Hate crimes (was Re: muggle baiting vs. muggle torture)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 155761

> Magpie:
> But how can they legislate based on motivation?  Willy Widdershins
could
> have said he didn't prank the Muggle because he was a Muggle, but
because he
> was annoyed by him, or disliked his hair.  It seems like Muggle-
baiting must
> be wrong by Wizard standards either because they actually think
it's wrong
> to Prank Muggles (like the way they presumably disagree with the
Black who
> likes to hunt Muggles) or because it causes danger to Wizards.
>

Easy, happens all the time.  All hate crime legislation is based on
motivation, meaning that an assault, for example, is a hate crime if
you can prove that it was carried out as a result of a pattern of
racial/ethnic/homophobic hatred as opposed to a more standard desire
for personal revenge or robbery.

For that matter, conspiracy laws are also based on intent and
motivation.  That is, they are based on what you intended and were
motivated to do, and the basis of your plans.

Now, both conspiracy and hate crimes are notoriously hard to
prosecute, because motivation and intent are very difficult to
prove.  But they are prosecuted every day, and successfully, and the
laws under which those prosecutions take place are of long standing.

I'm afraid that laws based on motivation are a very old story, going
all the way back to the medieval and ancient worlds.  The WW has
plentiful historical precedent if it invokes such distinctions.


Lupinlore