Hate crime

Question 1

Rationale

Answer 1

Home Office: Government recognises that it “affects the whole family and it erodes the standards of decency of the wider community. Trust and understanding built up over many years between communities can be eroded”
R v Rogers: The essence of racism and xenophobia is the “denial of equal respect and dignity to people who are seen as “other”. This is more deeply hurtful, damaging and disrespectful to the victims than the simple versions of these offences”

Question 2

Enhances sentencing provisions

Answer 2

Section 66 of the Sentencing Act 2020
Race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, transgender identity
Court treats hostility as an aggravating factor in sentencing

Question 3

Demonstration of hostility

Answer 3

R v McFarlane: does not require pre-existing hostility and can be in the ‘heat of the moment’
R v Woods: V’s reaction to the hostility is not relevant- doesn’t matter if they were unaffected

Question 4

Motivated by hostility

Answer 4

R v O’Callaghan: more difficult to prove, have to show that the offence (at least in part) was motivated by hostility
DPP v Dykes and Others: prior behaviour and selection of victim can evidence motivating hostility even absent explicit statements
R v Killick: targeting/selection of victim does not necessarily demonstrate hostility (exploitation of person with disability alone is not sufficient to demonstrate hostility)
Walters papers: “trying to bridge the gap between him being targeted because he’s vulnerable, and targeted because they were motivated by hostility to him based on his disability”

Question 5

The justice gap

Answer 5

Walters: “204,000 hate crimes reported, only 4,342 offences with uplifts; justice gap = 96%, only 4% total hate crimes successfully prosecuted and sentenced as a hate crime

Question 6

Hierarchy of hate

Answer 6

Walters: two rocks thrown at a black person and trans person, giving each a minor cut on the forehead- “the ridiculous situation is the same behaviour with the same hostility produces a two-year maximum sentence for one of the victims and a six-month maximum in relation to the ..other”
Law Commission: “The present system… treats some protected characteristics differently despite (1) all of them being protected for the purpose of hostility-based offending (by the enhanced sentencing system) and (2) there being no obvious justification for the different legislative treatment”

Question 7

Most people prosecuted for hate crimes are against people of their own minority

Answer 7

Willis: “hate crime legislation operates from exactly the ignorant position, which unavoidably treats racial language in a superficial fashion. While it may catch genuine expressions of racial bigotry within its group, it also risks widening the reach of criminal law and further criminalising an already over-criminalised sub-section of society”