Potential Title: Examining the Possibility: Is the Suspect in the Shooting of 3 Palestinian Students Liable for a Hate Crime?
The shooting of three Palestinian college students in Vermont sparks debate on whether the suspect should face hate crime charges Explore the definition of hate crimes, the complexities of federal vs state charges, and the timeline of the Justice Department's involvement
The shooting of three Palestinian college students in Vermont has sparked demands for the suspect to be charged with a hate crime. Jason J. Eaton, 48, was taken into custody on Sunday and is facing three counts of attempted second-degree murder in connection with the incident. He has entered a plea of not guilty.
Eaton is alleged to have fired at the three students on Saturday night as they strolled in front of his apartment building while conversing in Arabic and English, Burlington Police Chief Jon Murad said. At the time of the attack, two of the men were wearing keffiyehs, traditional scarves worn across the Middle East but linked with Palestinian identity and resistance, Murad added.
Jason Eaton pleaded not guilty to shooting 3 Palestinian students in Vermont.
Burlington Police Department
Authorities are still working to understand the motive behind the attack and are considering whether it was driven by hate. The families of the victims and civil rights organizations have called for the incident to be examined as a hate crime, connecting the shootings to the troubling increase in anti-Muslim and anti-Arab prejudice in the US since the recent conflict between Israel and Hamas began in October.
Chittenden County States Attorney Sarah George, however, cautioned against rushing to conclusions.
During a news conference on Monday, George stated, "The addition of a hate crime enhancement significantly alters the situation. It requires us to definitively prove an additional element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. While this can be evident from statements made by the defendant or items found at the scene or online, we still require substantial and direct evidence to support this additional element."
What is a hate crime?
At the federal level, a hate crime is a criminal act that is motivated by bias, according to the Justice Department.
In this context, hate does not mean anger or rage, but rather "prejudice against individuals or groups with specific characteristics that are protected by law," as defined by the DOJ.
Crimes motivated by bias are frequently violent and can involve "assault, murder, arson, vandalism, or threats to commit such crimes," according to the DOJ. Charges for hate crimes can also apply to individuals who plan or incite someone to commit the crimes, even if the crimes are never carried out.
Tori Morales
The US saw a surge in reported hate crimes, reaching record highs as shown in 4 charts.
In 2022, the FBI reported 13,278 individuals as victims of hate crimes. Among the incidents attributed to a single bias, 59.1% were based on race, ethnicity, or ancestry, 17.3% on religion, and 17.2% on sexual orientation.
4% of hate crimes are based on gender identity, 1.5% on disability, and less than 1% on gender. The FBI gathers and releases data on hate crimes from state and local agencies, but reporting statistics to the bureau is voluntary, and only about 80% of agencies submit data.
What is the difference between a federal and state hate crime?
Accurately tracking hate crimes presents a challenge due to the fact that less than half of the victims report these crimes to the police, as stated in the FBIs National Crime Victimization Survey. Consequently, it is likely that the true annual number of hate crimes in the US is underreported.
Hate crimes can be prosecuted both federally and at the state level.
According to the Justice Department, federal hate crime laws focus on crimes "committed based on the victim's perceived or actual race, color, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability."
In addition to federal hate crime laws, the majority of states and US territories have their own hate crime laws that are upheld by local and state judicial systems. According to Elliot Williams, a CNN legal analyst and former deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department, individuals can face charges for federal and state hate crimes simultaneously. The decision on which entity pursues the charges is influenced by various factors, such as the location of the crime.
{{img_placeholder_2}}
In Hebron, West Bank, Palestinians check the list before casting their votes for the Palestinian Parliamentary elections on Wednesday, January 25, 2006. The election presented a significant decision for Palestinians - to either give the corruption-tainted Fatah Party another chance for peace negotiations with Israel or to choose confrontation and international isolation under the Islamic militant Hamas. (Photo by Lior Mizrahi/Getty Images)
Lior Mizrahi/Getty Images
The keffiyeh explained: How this scarf became a Palestinian national symbol
"The attorney general must provide written certification that the federal hate crime charges will not interfere with a state case, or that it is in the public interest for the federal government to prosecute," said Williams. He also mentioned that prosecutors take certain factors into account when deciding whether to file charges.
Why would it be difficult to charge someone with a hate crime?
"Firstly, what can be easily proven? What evidence do the prosecutors believe they have to secure a victory in court?," Williams stated. "Secondly, where can the most significant sentencing decision be made? Sometimes this may be at the state level, and the federal government may opt to defer to the state before proceeding."
Burlington Police Chief Jon Murad told CNN's Erin Burnett on Monday that the attack was definitely a hateful act. However, he also stated that determining whether it qualifies as a hate crime is a separate issue.
Elie Honig, a CNN senior legal analyst and former New Jersey and federal prosecutor, explained that prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that racial hatred was a motivating factor in order to convict someone of a hate crime, which is a significant legal challenge.
"In hate crimes, proving a specific motive can be more challenging than it seems initially," Honig explained. "The burden of proof lies in establishing that the person both committed the crime and did so with a specific intent."
When evaluating a potential hate crime charge, Honig stated that prosecutors will examine evidence such as negative social media posts regarding race and ethnicity, statements made to acquaintances, and any confession following an arrest.
It may take time to find evidence, but authorities warn that it is necessary. On Monday, Chittenden County state attorney Sarah George stated that there is no doubt the attack was motivated by hate, but authorities still need more evidence to confirm it as a hate crime. The Justice Department is also looking into whether the incident is a hate crime.
When did the Justice Department begin prosecuting hate crimes?
The Justice Department began prosecuting federal hate crime cases after the Civil Rights Act of 1968 was signed into law.
Congress has continually passed laws to extend protection to various groups and to impose harsher penalties for hate crimes. In 1998, the brutal killing of James Byrd, Jr., who was tied to a truck and dragged to his death by White supremacists, along with the attack on Matthew Shepard, a gay man who later died from his injuries, sparked national outrage and prompted Congress to enact a new hate crimes statute.
The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr., Hate Crimes Prevention Act eliminated the requirement that the victim had to be involved in a federally protected activity, such as voting, at the time of the crime. According to the Department of Justice, it is the first law to allow criminal prosecution of crimes driven by a victim's perceived sexual orientation, and it made it "a federal crime to willfully cause bodily injury, or attempt to do so using a dangerous weapon, because of the victim's actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin."
This report includes contributions from CNN's Eric Levenson, Elizabeth Wolfe, Tori Morales Pinales, and Melissa Alonso.
