Hate crimes against LGBT people: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017-2019.

Hate crimes (or bias crimes) are crimes motivated by an offenders’ personal bias against a particular social group. Modern hate crimes legislation developed out of civil rights protections based on race, religion, and national origin; however, the acts that constitute a hate crime have expanded over time, as have the groups protected by hate crimes legislation. Anti-LGBT hate crimes, in which victims are targeted based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. LGBT people are highly overrepresented as victims of hate crimes given the number of LGBT people in the population, and this is especially true of hate crimes against transgender women. Despite the frequency of these crimes, the legal framework for addressing them varies widely across the United States. Many states do not have specific legislation that addresses anti-LGBT hate crimes, while others have legislation that mandates data collection on those crimes but does not enhance civil or criminal penalties for them, and some offer enhanced civil and/or criminal penalties. Even in states that do have legislation to address these types of hate crimes, some states only address hate crimes based on sexual orientation but not those based on gender identity. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act gives the federal government the authority to prosecute those crimes regardless of jurisdiction; however, this power has been used in a limited capacity. Hate crimes are distinct from other crimes that are not motivated by bias. For example, thrill seeking, retaliation, or the desire to harm or punish members of a particular social group often motivates perpetrators of hate crimes; these motivations often result in hate crimes being more violent than other similar crimes. The difference in the motivation of offenders also has significant consequences for victims, both physically and mentally. Victims of hate crimes are more likely to require medical attention than victims of non-bias crimes. Likewise, victims of hate crimes, and especially anti-LGBT hate crimes, often experience negative psychological outcomes, such as PTSD, depression, or anxiety as a result of being victimized for being a member of an already marginalized social group.

This chapter presents hate crime patterns and trends using data from the UCR Hate Crimes Statistics Program and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS). Comparisons are made between these two data collection systems, noting where the NCVS and UCR agree and differ in findings regarding the occurrence of hate crime. We observe overall and recent trends from the UCR data for all hate crime, and for hate crimes separated into bias motivation categories, bias types, and offense types. Using data from the NCVS, we show patterns among hate crime victims and offenders. We exhibit how the strengths of each of these data collection systems can be utilized to better understand the nature and scope of hate crime in the United States.

Violent crime victims often do not report their victimization to the police. While still infrequent, victims may instead (or also) contact non-police (i.e., informal) outlets like counselors, victim service providers, or friends and family. However, it is unclear if the decisions to seek police and/or non-police (“informal”) help differ among hate and non-hate crime victims. Given existing evidence that hate crime victims are more likely to experience greater psychological distress than other victims, it is important to understand how people targeted because of their identities request assistance to mitigate these unique consequences. Using the first wave of the Longitudinal Hate Crime Victimization Survey – Pilot (LHCVS-P), this study examines variation in (1) help-seeking among hate and non-hate crime victims and (2) reasons for reporting or not reporting to the police in tandem with other help-seeking decisions. Implications for improving connections to victim support resources to address unique post-victimization needs are discussed.

Much of the academic, practitioner and voluntary sector interest in victims of hate crime have focused upon the impacts of hate crime and the practical and emotional support needs and services for victims. Our own work has been somewhat divergent from this. We were commissioned to identify how hate crime reporting could be improved in a northern town, and made inclusive across different equality groups. We undertook a small scale study that examined individual decision making by hate crime victims in whether or not to report incidents, and how the available reporting arrangements and associated publicity materials affected these decisions (Wong & Christmann, 2008). Somewhat to our surprise, what appeared to be a critical issue in terms of whether or not hate crime policies were likely to succeed was also a much under researched area. Whilst our own research findings cannot be generalised beyond the study site, it did allow us to test out and consider more thoroughly some of the assumptions implicit in policy developments around hate crime reporting, specifically the policy goal of full reporting. We want to reflect back on these findings and the broader research literature to pose some questions on the adequacy and utility of the current reporting agencies approaches and the general policy direction to hate crime victims. We believe this has merit because the statutory criminal justice agencies and the voluntary sector are grappling with the challenges of adopting hate crime in its broadest sense, and providing a responsive, effective and victim centred service across markedly different vulnerable groups. Pertinent questions can be asked about what the current policies on hate crime can be expected to achieve given the nature of victim decision making on the critical issue of whether to report their victimisation. We will draw out some implications that the legacy of the Lawrence Inquiry has had for strategic thinking, policy making and make some tentative suggestions on how these might be improved. We argue something that may be considered heresy among hate crime victimloogy circles and victim campaigning groups; that the current policy message concerning victim reporting does not reflect reality, and risks being discredited. What is required, some 10 years post Lawrence is more nuanced responses and ones which acknowledge: the distance travelled by criminal justice agencies in the intervening years; that the majority of hate crime is manifested as single incidents of harassment (which may not necessarily constitute crimes); and the unlikelihood of full reporting by the public, which realistically fits where the public are in terms of their expectations. In doing so we do not pretend to have any authoritative answers to these issues, but believe the questions are worth posing to prompt a debate between efficacy of response versus a largely unchallenged view of hate crime victimology.

Hate is a global phenomenon as evidenced by recent increases in hate crimes in both the United States and the United Kingdom; unfortunately, these crimes are also substantially underreported in both nations. Following this, this research presents an examination of racially motivated hate crimes and victim reporting to the police in both nations using data from the National Crime Victimization Survey and the Crime Survey of England and Wales from 2003 to 2015. Results indicate that, overall, victim reporting has been increasing in the United Kingdom and decreasing in the United States. Disaggregating by victim and offender race, however, reveals divergent trends such that anti-black hate crime victim reporting is increasing in the United States and decreasing in the United Kingdom. Policy and research implications are discussed.

People With Mental Illness More Often Crime Victims

ABSTRACTHate crimes remain pressing traumatic events for sexual orientation minority adults. Previous literature documents patterns in which hate crime victimization is associated with elevated risk for poor mental health. The present paper held 2 aims to advance literature. First, we investigated the rates and types of hate crime victimization among sexual orientation minority adults. Second, adopting a mental health amplification risk model, we evaluated whether symptoms of depression, impulsivity, or post-traumatic stress exacerbated the hate crime victimization–suicide risk link. Participants were 521 adult sexual orientation minority-identifying members of the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom (i.e., a bondage and discipline, and sadomasochism-identifying sexuality special interest group). Participants completed demographic and mental health inventories via online administration. Results showed: (1) low rates of total lifetime hate crime victimization and (2) higher rates of interpersonal violence compared to property crime victimization within the sample. Regression results showed: (1) independent positive main effects of all 3 mental health symptom categories with suicide risk; (2) an interaction pattern in which impulsivity was positively associated with suicide risk for non-victims; and (3) an interaction pattern in which post-traumatic stress was positively associated with suicide risk for hate crime victims and non-victims. Results are discussed concerning implications for trauma-informed mental healthcare, mental health amplification models, and hate crime and suicide prevention policies.

Although there is a robust body of research examining various predictors of fear of crime, there are still predictors of one’s perceived safety that have not been thoroughly assessed. Using primary data collected from a sample of college students (N = 662) enrolled at five universities in the United States the main objective of the study was to identify the factors more likely to predict variations in fear of crime, which is viewed here as a bidimensional concept that includes the affective side of fear (worries about becoming a victim) and the cognitive dimension of fear (i.e., personal judgment of safety). The study is informed by theoretical explanations of fear of crime (Ferraro, 1995; see Hale, 1996) and by Gerbner’s (1969) cultivation theory. In addition to frequently used predictors of fear of crime, such as social vulnerability, crime victimization experience, and public attitudes toward the police, this dissertation explores the impact of traditional and social media consumption on one’s perceived risk of victimization and fear of crime. The study also assessed the effect of membership in social media police scanner groups on variations in perceived safety. Those who are members of a social media police scanner groups can view and read about various types of violent and property crimes before the public is informed. Yet, to the author’s knowledge, the potential effect of police scanner membership/subscription on fear of crime has not been examined in the literature and research assessing the impact of social media on perceived risk of victimization is limited. By examining the effect of novel predictors of fear of crime (e.g., social media consumption; police scanner usage), the dissertation expanded fear of crime research. The data were analyzed using a simple mediation analysis that used perceived risk of victimization as a mediator. Results show that those who worry more about becoming victims of violent crime also tend to feel unsafe in their neighborhoods. As hypothesized, victims of crime, females, younger respondents, and students belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups tend to worry significantly more about becoming victims of violent crime and report higher levels of perceived unsafety. Conversely, those with positive perceptions of the police are less likely to fear victimization. While traditional media consumption does not appear to influence variations in perceived risk of victimization and/or perceived safety, social media consumption as well as membership in social media police scanner groups indirectly increase one’s fear of crime.

Objective-To review empirical studies, published since 1990, of the prevalence and incidence of violent perpetration and violent victimization among persons with serious mental illness and to compare their relative importance as a public health concern.Methods-We searched three computerized bibliographic databases, MEDLINE, PSYCH INFO, and Web of Science, using the following keywords: (1) Violent perpetration: SMI, mental illness, mental disorder, psychiatric disorder, psychopathology, violence, violent behavior, and violent act(s); and (2) Violent victimization: SMI, mental illness,

The primary purpose of the current study was to understand immigrant hate crime victimization in the U.S. Specifically, the authors analyzed the most recent data from the National Crime Victimization Survey to explore the factors that influence hate crime experiences and reporting by immigrant victims. Results from the binary logistic regression analyses revealed significant relationships between immigration status, citizenship status, number of prior incidents experienced as well as certain demographic characteristics and being the victim of a hate crime. Overall, being an immigrant or non-citizen, was associated with an increase in odds of being the victim of a hate crime. In terms of victims’ reporting of hate crime, immigration status had no impact, but the number of incidents experienced, being married and being less educated significantly increased reporting among victims. Numerous recommendations are provided, however, the most important step forward is the creation of a legal status category within the UCR’s Hate Crime data collection coupled with several legal protections for victims.

In October 1998, Matthew Shepard, a young gay student at the University of Wyoming, was brutally murdered. Upon hearing the news, many Americans described him as a victim of a hate crime. Others, however, proclaimed Shepard a gay martyr. This declaration was not simply political rhetoric. Despite long-standing conservative religious opposition to homosexuality, they believed that Shepard had been granted salvation and a place among the saints in heaven. This article addresses the questions, “How and why was Matthew Shepard declared a popular martyr?” More specifically, how does this popular martyrdom relate to contemporary debates surrounding civil rights for gays and lesbians in America? As part of a series of social movements that followed the Second World War, sexual minorities have struggled to claim legitimate space in American society, leaving dramatic social changes in their wake. Noting this, while contrasting the news media’s construction of Shepard with the simultaneous popular discussion on the Internet, this article argues that a long tradition of popular martyr-making came together with social and political circumstances at a certain historical moment to transform the obscure victim of a hate crime into a popular martyr residing in heaven. That is, although the news media constructed Shepard as simply the affable young victim of a fatal hate crime, these contingencies allowed many Americans to reconstruct Shepard as a popular martyr. They expressed this belief in political, cultural, and social action. In time, Shepard's popular martyrdom helped further a growing acceptance of gays and lesbians into America's mainstream.

This research explored the content of hate crime prototypes in a North American context, with particular attention to how such prototypes might influence blame attributions. In Study 1a, participants were recruited from a blended sample of universities (n = 110) and community members (n = 102) and asked to report their thoughts about typical hate crime offenses, victims, and offenders. These open-ended responses were coded, and common themes were identified. In Study 1b, a new group of participants (n = 290) were presented with these themes and asked to rate each for their characteristics of hate crimes. Studies 1a and 1b confirmed the presence of a clear prototype of hate crimes, such that (a) perpetrators were believed to be lower status White men with clear expressions of bias, (b) hate crime offenses were believed to be acts of interpersonal violence accompanied by slurs or verbal abuse, and (c) hate crime victims were thought to be members of a marginalized group who remain passive during the offense. Study 2 explored the consequences of victim prototypes on assessments of victim blame. Participants (n = 296) were recruited from York University and presented with a case vignette that varied the prototypicality of a victim of hate, depicting him as either Black or White and either passive, verbally responsive, or physically confrontational in the context of an assault. Participants showed greatest sympathy for the Black victim who passively ignored verbal harassment but increasingly assigned blame when the Black victim spoke or reacted physically. When the victim was White, participants showed little variation in their assessment of blame as a function of the victim's behavior. These results suggest that Black victims are subjected to greater behavioral scrutiny than White victims and that sympathy for victims of hate may be contingent on their passivity in the face of harassment.

Violent crime has become one of the most significant concerns among people today (Kilpatrick, Seymour, & Boyle, 1991), and rates of violent crime have risen substantially in America as well as in other countries around the world (Reiss & Roth, 1993; Rosenberg & Fenley, 1991). Many Americans have been victims of violent crime sometime during their lives, and many other Americans, who have not yet been victimized, fear becoming violent crime victims in the future (Kilpatrick et al., 1991). This fear of crime among Americans is not unfounded. In 1990, more than 23,000 people in the United States were homicide victims (Reiss & Roth, 1993), and over 6 million violent crimes were disclosed to interviewers from the National Crime Victimization Survey (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1990). As a consequence, violent crime and fear of violent crime have become important antecedents of fear and anxiety in America. Moreover, violent crime is a predominant contributing factor to the development of mental health problems, most commonly, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (Breslau, Davis, Andreski, & Peterson, 1991; Kilpatrick et al., 1989; Resnick, Kilpatrick, Dansky, Saunders, & Best, 1993).

PurposeThird party reporting (TPR) services provide a route for victims of hate crime to report their experiences to an organisation other than the police. There is repeated evidence of under-reporting of hate crimes within the UK, and many victims of hate crime are unaware of the existence of TPR mechanisms. Little research attention has been given to understanding of the merits of TPR, beyond evaluating how often they are used. This study aims to explore the delivery of TPR from an advisor perspective.Design/methodology/approachThe research evaluated a small TPR centre based within a charitable organisation. The research, part of an undergraduate study, analysed the experiences of volunteer advisors working on the service through a semi-structured questionnaire.FindingsResults were mixed. Findings indicated the service contributed to an enhanced awareness of hate crimes in the community; however, greater promotion of the TPR centre was advocated. The results also indicated a significant lack of understanding and knowledge by trained volunteer advisors about hate crimes.Social implicationsA lack of informed awareness of what hate crimes are could result in victims of hate crime not being recognised or supported as such.Originality/valueMost hate crime research is victim centred, and this study is innovative in looking at those receiving hate crime reports. There is limited evidence on TPR service provision in the UK, particularly on service delivery staff, and this research contributes to the gap in knowledge.

This study investigates violent hate crime victimization among adolescents in Iceland, focusing on the role of immigrant background and classroom diversity. Drawing on data from the International Self-Report Delinquency Study (ISRD4), I analyzed responses from more than 3,000 randomly selected students aged 13 to 17 in the capital area using multilevel logistic regression. I examined (a) whether immigrant youth are at greater risk of experiencing hate crime victimization than native peers and (b) whether classroom composition moderates this relationship. Hate crime victimization is measured as exposure to threats or physical violence based on race, ethnicity, religion, gender identity, sexual orientation, or similar characteristics. Results show that first- and second-generation immigrant youth report significantly higher rates of hate crime victimization than their native peers, with the risk especially elevated for first-generation youth. While classroom diversity has no overall effect, cross-level interactions reveal that more diverse classrooms reduce victimization among first-generation immigrants but increase it among second-generation youth. These findings offer nuanced support for both minority threat theory and intergroup contact theory. The study contributes to the limited quantitative literature on hate crime in Iceland and underscores the importance of considering classroom context when examining the social mechanisms shaping adolescent victimization.