DieHardBrownsFan Posted May 2, 2009 Report Share Posted May 2, 2009 This story gives me hope in America yet. Pa. jury: Immigrant's beating death no hate crime POTTSVILLE, Pa. – Prosecutors called the beating death of an illegal immigrant from Mexico a hate crime, and they urged an all-white jury in Pennsylvania coal country to punish two white teenagers for their roles in the attack. Instead, the jury found the teens innocent of all serious charges, a decision that elicited cheers and claps from the defendants' families and friends — and cries of outrage from the victim's. Brandon Piekarsky, 17, was acquitted of third-degree murder and ethnic intimidation, while Derrick Donchak, 19, was acquitted of aggravated assault and ethnic intimidation. Both were convicted of simple assault late Friday following a trial in which jurors were left to sort out the facts of an epithet-filled brawl that pitted popular football players against a 25-year-old Hispanic man, Luis Ramirez, who appeared willing to fight. A representative of Ramirez's family said the jurors got it wrong. "There's been a complete failure of justice," said Gladys Limon, staff attorney for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, who attended the trial and informed Ramirez's family of the verdict. "It's just outrageous and very difficult to understand how any juror could have had reasonable doubt." On Saturday the group's interim president, Henry Solano, called on the Justice Department to "bring justice to the Ramirez family and send a strong message that violence targeting immigrants will not be tolerated." Piekarsky's attorney declined comment on the possibility of federal charges against the teens. Prosecutors had cast Ramirez as the victim of a gang of drunken white teens motivated by a dislike of their small coal town's burgeoning Hispanic population. But the jury evidently sided with defense attorneys, who called Ramirez the aggressor and characterized the brawl as a street fight that ended tragically. Jury foreman Eric Macklin said he sympathized with Ramirez's loved ones but that the evidence pointed to an acquittal. "I feel bad for Luis's friends and family. I know they feel they haven't gotten justice," he said. The simple assault convictions carry possible one- to two-year prison sentences. Donchak was also convicted of corruption of minors and an alcohol charge, both stemming from his purchase of beer and malt liquor that he drank with his underage friends the night of the fight. Sentencing has not been scheduled. The case exposed ethnic tensions in Shenandoah, a blue-collar town of 5,000 that has lured Hispanic residents drawn by cheap housing and jobs in nearby factories and farm fields. Ramirez moved to the town about seven years ago from Iramuco, Mexico, working in a factory and picking strawberries and cherries. The 2000 U.S. Census showed that Schuylkill County's population was 96.6 percent white, with 1.1 percent of the county listed as Hispanic or Latino. The fight began late July 12 when a half-dozen teens, all Shenandoah residents who played football at Shenandoah Valley High School, were walking home from a block party and came across Ramirez and his 15-year-old girlfriend in a park. Brian Scully, 18, asked the girl, "Isn't it a little late for you to be out?" That enraged Ramirez, who began yelling in Spanish and dialing friends on his cell phone. Scully admitted to shouting ethnic slurs. The verbal sparring soon turned into a physical altercation as Ramirez and Piekarsky traded blows, though prosecutors and defense attorneys disputed who threw the first punch. Donchak then entered the fray and wound up on top of Ramirez. Prosecutors said he pummeled Ramirez, holding a small piece of metal in his fist to give his punches more power. Defense attorneys said Donchak tried to break up the fight between Piekarsky and Ramirez and denied he had a weapon. The two sides eventually went their separate ways. But Scully kept yelling at Ramirez, leading the immigrant to charge after the group. Colin Walsh, 17, then hit Ramirez, knocking him out. "Does Mr. Ramirez fit the description of an innocent soul who just happened to get picked on by a group of kids?" defense attorney Fred Fanelli asked jurors in closing arguments. "He's the only adult, and he makes some bad choices." Fanelli accused prosecutors of ignoring exculpatory evidence, including statements by two of Ramirez's friends shortly after the fight that the kicker wore white sneakers — the color Scully was wearing. Fanelli also said prosecutors offered leniency to key witnesses — including Scully and Walsh, who admitted to knocking Ramirez unconscious with a single punch to the face — giving them a strong motive to lie. Walsh pleaded guilty in federal court to violating Ramirez's civil rights and could be out of prison in four years. On the witness stand, he identified Piekarsky as the kicker. So did Scully, who told jurors he tried to kick the immigrant but missed. Scully is charged in juvenile court with aggravated assault and ethnic intimidation. Fanelli derided the prosecution testimony as "bought and paid for." Robert Franz, the prosecutor, denied any misconduct on the part of the district attorney's office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Well atleast they are not burning down South Central Pottsville. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Thank God. It's about time the Whites in this country got a fair shake, especially in the Judicial system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Fair shake? In a land where the legal category "hate crime" is specifically used to dole out harsher sentences to white peole? Please. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 That's a good one, Steve. You must be the guy who cries about the lack of a White History Month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 That's a good one, Steve. You must be the guy who cries about the lack of a White History Month. Cries? Actually I might say that other cultures have contributed more to civilization who aren't so honored. Romans Greeks Chinese Jews Dare I suggest Irish? But to "hate crimes" I say hang every violent criminal from the same tree. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 I guess I find hate crimes to be particularly offensive. I hope I'm not alone in feeling this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 I guess I find hate crimes to be particularly offensive. I hope I'm not alone in feeling this way. The Hate crimes bill is censorship of Free speech. When do we start jailing preachers for reading the Bible? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osusev Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 I have to say that I agree with Steve. The law and the controls of punishment/correction should not be defined because of ethnicity or other similar defining differentations. Assault is the same regardless of the motivation and the correction/punishment should be the same regardless. Personally I find measures that are supposed to erect some sort of equality and fairness to minorities (affirmative actions) reverse discriminate and lower the the people by defining them basically as a handicap. From the article all this sounds like is young men being well young men and a group mentality taking over. Group/individual assault and or self defense should have been the subject of that case not "racism". Angry people say things intentionally to hurt their target the subject matter of that should not constitute more punishment. For me knowing very little of this case... It does not sound like a good idea to rush a group..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Personally I find measures that are supposed to erect some sort of equality and fairness to minorities (affirmative actions) reverse discriminate and lower the the people by defining them basically as a handicap. I would agree with you, sev, if we lived in a society where every society member thought like you and me, where everybody should be treated equally. But, unfortunately, there are folks like Jeffro who believe it's OK to assault someone just because he sleeps with other guys or he happens to be from Mexico, thereby making that crime a different kind of crime. There are all sorts of different crimes, obviously, so why not be able to merely designate it as what it is? A crime solely based upon hate. Whether there should be a stiffer penalty for such an act is up for debate; I can agree with Steve's "a crime is a crime" thing. And I'm not sure the crime DH applauds in his OP is a hate crime or not, and I don't really care. It's the "White teenagers win justice in PA" thread title which is the incredibly stupid thing here; he's pretty much saying it's OK to get away with assaulting a dude because he might be in this country illegally that folks should take issue with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 Steve and Sev are right. And, I believe there is no room for allowing hate speech out of racist, political or cultural favoritism. The old "No one is above the law." This also assumes an adherence to a legitimate definition to the phrase "hate speech". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted May 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 I would agree with you, sev, if we lived in a society where every society member thought like you and me, where everybody should be treated equally. But, unfortunately, there are folks like Jeffro who believe it's OK to assault someone just because he sleeps with other guys or he happens to be from Mexico, thereby making that crime a different kind of crime. There are all sorts of different crimes, obviously, so why not be able to merely designate it as what it is? A crime solely based upon hate. Whether there should be a stiffer penalty for such an act is up for debate; I can agree with Steve's "a crime is a crime" thing. And I'm not sure the crime DH applauds in his OP is a hate crime or not, and I don't really care. It's the "White teenagers win justice in PA" thread title which is the incredibly stupid thing here; he's pretty much saying it's OK to get away with assaulting a dude because he might be in this country illegally that folks should take issue with. Because the kids were white? Or is it not okay to say that anymore? I think it is relevant because the guy was an illegal, and actually started the altercation with the youths, who happened to be white as referenced in the article, oh politically correct dumb ass. And I never mentioned anything about "approving" of the killing of the guy. I think it was unfortunate. He did deserve a major ass whipping though. You insinuate that I think its OK to assault this dude because he was an illegal, never said that pin head. He started the altercation as decided by the jury. You are the one who is making decisions based on your own liberal thought process. I don't think its OK to assault illegals or gays based on there "life style", unless they start the altercation, which is the case here. Comprehend jerk off? Good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted May 3, 2009 Report Share Posted May 3, 2009 ^^Hey, that wasn't a half-bad post there, DH! Besides the name-calling (which I'm used to), I kind of disagree with this: You are the one who is making decisions based on your own liberal thought process. I don't know what to call it, but I don't think it's "Liberal," per se. I think it's more of a "person" thing than a "Liberal" thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.