Angie Zapata was brutally murdered in Greeley, Colorado in July 2008. Angie was a transgender woman and she was murdered because of anti-transgender bias.
On April 14, 2009, her alleged killer will go on trial in Greeley, Colorado. The trial marks the first time that Colorado’s gender identity-inclusive hate crimes statute–and in fact any state’s hate crimes law–has been applied in the investigation and prosecution of an anti-transgender murder case.
The tragic circumstances of Angie’s death gives Coloradans an opportunity to better understand Angie’s life and the lives of transgender people. It offers a chance to talk about the importance of Colorado’s hate crime law. And it highlights the need to stop excluding people from the protections of a federal hate crimes law simply because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
Learn more about Angie Zapata, Colorado’s hate crimes law, and light a candle for Angie: http://www.angiezapata.com/
Cross-posted at ProgressNow Colorado
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: joe_burly
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: harrydoby
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: Pam Bennett
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: ParkHill
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: 2Jung2Die
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: ParkHill
IN: Tuesday Open Thread
BY: spaceman2021
IN: Lauren Boebert Picks Up George Santos’ Favorite Side Hustle
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
I will spark up a candle!
While I’m totally sympathetic to the poster’s concerns and support gay marriage, etc., I do wonder whether the community is exploiting her murder for its own benefit?
And is the community making it harder for the defendant to get a fair trial, which is a concern reported in the Post today?
Wouldn’t it have been fairer to have conducted this campaign, which includes newspaper ads, after the trial?
…even though you know it’s true if you actually read the Post article today, the ads were not run in those communities from which the jury will be selected. Hell, the ad wasn’t even run in the Post, out of an abundance of caution. I wonder if your omission was intentional? Hmmmm
I failed to note that the ads weren’t run in Ft. Collins or Greeley and that nevertheless prosecutors are worried that the ads will make a fair trial more difficult.
I think that covers it?
For the first time I am in agreement with you 100%.
.
How is prosecuting a killer for a hate crime better than prosecuting them for murder ?
What’s the advantage ?
.
you are still charged with murder but the added “hate” makes your sentence harder.
.
once I read that, it was obvious.
.
Murder is not the only Hate Crime, although it is the one always focused on. Destroying or damaging one or several places of worship with the intent to send a message to the followers of that religion is a hate crime. By prosecuting it as a hate crime the penalty can be increased.
I’d think juries would be more careful about convicting people of hate crimes because of the tougher sentencing guidelines.
Are there any relevant stats?
Why do hate crime laws make sense when current sentences for using and selling drugs don’t?
Just wondering.
….because it’s irrelevant to their proper consideration and could lead to improper analysis, as your question highlights.
In any event, I’ve read a fair amount of newspapers accounts of the Zapata killing, and the charging, etc. I have not read anything that confirms the speculation on here that a hate crime conviction in CO increases the sentence given for another crime. Instead, a hate crime is a separate crime in itself, with its own sentence. In Zapata’s case, the defendant was charged with both murder and a hate crime. So the jury is free to consider the hate crime charge separately from the other charge.
It could totally acquit.
Or it convict on murder or hate crime or vice versa.
So let’s hang him twice, I guess?