“The hate crimes bill that’s called the Matthew Shepard Bill is named after a, a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed. But we know, uh, that young man was killed in the, uh, commitment [sic] of a robbery. It wasn’t because he was gay, this — the bill was named for him, the hate crimes bill was named for him, but it’s, it’s really a hoax that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills.”
* * *
U.S. Representative Virginia Foxx of North Carolina made the preceding statement on the floor of the United States House of Representatives during the debate over the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, which passed despite her vote against its passage on Wednesday afternoon.
I was living in Youngstown, Ohio, at the time of Matthew’s murder — not exactly the height of enlightenment about gay and lesbian folks. I was born within a year of him, and I remember the fear I felt as the story of his torture unfolded across the media. Living in the Midwest as an openly gay man, I remember the horror I felt during the time he was in the Fort Collins hospital, clinging to life, and the loss I felt when I awoke on October 12, 1998, to the news that he had died.
I remember driving with a friend to the vigil held on the steps of the Capitol in Washington, D.C., calling on Congress to take action to pass what was then called the Hate Crimes Prevention Act. I remember one of Matthew’s close friends speaking on those steps, and my resulting tears.
I remember the stories about Judy and Dennis Shepard and the extraordinary mercy they had shown during the trial of Aaron McKinney, following the guilty plea of Russell Henderson, for their son’s murder. I remember how proud I was of the mission of education and love on which Judy Shepard embarked following that trial. I remember how sad yet empowered I was the first time I met the Shepards, seeing how ever-present their loss was and yet how equally present was their incredible courage.
I remember watching during the Bush Administration as both the House and the Senate expressed in votes that they supported the hate crimes legislation and how the conference committee removed the bill, which had been inserted in one chamber as an amendment to another bill. I remember also how President Bush responded to the possibility that Congress might seek to pass it again by stopping action in its tracks by threatening a veto.
I remember all of that history. To see Rep. Foxx on Wednesday show so callously that she has no such memory, yet felt it appropriate to comment with no knowledge about the situation, was appalling — not just from a political perspective but, more importantly, from a personal perspective. To know that Judy Shepard was sitting in the House gallery at that time makes the statement all the more disgusting.
Here is a report from Salon, which covered the murder and trial extensively, that could help inform Rep. Foxx of the truth about Matthew Shepard’s murder:
According to the detectives, Henderson’s testimony also would have resolved the most contested issue of the case: that he and McKinney initially approached Shepard and posed as gays to lure him out of the Fireside Lounge to rob him.
Henderson provided a detailed account of that plan. The killers identified Shepard as a lonely homosexual, an easy mark, and retreated to the bathroom to hatch their plot. Henderson made the first advance by whispering a come-on in Shepard’s ear, and “McKinney tried to feminize his voice to continue the lure,” DeBree said.
Even the initial robbery plan was planned entirely because he was gay. And that is not even to consider the eventual way in which the robbers-turned-killers brutalized Matthew, beat in his skull, tied him to a fence and left him to die.
These stories about Matthew Shepard, Rep. Foxx, are no hoax. They are a very real part of the history of our country. And bias-motivated crimes that continue to this day are the reason why this legislation passed the House, despite your misguided efforts, on Wednesday.
Please contact Rep. Foxx at 202-225-2071, explain to her office that her statement was both incorrect and extraordinarily hurtful to those who lived through Matthew’s death, and ask her to apologize for her statement, captured below by Media Matters for America.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWm2zGTZBM0]
Popularity: 1% [?]
Chris Geidner is the award-winning senior political editor at D.C.'s Metro Weekly and has written for The Atlantic Online, The American Prospect, Advocate.com, Salon and other publications, as well as at his blog, Law Dork. In 2011, he received the Excellence in News Writing Award from the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association for his coverage of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal. Prior to moving to D.C. in 2009, he served as an attorney on the senior staff at the Ohio Attorney General's Office and had earlier worked for a leading Columbus law firm. An extended biography can be found
I find the “X would make a good target” crimes less clear instances of hate crimes than the “I want to hurt this person because he is X” crimes. For example, my college had a rash of muggings of white students by African American teenagers, and when they were caught the teens said they had deliberately targeted white people because white people have more money and nicer stuff. Is that a hate crime, or merely stereotyping incidental to a crime? But it’s more clearly a hate crime when the crime involves violence, especially a brutal disregard for life: the targeting of a particular group for such crimes is indicative of a sense that their lives are worth less.