in the film, “The Laramie Project”, an entire nation waited to hear the devastating news of Matthew Shepard’s death. In this particular case, the media took a strong interest and connected with the small town and the brutal murder. It is imperative to question what made the murder so different and why there was so much attention paid to it. By tracking different articles from “The New York Times”, it is possible to determine the attitudes toward the incident and how they changed over time.

The Matthew Shepard case was not the first time someone of the Homosexual community had been attacked for their sexual orientation. There are many different factors that made his case different. One of these factors is that when looking at Matthew, he looks non-threatening and he is easy to feel sympathy for. This made it much easier to paint him as a perfect, innocent martyr. The brutality of the crime also set it apart from other incidents because it was not a simple or humane murder. He was beaten and left to die and this furthered his image of being helpless and alone. It was an opportunity to draw attention to an issue that had become more and more pressing. However, even Matthew’s parents acknowledge that the media tended to make him seem more perfect than he was.

For example, in the first report by the New York Times, "Gay Man Beaten and Left for Dead; 2 Are Charged", there was an already an extremely sympathetic tone. This is demonstrated in the quotes included. For example, when describing how the incident began, the quote included is coming from a man who is in tears about the incident who states “He was sitting at the bar, having a beer, when two men came up and talked to him… now he is in a coma”. Not only does this appeal on an emotional level, it also demonstrates that Matthew was just sitting, minding his own business when he was approached. This makes the reader feel sorry for Matthew. In this piece, background is given on Matthew, which also appeals to the media and contributes to the interest in the story because as a reader, there is a connection to him. The reader feels that they know him personally because they are familiar with the things he is involved with and the things he is passionate about. When describing the attack, the article spares no details, including the type of rifle and his begging for his life. The article also wastes no time in condemning the small town for their relationship with the gay community quoting Carla Brown saying, “If I were a homosexual in Laramie, I would hang low, very low”. Also, the writer includes that it was a hate crime and the article is centered on the idea that it was a hate crime even though at this point, the police only recognized it as a robbery. The rhetorical decisions the writer chose to make definitely enhanced the article and the connection the reader has with the incident.

In the second article the New York Times released after the attack, "After Beating of Gay Man Town Looks at its Attitudes" by James Brooke, Laramie’s values are once again called into question. Brooke similarly provides background to engage the reader and connect us to Matthew. Because this is not just a piece on the incident, Brooke includes stories from different people who have felt marginalized by the community for their sexual orientation. For example, he includes a story about a man who saw that a sign for a museum had been changed from ''Shoot a Day or Two,'' so that it read ''Shoot a Gay or Two.'' Even after politely informing the museum of this multiple times, his request that it be fixed was ignored. This illustrates the community in a way that makes it seem very intolerant and closed-minded. Brookes also uses examples that are more personal and individual. In one case, the editor of a newspaper was called a “faggot lover” because she was handing out the special edition dedicated to Matthew. One man in Laramie stated 'This incident was atypical in its brutality, but not in its underlying motive” and said that gay people “are frequently assaulted with derision, intolerance, insult and hostility -- if not guns and ropes.'' Though the article is suggestive that the town is very intolerant, Brooke establishes his ethos and builds his credibility by providing quotes from the people who thought Laramie was an “anti hate” community. He includes quotes such as “'We live in the Equality State,' 'Hate Is Not a Small Town Value -- No to Violence and Evil, and ''No Hate Crimes in Wyoming.'' which give Laramie a chance to redeem itself from all of the negative attention. The article also takes quotes from both families but it is obvious who the article is supporting. The quote provided from the Shepard family once again portrays them as the innocent victims and the quote provided from Aaron McKinney’s father made him seem ignorant. He did not seem to understand that the fact they attacked Matthew because of his sexual orientation was very important. He said ''Had this been a heterosexual these two boys decided to take out and rob, this never would have made the national news.” Though this may be true, Mr. McKinney does not recognize that a hate driven crime is more heinous than a simple robbery. It is also obvious that the media attention of the incident has increased because President Clinton is quoted in the article.

In the third article I examined, "Gay Murder Trial Ends With Guilty Plea", James Brooke paints Russell Henderson painted as a monster for the crime he committed. He briefly includes the kind words of Russell’s grandmother and she attempts to say that he was a kind and gentle boy, but the evidence included strongly suggests otherwise. When it is mentioned that he was not the mastermind of the situation and that he didn’t really want anything to do with it, it is coupled with the idea he just said that to get out of the death penalty and throw his partner under the bus. The judge is quoted saying “This court does not believe you feel any true remorse in this matter.” The attorney, Cal Rerucha, is also quoted and he states ''It is my hope that Mr. Henderson will die in the Wyoming State Penitentiary, the only time he leaves the Wyoming State Penitentiary is when they bury him.'' By including these quotes from officials, who have seen the worst crimes, it makes what these men did seem especially horrible. The closing quote of a grieving father makes the reader feel like they are in the court room but more importantly, you feel the pain that Mr. Shepard is going through and you grieve with him. He states powerfully, ''My son was born blind, not physically blind, but blind to people's differences -- short or tall, black, brown or white, religion or ethnic backgrounds. His friends included gays and so-called straights.'' Throughout the article you get a sense of what Matthew was like through these accounts and they make the reader wish they could connect with Matthew. He is portrayed as such a kind, loving, accepting individual that almost serves as a foil to Russell Henderson’s cruelty.

In the final article I analyzed, "Parents of Gay Obtain Mercy for His Killer" written by Michael Janofsky the roles established by earlier articles are acted out. There is no background provided on Aaron McKinney and he doesn’t say anything but a simple apology, which makes him seem inauthentic. The Shepard family on the other hand, is represented very well. The strength and mercy they showed were unimaginable and the quotes provided from Mr. Shepard demonstrate this. He addresses Aaron McKinney personally and says “I would like nothing better than to see you die, Mr. McKinney however, this is the time to begin the healing process, to show mercy to someone who refused to show any mercy.” He also says, “Mr. McKinney, I am going to grant you life, as hard as it is for me to do so, because of Matthew. Every time you celebrate Christmas, a birthday or the Fourth of July, remember that Matthew isn't. Every time you wake up in that prison cell, remember that you had the opportunity and the ability to stop your actions that night.'' He concluded, with obvious emotion: “You robbed me of something very precious, and I will never forgive you for that. May you live a long life and may you thank Matthew every day for it.” The idea that the attackers were all bad and the victim was completely innocent is definitely apparent in this article.

After analyzing different articles about the events surround Matthew Shepard’s murder, it is apparent to me why this case was different. Many different factors led the media to be able to paint the story in a way that the American public could relate to. The victim was literally small, alone, and minding his own business and the attackers were drunk, hateful, and cruel. It was easy for the public to understand the story because it was easy to feel sadness and connect with the Shepard family. This was a horrible crime and hopefully, its widespread media coverage made it so that many people could learn that hatred wont end in anything positive.

The Motivation behind Hate Crimes

On the cold night of October 6th, 1998, Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney, lured, kidnapped, robbed, beat and murdered a young gay man, Matthew Shepard. The two men explained that they were out that night to get drunk and rob someone. When Shepard asked the two for a ride home, Henderson and McKinney not only took his money, but beat him brutally and left Shepard to die, tied to a fence. The family members of the two suspects argued that Matthew Shepard came on to the two men during the car ride and embarrassed them. But what causes this embarrassment to become enough rage and hatred for human beings to commit a heinous crime? What motivates these brutal hate crimes and stories similar to Matthew Shepard’s?

Although Henderson’s and McKinney’s families believe it was brought on by the intention of robbery, many argue the murder of Matthew Shepard was motivated by hate of homosexuals. Hate crimes, although steady in their statistics (due to the lack of crimes being reported), are dangerous acts that need to be observed and understood. By understanding what drives and motivates perpetrators to commit a hate crime, society can decrease the statistics and become more open to people who are different from the expected norm. The research article, Hate crimes against gay males by Danny Willis states that the United States Department of Justice “reported 1,486 hate crime offenses based on sexual orientation in 2000 resulting in 1,558 known victims. The majority, 1,023 or 68% of the offenses, were ‘anti-male homosexual’ meaning the offenses were directed at actual gay males or males perceived to be gay.”

There are many theories as to how anger generates and motivates hate crimes in society. In the research article What motivates hate crimes based on sexual orientation? Mediating effects of anger on antigay aggression, Dominic Parrott and John Peterson state that there are “three complimentary theoretical models that explain the motives for antigay aggression have garnered the most attention: sexual prejudice, peer dynamics and thrill seeking.” Parrot and Peterson also explain that these three theories can either be the sole motivating factor or the hate crime can be motivated by a combination of the theories.

Sexual prejudice, one of the possible motives for committing a hate crime, is having a negative regard towards non-heterosexual behavior and communities. Sexual prejudice can come about and grow throughout a person’s life from values taught through the family, society, or the religious community. Sexual prejudice can be demonstrated through aggression toward the gay community, then through anger, and finally through an act of hate crime.

Associated with sexual prejudice is the perception that homosexuality threatens traditional gender roles of society. This feeling of threat mixed in with anger can cause someone with sexual prejudice to lash out and become violent. For example Parrott and Peterson state, “sexually prejudiced individuals perceive same sex relationships as a threat to core values and to traditional social institutions such as marriage.” Sexually prejudiced individuals feel as though sexual behavior that deviates from their own gender role threatens the stability of society. This threat of an unstable society can cause sexual prejudiced individuals to commit hate crimes against homosexual men. As Parrot and Peterson discuss recent research, “survey-based studies have demonstrated a positive association between sexual prejudice and self-reported past aggressive behavior toward gay men.” Once a sexually prejudiced person feels threatened by homosexuality and already feels it to be wrong behavior, anger and aggression can build up against gay men.

Peer dynamics can be another motive for committing a hate cry against gay men. Peer dynamics is the idea that a man might become aggressive towards gay men in order to prove his toughness and heterosexuality to his friends. If a man’s masculinity comes into question, he might become angry and try to regain that masculinity by showing aggression towards a homosexual male. Some men who have their masculinity challenged might simply just exaggerate stereotypical masculine emotions (like anger and toughness), however according to Parrott and Peterson, “aggression directed toward feminine targets, especially gay men, represents an ideal opportunity to publicly display one’s masculinity.”

Thrill seeking can also be a motive for participating in a hate crime, although it is usually a contributing motive to either sexual prejudice or peer dynamics. Thrill seeking is explained as an individual attacking a gay man simply out of boredom. In most cases, thrill seeking is the side dish to the main plate of sexual prejudice against gay men. According to Parrott and Peterson others that show aggression towards most individuals, pick gay men as their victims because “they are easy targets.”

Motivations of hate crime against gay men can be summarized into three theories: sexual prejudice, peer dynamics and thrill seeking. Although each branches out to its own explanation as to why an individual might commit a hate crime, the three theories of motives have a root similarity. All three must have grown and progressed from an individual who was taught to be prejudice against homosexuality or from and individual who has become angry from past experiences against gay men. Henderson and McKinney most likely had a combination of the three theories as motives to killing Matthew Shepard. They needed to reclaim there “manhood” after, as they stated, Matthew made a pass on them. They also had some bias and prejudice towards gay men. While being questioned by the sheriff, McKinney said, “No, I don’t” to the question of whether he like homosexuals. Part of the two young men’s motives must also have been to have a thrill and be amused. In the same questioning, McKinney states he could, “just remember Russ was laughing at first”. Henderson’s and McKinney’s statements and actions illustrate that all three main theories could have been the motives to killing Matthew Shepard. Understanding these motives of hate crimes can better help society and the government to stop from stories like Matthew Shepard’s of ever reoccurring.

Seeds of Hate Planted in Laramie

Michael Ufkes

Seeds of Hate Planted in Laramie

The Laramie project is a film that astutely observes a small town’s ability to capture the attention of an entire nation through a single, appalling act of violence. Matthew Shepard, a promising 21-year-old human rights activist, was a resident of this small Wyoming town. Unfortunately, he also served as the origin of the town’s abrupt infamy. Matthew Shepard was a gay man who was brutally beaten, tortured and left to die in the remote plains of Wyoming. The untimely death of Mr. Sheppard marked yet another heinous act produced by a small town, eerily reminiscent of tragedies such as the Scott Joe Weaver murder and the Lawrence King shooting. The remainder of this analysis will be dedicated to revealing some of these towns’ inherent cultural facets which aid in cultivating an atmosphere of tremendous hate and discrimination. By investigating various mindsets, beliefs and communal interactions we may be able to conclusively infer why these tragedies arise amidst similar settings. In regards to the audience towards which this analysis is primarily focused, I subscribe to the belief that the nation as a whole should have a vested interest in this matter. I make this claim as repercussions of such catastrophes span not over a single town, district or state, but have a resounding national influence. It is the responsibility of the entire nation, not just the towns or states in which these tragedies occur, to take action against such atrocities and not treat them as mere ephemeral national issues.

The first characteristic of Laramie, which could have been easily predicted as a precursor to the Matthew Shepard murder, was the unabashed, prejudiced treatment of the gay community. Throughout the film there are a plethora of examples illuminating the uncomfortable tensions between avid conservatives and their hesitant liberal counterparts. However, in one of the first Laramie interviews, the presence of a more blatant form of discrimination is established. Marge Murray, a long time Laramie resident and social worker is the first to expound upon this cruelty. “They might poke one, if they were in a bar situation, you know, they had been drinking, they might actually smack one in the mouth, but then they’d just walk away.” The detached manner in which she states this apparently accepted societal conduct is bewildering. After explaining how a gay man may very well be poked or smacked in the mouth for simply being in attendance at a local bar, she justifies these actions by categorizing them as the extent to which gay people were harassed. In other words, Ms. Murray informs the interviewer that the barometer for which gay people can be mistreated includes, but is also limited to, occasional bigotry and physical violence. What is frightening is the fact that these are views held by a relatively neutral member of the Laramie community. They represent beliefs commonly held amongst the mothers, aunts, uncles, workers, and teachers of the town. These beliefs, which were distinctly doused in racism, did not even take into account the more fanatical viewpoints of the Laramie population. It seemed as though this discrimination had permeated the very fabric of the town’s culture and had firmly established itself as a norm, never to be questioned or scrutinized. What I now call into question is how, under such insular conditions, was the travesty surrounding Matthew Shepard not expected? When analyzing the peculiar almost “twilight zone-esque” atmosphere that these people lived in, it is undeniable that Laramie was a hotbed for this type of racially charged behavior. The fact that this discriminatory treatment was widely held as a standard of the town, also speaks to a very enabling demeanor that the people had adopted. In essence, the majority of the town had an adamant interest in perpetuating the town’s inequality. Prior to the Matthew Shepard murder, those who refuted this discrimination were quieted by the deeply enrooted intolerance the town had embraced. To sum, I attribute this very deliberate and widely accepted intolerance, as one of the towns foremost reasons for the imminent hate crime. Anytime a town collectively adheres to the maltreatment of a certain demographic, they epitomize an atmosphere where tragedy is simply unavoidable.

The second characteristic of Laramie that undoubtedly contributed to the ultimate execution of Matthew Shepard revolves around the convoluted idea encapsulated by the term “live and let live.” This is a phrase that surfaces frequently among the film’s dialogue and refers to the principle that people were “free” to pursue whatever personal endeavors as long as they were not made public. Jonas Slonaker, a gay resident of Laramie, helps to exemplify how the live and let live motto was not embedded in any form of acceptance, but rather was utilized as means of passive aggressive tolerance. “Live and Let live, that is crap you know? Basically what it boils down to: If I don’t tell you I’m a fag, you wont beat the crap out of me. That’s a great philosophy?” Further, the motto was seemingly implemented to abate the evil that gay people could potentially infect the rest of the town with. The live and let live credo inherently created an invisible partition, isolating one group from the rest. It was a theory that left those minority members in quarantine, unable to truly live as they desired. It is evident, upon further analysis, that live and let live is not an expression striving for freedom, but an axiom devoted to repression and segregation. It represented an avenue for those uncomfortable with gays to do the bare minimum in both acknowledging and tolerating their presence.

A community is composed of the network of people living in a common area or land. These interactions are based on societal interactions and relational synergism. But when these components of a community are only applicable to certain “favorable” demographics, it leaves room for festering tensions and hostility among the population. Ultimately, this deeply seeded hostility manifested itself into the violent murder of Matthew Shepard. Where the live and let live doctrine spoke to a hallow sense of tolerance, what it should have been promoting is unreserved acceptance. Briefly defined, tolerance is “the capacity to endure an amount of variation or behavior that one does not agree with”. In and of itself, the definition harbors a sense of forced compliance with an unwanted factor. This was the mindset of many of the Laramie residents. They were simply enduring the presence of an unwanted people. In recognizing the meaning of tolerance it is not farfetched to conclude that those who murdered Matthew Shepard were simply tired of enduring the stigma that he represented. Live and let live did an excellent job in disguising its underlying objectives and offered a collective excuse for the societal interactions of Laramie. To reiterate my initial argument, the deconstruction of the live and let live phrase is yet another example of a widely accepted belief that led to the preordained murder of Matthew Shepard. It is useful in the sense that it serves as a warning sign, that any town which pledges a halfhearted allegiance to tolerance exhibits resistance to fully accepting the group in question. In essence, Laramie used the live and let live phrase to avoid the more difficult task of accepting divergent lifestyles.

In summation, by explicating both the blatant and implicit forms of prejudice incorporated by Laramie, it is not difficult to assume that conflicting convictions would ultimately reach a devastating climax. What is most valuable from this tragedy is that it magnified the specific environmental components that often result in malicious acts. By placing Matthew Shepard on a large, national scale, more people may have been inclined to acknowledge specific facets that their own town shared with Laramie. In doing so, some of these hate-inciting factors could be potentially avoided. Recognizing these detrimental societal factors and being proactive in their elimination is the underlying premise upon which this analysis is based.

In Defense of Laramie

Maybe it was the hopelessness in their eyes or their extreme concern, but I
believed them when I heard their voices in the Laramie Project film state, “Laramie is not this way”. The people of Laramie, though wrought with devastation, had to defend everything they had ever known and believed. A town known by few before 1998, Laramie, Wyoming was suddenly swamped with media and recognized as a place filled with hatred towards homosexuals. My question is, is this fair? Is it just and logical to give a town such a reputation of hatred to the point where good people who mean and do well would hesitate to go there? I do not believe it should be so. We do not throw babies away when they poop in their diapers, nor do we disown our family members after an argument. Just as we do not throw babies away or disown our family, neither should we dub Laramie, Wyoming or any place or person with a negative reputation based on the actions of a few people. Everyone and everything deserves an opportunity for another chance because mistakes happen to the best of us, there is some good in everything, and assuming that a majority of the time most people are reasonable, there is a reason that people call Laramie home and, for that, it deserves to be defended.

Before the tragedy, Laramie was recognized as the town of the west. A visit Laramie website, called Live the West, states that Laramie was recognized for its beautiful landscape, rich culture, and plethora of outdoor activities. According to The Laramie Boomerang, a local newspaper, Laramie is so dedicated to outdoor activities that it is even supporting bike and pedestrian policies in Wyoming. In spite of this, Laramie is identified widely as the town of the hate crime. Tragedies happen everywhere and everyone makes mistakes; even the most perfect invention malfunctions. This is not to say forget about the tragedies that occur but, rather, do not let those negative aspects be the forefront of any judgment. It is only logical to give a pro and con to everything. The basis of every rational decision is to look at both sides. There are few human beings who would prefer to be viewed in a negative light. Most want to be remembered for their best qualities of brilliance, kindness, talent, etc. How many of us have been late to class or a meeting or been swamped with a lot of work and missed the deadline for something? None of us would want to be branded as disrespectful or irresponsible. For a weightier example: how many of us have broken something expensive or stolen something or hurt someone? None of us would want to be forever branded as a destructive person or a thief or an abuser. Let us give Laramie the same opportunity we all ask for. Let us give Laramie the benefit of a doubt and see it as something that is characterized more so for its good qualities than its negative ones.

Laramie, in spite of its tragedy, is a place filled with good people. It is a close-knit community in which people have know each other for their entire lives. People live there, and people stay there. There is too much good going on in the town for it to be known only for the tragedy that happened there. Some may argue that Laramie, though it may have positive qualities, created an environment that was conducive for such a violent hate crime to occur. I would have to agree with this but I implore everyone to also look at the other things that were able to occur in Laramie, Wyoming because the environment was conducive for it. People are educated there, people make a living there, people raise their families there. People stand for their friends and family there. In the film, The Laramie Project, after the death of Matthew Shepard, a group of Laramie residents marched for him in the local parade. In addition, when a radical group was professing fire and brimstone on Matthew Shepard, a group of Laramie residents blocked the signs with handmade angel wings. The integrity of Laramie and its good-standing should be defended because there is good to be defended.

In Act I of the Laramie Project, the residents of Laramie, Wyoming state that they love it there because, “My kids can play outside at night and I don’t have to think twice about it” , “…Laramie is a beautiful town…secluded enough where you can have your own identity…” and “It’s a good place to live. Good people—lots of space”. Jonas Slonaker knew it would be difficult as a homosexual to live in Laramie, but that was the place he wanted to live. Even knowing he would be an anomaly, he knew Laramie was the place for him. Colorado Springs is my hometown and like Laramie, to the outside world it is associated with an unfortunate event. Colorado Springs is infamous for the Ted Haggard incident. People outside of Colorado Springs may associate it with that incident, but when I think of Colorado Springs, I think of various other things. I think of Garden of the Gods, Pikes Peak, and the zoo. I think of my elementary school, middle school, and high school. I think of my home, my church, and my family. I have quite a bit of empathy for the residents of Laramie who love their hometown and do not want it identified with a hate crime. The residents of Laramie are willing to defend their town and livelihood, and that is worth taking note of.

The question of whether or not to define and label a town by its past actions is an ethical dilemma to say the least and has been attached with clichés. Don’t throw the baby out with the baby water; can’t see the forest for the trees are some of these. When is it fair to denounce a town because of past actions? Where is the line? A little poop does ruin a batch of brownies and a half millimeter spot of Louisiana Pete’s hot sauce ruins the perfect wedding dress. It may be more forgiving. A barbeque stain on a white shirt is nothing a little bleach won’t fix and even the worst scars don’t bleed forever. This argument must be qualified simply because there are a handful of counter examples to the argument. There are places even I hesitate going because of actions past. The South, though hospitable and beautiful, is a place that I do not think of with such ease. My argument is not that anyone who has a negative connotation of a specific place is wrong; my argument is simply: think twice. Wisdom and caution are necessary in every situation, but so is the ability to understand that mistakes happen, there is good in a lot of things, and if something is worth defending, it is important to consider both sides. Did a wrong and brutal tragedy occur in Laramie? Yes. Are there people in the town who have ignorant and aggressive notions towards those who do not have a traditional sexual orientation? Yes. This, however, should not be the end all be all of Laramie, Wyoming. In defense of Laramie, give Laramie the chance to renew its reputation and be known for the beautiful town that it is, not the ugly hate crime that occurred there.

The Value of Human Life: Who’s worth more, you or me?

The Laramie project opened my eyes to a story I vaguely had remembered from when I was a child, though I did not really understand what the big deal was, I was eight and ignorant. Watching the Laramie Project, I saw and heard many things I could have gone through life without hearing. Not because they were gruesome or cruel, but people did this, people who at the time were a year older then I am now, people who grew up in Small Town USA, a postcard community for the West. But from this evil, rose good.

The people of Laramie in the film kept saying they were a “live and let live” community, which as time went on became more obvious they were really saying they were a “don’t ask, don’t tell” community.” Thinking about it as the movie went on, I thought about this summer, working at Fenway Park during the Paul McCartney concert, and when Paul sang, “You used to say live and let live…/But in this ever changing world in which we live in/Makes you give in and cry/Say live and let die.” I realized this is what happens at the end of the film, from Matthew’s death rose courage, like a phoenix from its ashes, only instead of one, hundreds of people from across the nation and around the world rose up, and announced their sexuality with pride.

They said they were going to live, and let the terror die, the terror of what would happen to me if I “came out.” In the 11 years that have passed, hate crime legislation has finally passed, but is that what we as a nation have been striving to reach for so long? Does it hold true to other fights people have had for so many years?

In the almost 234 years since the Declaration of Independence has been written, we as a nation have made strides towards the statement “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Granted when the Declaration was drafted “men” only included white males, but since then “men” now includes people of all genders, races, creeds, religions, etc. There are exceptions now though, because of legislations past, we are equal in politics, but our lives now have different values placed upon them. Hate crime legislation, though logical in installment and passing of bills and laws, creates an imbalance in how equal we are as people.

National Defense Authorization Act states those found guilty of a hate crime “shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both” or “shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if; death results from the offense; or the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.“ The second half of the sentencing is a restatement of current law for the crimes listed, not matter what the motivation for the crime was. What creates an inequality in the population is the first section of the sentencing. What this is saying is, if someone has a crime committed against them, and someone else has the same crime committed against them because of their race, religion, sexuality, etc, while one criminal could walk free, the other criminal may go away for 1o years more then the original sentence. For within the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, the act gives authority to the Attorney General to supply communities with extra manpower and priority in federal labs to prosecute the alleged offender. This also raises the question in my mind of the investigators, prosecutors and lab technicians developing “tunnel vision.”

In my first year seminar (Introduction to Forensic Science and Real Life CSI), we were taught about the Cameron Todd Willingham case, a Texas man who is thought to have been wrongfully convicted and executed due to invalid forensic evidence. What if this happens to a person who is tried for a hate crime and put to death instead of life in prison? What if this happens because of the extra, advanced technology that happens to have a flaw? Expectations are created when extra money is added, people want answers, and sometimes human nature takes over and lawyers miss these wrongs until it is too late. Timothy Masters was a more local case we learned about, a man who spent 10 years in jail after being wrongfully convicted, what if he had been charged with a hate crime and convicted, what if he was given the needle? The police were so certain it was him, there were no doubts in their mind. Well they were wrong, A hypothetical situation now, a man sets fire to the home of a Jewish family for personal reasons, another man walking along the street is spotted by police matching the criminals description. The police bring the man to the station, find out he is a member of the Arian Brotherhood, and they are convinced they have their man. For arson and murder the innocent man is put on death row because it is a hate crime, and though he may have committed countless crimes, justice is not served because a guilty man walks.

Hate crimes do cause terror in populations, but when doesn’t crime cause terror in a population. According to a November 16, 2006 article in the Seattle Times, 15.4% of the population of San Francisco is gay. Though depending on the area there may be higher or lower percentages, however, should someone commit a crime in San Fran, there is a 3-in-20 chance it was committed against someone who is homosexual or bisexual. Is this automatically a hate crime? No. Say the crime was robbery, and it happened in a neighborhood with approximately half homes homo- or bisexual and the other half heterosexual. And say this is a very nice neighborhood in San Francisco, and the robber comes back and happens to hit the home of a gay couple. This all happens by chance, but going to sleep the night after the second robbery the heterosexual families aren’t going to bed with their doors unlocked. The same criminal terrifies the population of the entire area. With this all going on, is there terror in the entire GLBTQ population across America? No, or at least it shouldn’t be. It’s understandable for people to be afraid when a crime occurs, but until proven beyond a reasonable doubt the crime was committed out of hate, there is no reason to feel a group is targeted. Acts of terrorism are understandable to cause fear through the entire group, but those are not everyday crimes. The value of one life should not supersede the value of another, no matter what their religion, race, sexuality, etc. That is what the Civil Rights movement was all about, equality; in the work place, in credit, in buying homes, so why is there inequality in the court room?

A quote that has found a special place in me, in the realization of life occurred during the end of The Boondock Saints in a courtroom in Boston, Murphy says to the crowd, “Do not kill, do not rape, do not steal, these are principles which every man of every faith can embrace.” And embrace this I do, but one key fact about this quote is it covers all humans, about the entirety of the world, it does not specify who it would be worse to kill, and that is what people need to see and accept.

Being born and raised Irish Catholic in Boston, I have been taught to love my brother and treat others the way I would like to be treated myself. I also have been taught Leviticus 18:22 translated as “Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.” But I also know God loves all of his children, whether they do right or wrong by the Bible, as long as they believe and praise his word. Living in the first state to legalize and practice same-sex marriages, I have seen protests supporting and condemning the decision of the state. From all this, I have learned and decided physical attraction is based on who one is, whether is it to the same or opposite sex, and some argue God made them that way when other are saying they are defying God. I believe the reason is not important, what I do believe is to honor my neighbor.

Scientifically I am a Homo sapien, unique in my own rights, but in the eyes of the nation why should I be any different and represented any differently then another man because he is different racially, religiously, etc. I do not believe Hate Crime Legislation is fair and equal, which is what the nation has been striving for since the abolition of slavery, and continued within the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

What is fair and equal we pre hate crime legislation. I do not condone beatings or murders based on bias, but murder is murder. At the end of the investigation, someone’s life was wrongfully ended and someone should pay. But they should pay the same price for killing one man as they do for another, that is what is fair and equal, and it is what we should return our nation to.

Defining Laramie

If you drive down the main street of Laramie, Wyoming you will pass a sign that reads “HATE IS NOT A LARAMIE VALUE.” This sign would confuse someone unfamiliar with the history of the town of Laramie, but for those who are familiar, the sign evokes horrible memories and a message to contemplate. According to Peter O’Dowd of NPR, on October 12, 1998 Matthew Shepard, a gay college student died after being brutally beaten by two Laramie residents. Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson left a local bar with Shepard and proceeded to rob him, tie him to wooden fence, and strike him in the head eighteen times with a handgun before leaving him to die. He was found the next morning and rushed to the hospital where he died five days later.

After this horrific incident, the residents of Laramie began to question the role the town of Laramie had in the murder. In the film The Laramie Project, by Moisés Kaufman, one of the residents being interviewed raised the question of “Is Laramie actually that kind of a town?” As much as the other interviewees tried to deny that the town itself had any responsibility in this case, the validity of their arguments is questioned. After all, the murder happened in the town, by local residents. For everyone unfamiliar with Laramie, Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson have become the town’s core representations, which projects the mentality that Laramie is in fact, “that kind of town.”

Countless residents interviewed in The Laramie Project openly expressed their anti-gay feelings during their interviews. Resident, Sherry Johnson downplayed the severity of the Matthew Shepard’s murder by comparing it to the recent death of a highway worker that was killed by a drunk driver. She did not understand why Matthew was receiving significantly only more attention than the highway worker that happened to be her friend. She believed he was getting more attention because he was gay and did not understand why the murder was bring called a hate crime. Her homophobic statements shocked the listener due their sincerity and harshness that seemed unfitting coming from a woman. A second character in The Laramie Project that reinforced the idea that Laramie is “that kind of town,” was the Baptist minister. Even though he agreed Aaron and Russell’s actions were most definitely wrong, he concluded that he hopes when Matthew was tied to the fence and dying that he reflected on the lifestyle he chose to live. The minister insinuated with this comment that although Aaron and Russell killing Matthew was wrong, he agrees with the boys that Matthew should not have been alive.

These blatantly homophobic comments give the audience the perception that the people of Laramie resent the gay residents. People voicing such harsh opinions with little to no hesitation implies that Laramie is the kind of town that justifies the beliefs behind a hate crime. Even though some people in the town of Laramie may consent with the boy’s anti-gay attitude, very few of them would agree that showing your disapproval by murdering, as Aaron and Russell did, is permissible. None-the-less, Laramie is still the kind of town that raised two boys that robbed, beat, and eventually murdered a young man more or less because he was gay.

But what exactly is meant by “that kind of town?” Is the lady being interviewed referring to the homophobic attitudes of the people of Laramie or is it deeper than that? Donna Miskowitz, a lesbian author who visited the town of Laramie after the incident found her stay surprisingly pleasant. In the article “Love and Hate in Laramie” that she wrote following her visit she wrote, “And how does it feel to be a lesbian here? Fabulous.” Miskowitz ‘s opinion contradicts all of the stereotypes of Laramie that arose after the murder, which brings into question the underlying motivation behind the McKinney and Henderson’s gruesome actions.

The town of Laramie is said to be “obsessed with status.” Money and power control the attitudes and opinions of the residents. “Who’s on top and who’s on the bottom seems to be a matter of enormous intensity in this city,” said Miskowitz. She believes that the residents do not have a problem with homosexuals as long as they have money. This belief conflicts with some of the interviews showed on The Laramie Project, where the residents were blatantly against homosexuality, but this new outlook arises the idea that maybe Laramie is not a homophobic, hate-filled town, but rather simply too focused on status.

According to Miskowitz, Russell Hendeson’s mother was a hotel maid who died, with little surprise to the residents, after stumbling out a bar and freezing to death. They lived in the part of Laramie where the government did not even plow the streets and his mother “was the city’s most famous battering victims, and he was severely battered by her boyfriends.” Aaron McKinney was often locked in the basement by his mother throughout his childhood and frequently sent his girlfriend to school with black eyes. In the town of Laramie, McKinney and Henderson were clearly not “on top.” In fact, “Russell and Aaron were reviled for being “losers,” dropouts and poor.”

Matthew Shepard on the other hand, grew up in a well-to-do household. He attended a prestigious high school in Switzerland while his parents lived in Saudi Arabia and his father worked for Saudi Aramco, the largest oil corporation in the world. He always wore the newest designer clothes and never had to worry about money. He was clearly well educated and well spoken. Miskowitz believes When Aaron and Russell saw Matthew in the bar that night “He himself looks like an emblem of everything they have never been allowed to be.”

Perhaps Aaron and Russell’s motivation behind killing Matthew was not solely because he was gay, but rather they needed to their superiority over him in some way. They did not understand why someone who practiced something clearly against their beliefs could live a life substantially better then their own. Aaron and Russell, who had been victims of scrutiny their entire lives due to their economic status, wanted to be the dominant force for the first time.

Laramie may not be the kind of town that kills a person soley because of their sexual orientation, but it is the kind of town that allows for hurtful judgments to be made and a obvious hierarchy to be formed. If a member of the community fails to fit the Laramie standards, they will be made blatantly aware of their difference. In the Matthew Shepard case neither Aaron and Russell, nor Matthew were the ideal Laramie citizens, but for substantially different reasons. Aaron and Russell felt the need to establish their supremacy over Matthew in order to show the people of Laramie even though their were poor, they were still dominant forces in society.

Matthew Shepard: His-Story (long gone…) and His-Legacy

The assassination of Matthew Shepard left the world astonished. The brutality and gore surrounding the case left a dark legacy in Laramie and its residents, and branded a relatively quiet and tranquil place as a gay-basher town. Aside from these generalizations, the entire case brought attention and an opportune moment for the lesbian, homosexual, bisexual, and transgender communities to seek change and add severity to crimes that are committed on a sexual bias. Look into reality and ask yourself, should American law add gender-bias as part of hate-crime laws? Well if you have no answer to this question, this piece will illustrate some of the aspects included in the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, evidence leading to this legislative change to help decide whether “gender” should be a criteria in hate-crime laws.

Perhaps the biggest legacy Matthew Shepard left on American history is the recently passed Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act. According to the Matthew Shepard Foundation, the act has three main effects on federal legislation:
1)Expand the law to authorize the Department of Justice to investigate and prosecute certain bias-motivated crimes based on the victim's actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability.
2)Eliminate a serious limitation on federal involvement under existing law which requires that a victim of a bias-motivated crime was attacked because he/she was engaged in a specified federally-protected activity such as voting, serving on a jury or attending school.
3)Add "gender" and "gender identity" to the Hate Crimes Statistics Act
Basically this act added sexual orientation as a bias for the prosecution of hate crimes and it allows federal government to investigate such biased crimes where local authorities fail to do so.

Then why should homosexuality be included in hate-crime laws? Well there are various instances when criminals perpetuate crimes against certain individuals based on defining characteristic such as race, gender, religious affiliation, and so on. According to the Federal Bureau of Investigation there were 7,780 single-bias incidents reported in 2008. It’s an alarming figure that shows that there’s still a certain disdain towards certain characteristic of individuals within these categories. Out of these incidents, 16.7 % were motivated by sexual-orientation bias. Basically around 1,300 of these incidents were triggered by some type of intolerance to the victim’s sexual-orientation. This is not mere jack and run incidents, these crimes are planned as a way to intimidate people within a community— the gay community in this case. The most startling fact is that from these sexual-bias incidents, 58.6% were committed against male homosexuals. This figure shows that certain criminals show a twisted type of severe homophobia for gay man. These “alleged” crimes occurred before the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act came into effect and were prosecuted and penalized under normal judicial law.

Sexual-bias crimes should be branded as hate-crimes because the statistics given by the FBI show that sexual orientation is the third highest motive that drives hate crimes. Just below racial and religious motivated crimes. The Laramie Project movie depicts the Matthew Shepard assassination as a hate crime triggered at some extent to the inability of American society to fully accept homosexuality, or in this instance a small-rural town of about 27,000 people. There is a multitude of opinions in the American people that accounts for the various perceptions on homosexuality. For instance, I am not against same-sex marriage, adoption by homosexual couples and others. Yet, there’s the other side of the spectrum—people who are against these actions in society. Some arguments against homosexuality are of religious and moral character and shouldn’t be disregarded as plain “hateful” or dull arguments.

What worries me the most is the fact that politicians are still very lethargic to take action and acknowledge that homosexuals are no longer a concealed group in society. Let’s start by looking at a comment made by Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the House Republican leader, in a New York Times article in Access World News. “The idea that we're going to pass a law that's going to add further charges to someone based on what they may have been thinking, I think is wrong”. Well, Mr. Boehner is assuming that violent crimes such as Matthew Shepard’s assassination are already punished severely under current law. He is partially correct, both McKinney and Henderson were subjected to the death penalty for aggravated murder, and kidnapping. On the other hand Senator Carl Levin stated in the same article, "The hate crimes act will hopefully deter people from being targeted for violent attacks because of the color of their skin or their religion, their disability, their gender or their sexual orientation, regardless of where the crime takes place." This is a key point, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act intends to prevent hate crimes. The addition of sexual orientation is just the result of countless infamies the gay community has endured in American History. People have to consider that violent crimes against homosexual people like Matthew Shepard get triggered at the greatest extent by the perception of the subject sexuality. McKinney and Henderson could have just assault and rob Matthew of his properties if that was the initial plan they had in mind when the incident was about to happen. I’m pretty sure that if Matthew Shepard had been straight the perpetrators would have let him live and it would have been a plain robbery, which is still wrong, but not horrible. This was an act of hate towards a minority group and this new measure will get homophobes to think twice before they act against the gay community.

The LGBT community (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender) has endured neglect, violence, and in extreme cases pure hatred in American society for far too long. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act is a new victory for the gay community, and its effect is yet to be discovered. There’s still room for change, which requires support of the American public. Be part of that change; learn more about local adoption policies regarding same-sex couples. Visit the Matthew Shepard Foundation website and find out more things to do to change the role of homosexuals in America. The rest is up to you!!!

* If Access World News hyperlink does not work here is the URL:
http://infoweb.newsbank.com/iw-search/we/InfoWeb?p_product=AWNB&p_theme=aggregated5&p_action=doc&p_docid=12B3BFBD577F1B30&p_docnum=4&p_queryname=5