III. CRITERIA OF HATE CRIME
A. Bias Motivation
The object of the data collection is to indicate whether the offender was motivated to
commit the offense because of his/her bias against a racial, religious, disability, sexual-orientation,
or ethnic/national origin group. Because of the difficulty of ascertaining the offender’s
subjective motivation, bias is to be reported only if investigation reveals sufficient objective facts
to lead a reasonable and prudent person to conclude that the offender’s actions were motivated,
in whole or in part, by bias. The specific types of bias to be reported follow:
Racial Bias: Disability Bias:
Anti-White Anti-Physical Disability
Anti-Black Anti-Mental Disability
Anti-American Indian/Alaskan Native
Anti-Asian/Pacific Islander Sexual-Orientation Bias:
Anti-Multi-Racial Group Anti-Male Homosexual (Gay)
Anti-Female Homosexual (Lesbian)
Religious Bias: Anti-Homosexual (Gay and
Lesbian)
Anti-Jewish Anti-Heterosexual
Anti-Catholic Anti-Bisexual
Anti-Protestant
Anti-Islamic (Moslem) Ethnicity/National Origin Bias:
Anti-Other Religion (Buddhism, Anti-Hispanic
Hinduism, Shintoism, etc.) Anti-Other Ethnicity/National Origin
Anti-Multi-Religious Group
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism
B. Objective Evidence that the Crime was Motivated by Bias
An important distinction must be made when reporting a hate crime. The mere fact that
the offender is biased against the victim’s race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, and/or
ethnicity/national origin does not mean that a hate crime was involved. Rather, the offender’s
criminal act must have been motivated, in whole or in part, by his/her bias.
Because motivation is subjective, it is difficult to know with certainty whether a crime
was the result of the offender’s bias. Therefore, before an incident can be reported as a hate
crime, sufficient objective facts must be present to lead a reasonable and prudent person to
conclude that the offender’s actions were motivated, in whole or in part, by bias. While no
single fact may be conclusive, facts such as the following, particularly when combined, are
supportive of a finding of bias:
5
1. The offender and the victim were of different race, religion, disability, sexual
orientation, and/or ethnicity/national origin. For example, the victim was black and the offender
was white.
2. Bias-related oral comments, written statements, or gestures were made by the
offender which indicate his/her bias. For example, the offender shouted a racial epithet at the
victim.
3. Bias-related drawings, markings, symbols, or graffiti were left at the crime
scene. For example, a swastika was painted on the door of a synagogue.
4. Certain objects, items, or things which indicate bias were used. For example,
the offenders wore white sheets with hoods covering their faces or a burning cross was left in
front of the victim’s residence.
5. The victim is a member of a racial, religious, disability, sexual-orientation, or
ethnic/national origin group which is overwhelmingly outnumbered by other residents in the
neighborhood where the victim lives and the incident took place. This factor loses significance
with the passage of time; i.e., it is most significant when the victim first moved into the neighborhood
and becomes less and less significant as time passes without incident.
6. The victim was visiting a neighborhood where previous hate crimes were
committed against other members of his/her racial, religious, disability, sexual-orientation, or
ethnic/national origin group and where tensions remained high against his/her group.
7. Several incidents occurred in the same locality, at or about the same time, and
the victims were all of the same race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national
origin.
8. A substantial portion of the community where the crime occurred perceived
that the incident was motivated by bias.
9. The victim was engaged in activities promoting his/her race, religion, disability,
sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin. For example, the victim was a member of
the NAACP or participated in gay rights demonstrations.
10. The incident coincided with a holiday or a date of particular significance
relating to a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin, e.g., Martin
Luther King Day, Rosh Hashanah.
11. The offender was previously involved in a similar hate crime or is a hategroup
member.
12. There were indications that a hate group was involved. For example, a hate
group claimed responsibility for the crime or was active in the neighborhood.
13. A historically established animosity existed between the victim’s and the
offender’s groups.
14. The victim, although not a member of the targeted racial, religious, disability,
sexual-orientation, or ethnic/national origin group, was a member of an advocacy group supporting
the precepts of the victim group.
C. Cautions
1. Need for Case-by-Case Assessment of the Facts — The aforementioned
factors are not all-inclusive of the types of objective facts which evidence bias motivation.
Therefore, reporting agencies must examine each case for facts which clearly provide evidence
that the offender’s bias motivated him/her to commit the crime.
2. Misleading Facts — Agencies must be alert to misleading facts. For example,
the offender used an epithet to refer to the victim’s race, but the offender and victim were of the
same race.
3. Feigned Facts — Agencies must be alert to evidence left by the offenders
which is meant to give the false impression that the incident was motivated by bias. For example,
students of a religious school vandalize their own school, leaving anti-religious statements
and symbols on its walls in the hope that they will be excused from attending class.
4. Offender’s Mistaken Perception — Even if the offender was mistaken in his/
her belief that the victim was a member of a racial, religious, disability, sexual-orientation, or
ethnic/national origin group, the offense is still a hate crime as long as the offender was motivated
by bias against that group. For example, a middle-aged, non-gay man walking by a bar
frequented by gays was attacked by six teenagers who mistakenly believed the victim had left the
bar and was gay. Although the offenders were wrong on both counts, the offense is a hate crime
because it was motivated by the offenders’ anti-gay bias.
5. Changes in Findings of Bias — If, after an initial incident report was submitted,
a contrary finding regarding bias occurs, the national file must be updated with the new
finding. For example, if an initial finding of no bias was later changed to racial bias or a finding
of racial bias was later changed to religious bias, the change should be reported to the FBI’s
UCR Program.
ed.
.
