Brutal Attack on Sikh Teen
by Guest Contributor Angry Asian Man, originally published at Angry Asian Man
Last weekend in Queens, a young Sikh man was attacked and beaten so badly he may lose his left eye: Brutal Attack Has NYC Sikh Community In Uproar.
18-year-old Jasmir Singh was walking on the street early Sunday morning when he was approached by three men who demanded his money. Then they began to taunt him because of his turban, touching his hair and threatening to cut it. When he tried to run away, they beat him.
This appears to be hate crime, plain and simple. They targeted and taunted Singh because of his turban and beard — an important part of his Sikh faith. But the police and the Queens district attorney have simply classified it as a robbery and an assault. What’s up with that?
But here’s the part that kills me. That same night, police arrested two of the three suspects, described as “16-year-old Asian Pacific male and a 21-year-old Latino.” Ack. You freaking hateful idiots. That’s racist!
You’d think as people of color, as racial minorities, these two idiots would know what it’s like to be targeted and violated like this. Maybe they do. But I guess we know that ignorance and hate extends across all color. Police are still searching for the third suspect.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
MeowKun wrote:
oh no that sounds totally unpleasant. hope he will recover soon >.<
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 10:21 am ¶
Jess wrote:
I’d reserve judgment on whether it’s a hate crime until I see something that goes to the perps’ motivations a little more.
Not that other non-whites can’t be racist (though there are a lot of sticky questions one can get into here) but what if they targeted Singh because he was, I dunno, small and skinny (I haven’t any idea what he looks like, just throwing that out there) and alone, and only afterward decided to taunt him about the turban and his hair?
That is, is it a hate crime if you say “I am gonna rob that guy” and only after decide “Let’s beat him up and find something to make it feel worse.” as opposed to “I’m gonna go after those ragheads”
I thought about it because I have been beat on as a kid and had shit stolen, and calling me names (slurs) was cooked up in process, as it were, rather than as the motivation for the attack.
None of this is to excuse it or anything, but I have to say I am one of those in favor of defining hate crimes rather narrowly as a matter of general principle. To me that helps keep things focused. But I recognize that isn’t the only approach.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 10:31 am ¶
Political Pete wrote:
Hey,
I am no defender of NYPD, but actually . . . in most jurisdictions a hate crime is actually a lesser chage than actual assault and battery. This was the problem with the West Virginia case (the public decried the woman was a victim of a hate crime, but the prosecutor was actually going for the higher charge).
NOW that being said, I don’t see why they couldn’t charge them on a separate count for the hate crime. Since there are different elements, seems that it would pass the blockburger test (and no violating double jeopardy).
disclaimer: I am not advocate of more punishment though.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 10:50 am ¶
Sobia wrote:
This is disturbing. Officially a hate crime or not, they did taunt him based on his religion. They threatened to violate him religiously. That’s hate in my books.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 11:54 am ¶
Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:
Why are people shocked that POC can be racist and have targeted other POC???
Me and my hijabi Muslim friends have been targets of racist attacks by some black folks in high school and college.
There is racism and ignorance everywhere.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 12:23 pm ¶
Rchoudh wrote:
Oh man this happened right around where my parents live…it’s terrible that this happened. Personally it sounds like a hate crime/robbery to me since they continued harassing him even after he showed them he had no money for them to steal. I’ll admit I was surprised to find it was POC’s harassing him.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 12:30 pm ¶
Black Dragon wrote:
Just sounds like a robbery to me, ya they taunted him, they needed a reaction. It’s unfortunate what happened but this hardly seems like a hate crime. Overreact much?
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 12:40 pm ¶
Yolanda C. wrote:
From the details, it looks like these guys targeted Singh because of his religion, and let’s face it—people of color can be as bigoted about religion as white folks. Of course, the specter of racism can’t be ignored either, since too many ignorant fools conflate Sikhism and all Eastern religions with “terrorism.”
Should we expect POC to automatically “get it” because they are targets of oppression? I sure don’t think so. I mean, think about all the homophobes and misogynists of color that we know. Do we really think that folks like these guys are beyond perpetrating ethnoreligious bigotry as well?
By the way, Black Dragon, targeting a person because of their (perceived) religion is indeed a hate crime. Whether a particular state recognizes it as hate is another story altogether.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 1:38 pm ¶
gatamala wrote:
Black Dragon, why the comment about CUTTING the hair then?
Why not, “gimme your money muthafucka” or “hand it over” followed by a strong arm tactic?
Considering that Sikhs have been killed and are specifically targeted for the visible markers of their faith, this is NOT an overreaction. This attack went to idenity.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 2:05 pm ¶
Pololly wrote:
I thought to be a hate crime you had to be targeted because of race or religion. This sounds like they didn’t target him so much as sprinkle some insults in with assault and battery.
I may be wrong however.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 3:08 pm ¶
G.K. wrote:
I read the link, and from what the article reported, that was most def a hate crime. The teen showed them that he didn’t have any money or anything else they could take from him, so what the hell was the point of them beating him up, then? It went beyond just a simple robberly attempt when his assailants started using his appearance as a justification for assaulting him,since they couldn’t rob him. I mean, they blinded him in one eye—that sounds NOTHING like a normal robbery. At least he has the satisfaction of knowing that at least 2 of them got caught,thank goodness.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 5:59 pm ¶
watson wrote:
I’m not at all surprised that minorities can be perpetrators of a hate crime against another minority. It’s still tragic, though.
As for the question on whether or not it was really a hate crime, the linked article says:
“‘They touched my hair and my beard and questioned why I had it so long, said that they were gonna cut it,’ Singh said…..When he tried running to a nearby 24-hour grocery store, they tackled him, dragged him from the store and cut his eye with a bottle.”
Sounds like a fucking hate crime to me.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 8:48 pm ¶
Medusa wrote:
God DAMN it annoys me when people fall over themselves trying to explain how something that is obviously a hate crime is not a hate crime. I don’t give a shit what their motivation was for attacking him (i.e, “That is, is it a hate crime if you say “I am gonna rob that guy” and only after decide “Let’s beat him up and find something to make it feel worse.” as opposed to “I’m gonna go after those ragheads” “).
The moment the started racial and religious name calling, it became a hate crime.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 11:18 pm ¶
Mel wrote:
“Should we expect POC to automatically “get it” because they are targets of oppression? I sure don’t think so.” -Yolanda
This question really stuck out to me as well while reading the piece. Since I’m assuming the writer identifies as Asian and I don’t feel like this is a space for white folks (e.g. me) to critique the comments of people of color, I am not directing this at the writer. But I would like to suggest that we white folks, anyway, think about why it is that POC harm other POC or why certain people who have been oppressed go ahead and oppress other people.
What is it about the systems that perpetuate this kind of violence among groups that are oppressed by the dominant culture in the US (white, male, Christian, hetero, etc.)?
Groups of people have historically been pitted against one another to distract from the fact that the people in power are staying in power. You have black on black violence in poor urban areas; but let’s ask how it happened in the first place that many black folks have been relegated to these communities with few options for movement.
I particularly like this website because the focus is on systemic racism (like what the media perpetuates), NOT on scrutinizing the individual actions of people of color.
Posted 27 Jan 2009 at 11:53 pm ¶
jaye wrote:
@ Mel:
“Groups of people have historically been pitted against one another to distract from the fact that the people in power are staying in power.”
But don’t forget that happens in every society, community, in HOUSEHOLDS for god’s sake…yes, the biggest power structure is run by white, straight males…but the way they hold power is the way every other gov’t/insitution on earth does it, regardless of race, they’re not doing anything new or special, they’re just the ones that beat out all the other contestants. The other guys are doing it on a smaller, national or regional scale, but they’re all keeping power in the exact same way. Don’t forget…the British took over Ireland and Scotland and decided they were “less than” until they realized they could dictate worth by skin color…but it’s completely arbitrary. If everyone were white, there would still be colonizers and the colonized…skin color is just an easy excuse. And so to believe that POC are more virtuous or aware simply because of their race…is the same as believing that some people are more or less worthy based on skin color.
Not that I haven’t been surprised myself by the prejudiced comments of POC about other POC…but why do we expect POC to be held to a higher standard than white people? In their own countries, they’re not POC, they’re just people, and they have their own histories of racism, bigotry and xenophobia. It’s as though we expect white people to have some kind of monopoly on racism and ignorance…but the truth is, white people just won the colonization game. Spanish were in there, so were Japanese, Chinese, Iranians…we could all be speaking Japanese right now, or Spanish…POC come from cultures just as racist and exclusive as white-American culture, and yet we expect POC to somehow be different because they have been victims of racism. In their original countries, they likely might have been the perpetrators. White culture isn’t anymore racist than a lot of POC-cultures, they just happened to be the ones to dominate this world and have the greatest effect on other people. And let’s not forget…many white people are way more conscious and aware of racist ideology than a lot of POC…and so to turn this into a POC vs. white person thing…I get why we do that, I do it too, it’s almost natural in the society we live in. But I think it’s kind of short-sighted, and it turns white people into some kind of especially racist monsters that are separate from all of us good, decent, aware POC…and that’s not the way it is, as convenient and at times necessary it is to label it that way sometimes.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 3:51 am ¶
JB wrote:
This is nothing new, I’ve been called names by arabs, indians and asians at different times (in different countries) and I know some of the same people complain about mistreatment by other ethnic groups. It is a case of lackwit individuals. I don’t let it alter my interactions with other people who happen to share the same ethnicity as the idiots.
Some people might want to make it sound general but you can’t let the people with the lowest tact and intelligence make your choices for you.
Overall
A) It is wrong
B) It doesn’t justify or excuse systemic racism and colonialism like the oafs at stormfront would like to say. (example: the africans practiced slavery!)
C) People shouldn’t let the lowest common denominator in their ethnic group determine their views of other ethnic groups or individuals.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 6:24 am ¶
Jess wrote:
Medusa–
Let me turn it around then. When would it NOT be a hate crime?
I mean, name calling almost by definition will involve something the person getting insulted can’t help. If you end up defining it too broadly then everything becomes a hate crime, robbing the whole designation of its meaning.
I saw the same link other people did. I have seen nothing from the flks who did this that clears it up for me as to whether they were specifically targeting Sikhs or just being insulting sociopathic assholes.
Let’s look at another example: there was a guy in Boston who went on a rape/murder spree and talked about targeting Jews. Why am I not sure if it’s a hate crime? Because I don’t know if the guy was a schizophrenic and hearing voices or aliens or something. I don’t excuse what he did, but I do think there’s a difference if it turns out he is a nutjob.
I don’t believe in defining hate crimes relatively narrowly because I want to excuse it. I define them relatively narrowly — based on the facts at my disposal — precisely because I think it is so damned serious.
If you are going to have a crime defined according to motivation, then you have to know the motivation. We don’t know that yet, not well.
I mean, we could get a posse together and lynch the youths in question if you want. Why have a trial or anything? It was obviously a hate crime.
I am NOT saying that I blame the Sikh kid or want to downplay his feelings. Nor am I saying that this attack matters any less than any other.
But having all the facts to me is important. Yeah., I’d feel better if the kids who used to beat on me and call me kike were charged with hate crimes and hung up. But that wouldn’t be right because it would not fit the facts of the case. I was targeted because I was smaller and weaker. That isn’t an identity based hate crime (except in a very broad sense).
What makes you feel good and what is just are not the same thing.
I don’t jump on the “hang ‘em high” bandwagon precisely because the same reactions have been used to justify crime and violence against PoCs. So forgive me if the situation isn’t “obvious” to me. Emotions are our worst enemies in these cases.
Until someone talks to the suspects or establishes a pattern, (like, did they do the same thing to any other Sikhs? If so, that is a clear indicator) it’s a serious, nasty assault. They should go to jail for that. But that’s all we know for certain right now.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 10:00 am ¶
Persia wrote:
Not that I haven’t been surprised myself by the prejudiced comments of POC about other POC…but why do we expect POC to be held to a higher standard than white people? In their own countries, they’re not POC, they’re just people, and they have their own histories of racism, bigotry and xenophobia.
I agree with the sentiment, but want to point out that many of the POC we talk about, especially in the US, are in their own countries. All three of those kids are Americans, and it’s depressing to see the way tribalism and ‘hierarchy’ plays out.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 10:49 am ¶
Cynthia wrote:
Persia, just because the kids are “Americans” doesn’t mean that they’re not “in their own countries” in terms of how they were raised. Think about the number of American born kids who start kindergarten without knowing ANY English. In many communities, it’s possible to get most essential services (including banking, doctors, etc) without ever learning English.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 11:40 am ¶
Yolanda C. wrote:
Mel—I appreciate your comment. And for the record, I’m African American.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 2:17 pm ¶
Yolanda C. wrote:
Wait Mel, were you talking about me or AAM? Just nix that last comment.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 2:18 pm ¶
Sobia wrote:
I know POC on POC hate does exist, but I think one of the reasons people are surprised by it in a multicultural context is because we have this assumption, which is obviously wrong, that if someone knows and understands what it feels like to be the victim of hate, one would not victimize another with hate. So if as a South Asian I know what it feels like to be discriminated against, then I would not want to make another POC or minority feel that way.
But of course logically we all know that people who are oppressed can indeed oppress others. So sad.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 3:27 pm ¶
jvansteppes wrote:
This is why I don’t trust hate crime stats any more than federal sexual assault stats that come from police. Spewing racist hate makes it a hate crime to me, even if there’s a robbery too.
It reminds me of my home town; when straight people jump you as you’re leaving a gay bar and its called a ‘bar fight’ by the cops…
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 4:10 pm ¶
jaye wrote:
@ Persia…yeah, I was trying to figure out a way to say it properly. These kids are Americans, but they are also connected to other countries. A lot of their parents aren’t born here, and they instill in their kids their own prejudices and bigotry…just like white-American parents do to their own kids. But it is depressing to see people who we assume should know better, treating other people that way.
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 8:39 pm ¶
E wrote:
This is horrible… I’m a Latina and grew up in Queens and even before I read the ethnicity of these two fools I knew that they (or at least one of them) was going to be Latino. Going to school in Queens I’ve seen these kind of racial tensions between POCs. Latinos teasing sikhs, african americans teasing Latinos, Latinos from the DR teasing Latinos from Mexico and a lot of times this led to fights and violence.
Like Junot Diaz wrote “No one, alas, more oppressive than the oppressed”
Well… here is a link of another recent POC to POC hate crime:
In English:
http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=4bca6ba2431cdf186f0b29b7035b765a&from=rss
In Spanish:
http://www.impre.com/eldiariony/noticias/principal/2009/1/27/me-golpearon-para-matarme-105674-2.html
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 9:22 pm ¶
E wrote:
The thread in the link below about one of the Staten Island “election night” Staten Island attackers is pretty interesting. It turns out one of the attackers who went out looking for african americans to beat up is an afro-latino…
http://ta-nehisicoates.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/that_town_needs_a_better_class_of_bigot.php
Posted 28 Jan 2009 at 9:42 pm ¶
Orville wrote:
I don’t understand why Angry Asian man is so surprised that people of colour can also be racist? Newsflash racism exists in all communities. I notice on this blog and other websites that discusss race there is this binary that is white people VS people of colour.
Posted 29 Jan 2009 at 12:27 am ¶
erica wrote:
A digression here but why does the obvious “That’s racist” need to be printed… it’s redundant.
Mod Note – That’s Angry Asian Man’s thing. Check his site. He states it often because there are still a lot of people who need it pointed out. – LDP
Posted 29 Jan 2009 at 1:56 am ¶
latinamericanprincesa wrote:
Another sad story of a person of color brutally attacked by other POCs: http://ourlatinamerica.blogspot.com/2009/01/colombian-assaulted-in-new-jersey.html
I think sometimes too much focus on ethnicity and race takes away from issues that are more related to lack of education, opportunity and awareness. Instead of learning to respect their fellow human, they learn hate. And hate mixed with a lack of respect for the law (robbery) is a terrible combination.
Posted 30 Jan 2009 at 6:06 pm ¶
james wrote:
My grand parents were in world war 1, and they have told me about how brave and intelligent sikhs in the british army were. My grand father totally trusts sikhs. After researching sikh history I am somewhat shocked to find that sikh history is well documented by the british as the religion is only 300 years old.
sikhs are supposed to be spritual warriors who believe that all humans are equal regardless of race regilion and gender.
It is sad that sikhs today have lost their warrior sprit, I would have expected this young sikh lad to have caught the racists and brought them to justice.
I the so called “civilised and educated” west, his attackers probally thoufght he was muslim. many sikhs have been attacked since 9-11, even though they wear the british sikh turban.
Posted 11 Jul 2009 at 7:40 am ¶