• @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      65
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      To be fair, it was a toddler.

      /s in case that wasn’t obvious.

      Also, “possible hate crime”? It clearly was. Getting really tired of these bullshit headlines that don’t actually say what happened. The “alleged” for the crime since they haven’t been convicted is already in the headline, that’s fine, I get he legal distinction there, but then say what’s actually alleged and don’t try to hide the reality of what’s alleged. This is clearly a hate crime, there’s no question of that. It’s not an alleged possible hate crime, it’s just an alleged hate crime.

      According to a press release from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the mother appeared to be visibly Muslim, as she was wearing a hijab and modest swimwear to the pool at the time of the incident.

      Police said Wolf also asked the mother if two of the children in the pool were hers before allegedly attempting to grab one of them, a 6-year-old boy, who was able to get away.

      Wolf also allegedly snatched the mother’s headscarf off while she tried to save her daughter and beat her with it, according to CAIR.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        She was charged with attempted capital murder and injury to a child. … The Euless Police Department has recommended that the incident be considered a hate crime and the Tarrant County District Attorney’s Office is currently investigating it

        “Alleged” is what the DA has charged.

        “Possible” is what the DA might add to the charges.

        The opinions of the reporter, who is not a lawyer much less a prosecutor, are not helpful.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          “Possible” is what the DA might add to the charges.

          If the DA hasn’t added that already based on even this limited public information, I question their ability to do their damned job. There’s nothing “possible” about this being racially motivated, which clearly makes it a hate crime. The initial charges should have been for a hate crime and adjusted to remove that if necessary.

          But it’s Texas, they don’t want to prosecute white people for being racist against anyone brown, that sets a precedent with the public they don’t want.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            17
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            If the DA hasn’t added that already based on even this limited public information

            The DA also has access to non-public information, including potential exculpatory evidence.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              85 months ago

              Can’t imagine what sort of exculpatory evidence there could be for someone asking where someone is from, then trying to drown their child, and beating them with their hijab. There is a pretty damned cut and dry racial motive there. Unless the white woman was secretly Muslim somehow it seems pretty straightforward.

              Or… the simplest explanation is that it’s a smaller suburb of Dallas-Ft Worth where the largest ethnic group by far is white, in a district that went 62.2% Republican in the 2022 election, and the government officials don’t want to publicly denounce racism like that because that’s what the citizens in that area expect of their government.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                15
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Can’t imagine what sort of exculpatory evidence there could be

                Not being able to imagine something doesn’t mean it can’t exist.

                the simplest explanation is that it’s a smaller suburb of Dallas-Ft Worth

                Suburbs don’t prosecute, the county DA does. This county voted for Biden in 2020, and it prosecuted 42 hate crimes in 2022.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  45 months ago

                  Suburbs don’t prosecute, the county DA does. And this county voted for Biden in 2020.

                  You’re right, and Presidential elections don’t do a good job of showing anything about local matters. Gotta look at the local elections. Since you brought it up…

                  In the 2022 general election the County Clerk, Criminal District Attorney, Constable, District Clerk, and County Judge elected were all Republican. In fact, the only race not won by a Republican was one of 2 open County Commissioner seats, which a Dem barely won with 51.5% of the vote.

                  Notice that Criminal District Attorney, Phil Sorrells ®, was just elected in 2022. Prior to that, he was a Judge for Tarrant County Criminal Court Number 10 for 25 years. I’d be willing to bet if someone went back through his criminal sentencing over those 25 years it would show certain, shall we say, biases in those sentences, they almost always do. Sometimes that quack does come from a duck after all.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    10
                    edit-2
                    5 months ago

                    The previous DA was also a Republican, so it’s clear that Republicans are capable of prosecuting hate crimes.

                    And I’d be willing to bet that Tarrant County charged as many hate crimes in 2023 as in previous years.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        75 months ago

        Publishers have to use the walking on eggshells language even when it’s obvious what happened because of libel laws. You’re not guilty until convicted in a court of law. Until that point, everything is allegedly, possibly, appears to be.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          15 months ago

          I know. I already addressed that. That’s not where my issue is. My issue is they’re not only saying allegedly but also a possible hate crime when it is clearly a hate crime.

          Instead after looking more, it looks like that’s because the DA has unofficially chosen not to prosecute it as a hate crime for whatever baffling reason. A month after the event and they’ve not filed charges for a hate crime. It doesn’t take a month to figure out whether a white person fighting with a Muslim in a headscarf about being American, then attacking their children and beating them with the scarf, constitutes a hate crime.

          So instead it makes it look like a prosecutor that doesn’t want to prosecute a seemingly slam dunk hate crime as a hate crime, for whatever reason.