Can these boys charged with a hate crime and murder be convicted??

Question

3 boys were yelling back to a illegal immigrant nasty comments and that he should go back home and the group were walking away in one direction and the victim another until the victim turned around and walked bake starting a altercation and then being beaten until he could not get up. When he did not respond, one kicked him in the head. He died days later in the hospital. Could these boys truly be charged for murder if the man walked back towards them and started a fight?

Would the idea of the word exchange not being addressed would have been a proper way to deal with this for the victim? By walking back to the group looking for a fight, he asked for them to fight him back, so how does this play into the picture. What if gang ties are addressed?

Any ideas? Yelling out or calling names is a freedom of speech? or not? When does crime action start?

No opinions of action please, just facts of what is and what isn't.

Answer 1

3 against one is not self defense.  If they continued beating him when he could not get up, yes it is murder.  

My understanding is the altercation started because they singled him out because of his ethnicity, that makes it a hate crime.

Answer 2

Tragic as it is...This was a altercation that resulted in a death of a person.  

Due to the nature of the fight that occurred, manslaughter would be perhaps the charge.  There is nothing that will define 1st degree murder for the fact that the 3 individuals left the scene, and the actions of the single individual continued this event.  The intent of killing this one person is not established or shown.

Hate crime would involve witnesses that can testify that racially motivated comments were directed at the individual(s).  

Freedom of speech is not covered by the freedom to express hate.

One would say that this was a terrible judgement call for the one who decided to go back and try to conclude this event.  But, what is worst, is those that has to live with the judgement that comes to them after this life is over with.  No one, gets away with this...perhaps in the hand of the law/man most certain...but, when judgement day comes, all will be exposed, and nothing will be hidden.

Answer 3

Basically, by beating him for a considerable time until he died, they stepped way over the line past self-defense, so they can very well be convicted of murder. The hate crime issue would definitely be questionable, but since it's such a subjective crime in the first place, it's really up to the jury whether or not they would be convicted of that.

The fact that the victim turned around and started the physical confrontation would certainly enter into the consideration of the level of murder and the sentence, but have no real bearing on whether or not they should be convicted of murder.

Answer 4

Yes, they can and should be charged and convicted with murder.

The victim engaged in what's called a  "consentual fight" brought on by the boys taunting.

The Court will most likely find that the victim never intended to engage in a fight to the death.

Kicking someone in the head when he clearly could not fight anymore is clearly murder if the victim dies from it.

And, since a different race is involved, it can be a hate crime.

Calling out racial epithets is just stupid and not protected under freedom of speech.

Answer 5

Facts, huh.  How about giving us the fact of where this supposedly occurred?  Laws are different from place to place.

But in the US, generally, to be convicted of a hate crime, the prosecutor would argue that the boys' "nasty comments" are evidence of their hatred of someone based on national origin and that the hatred caused them to beat the man violently.

Could they be convicted?  Sure.

When the man walked back and started an altercation, I don't really know what that is supposed to mean.  If he turned and walked back to the boys to confront them verbally, it is not legal to respond by beating him. If by "looking for a fight", you mean that he actually swung at someone, then REASONABLE FORCE is allowed in self-defense.  But beating someone three-on-one until they can't get up is by no stretch "self defense" based on what you say here.

And kicking him in the head when he is down and apparently unconscious can't be defended at all.

Yes, you have the freedom of speech to be a bigot and holler at people on the street.  But if that makes them angry and they tell you so, you can't beat them for it.

The crime starts when the fists fly.

Answer 6

So, some facts, per what you wrote

victim was being verbally harrassed, and he WAS trying to walk away. The name calling continued, and he turns around.

Next, 3 guys start beating on him.  (hmm..self defense? nah.. 3 guys could easily have taken him down and controlled him/ defended themselves, while someone called the police).

I can't go along with "he asked them to fight him back".. the incident was provoked completely, one hundred percent by the "nasty comments". There are lesser charges that could be attached to the 'nasty comments' ie, provocation, disturbing the peace, etc.

The crime action escalated when 3 guys used excessive force (hey, any force would have qualified for assault).  The absolute fact of being 3 guys against 1... no way that they could have been in fear, they easily could have stopped him and any fight.

If you ask ONLY FOR FACTS.. the relevant fact is that 3 against one, and force severe enough that it caused a death.

That is the only facts that anyone possibly can get out of this.