From sfgate.com: A 70-year-old man was stoned to death with a rock stuffed in a sock by a younger friend who alleged the victim made unwanted sexual advances, authorities said.
According to the criminal complaint, John Thomas, 28, of Upper Darby, a Philadelphia suburb, told police he killed Murray Seidman of nearby Lansdowne because the Bible refers to stoning homosexuals.
"I stoned Murray with a rock in a sock," Thomas told police, according to the criminal complaint. Thomas was arrested and charged with murder Friday.
According to the complaint, "John Thomas stated that he read in the Old Testament that homosexuals should be stoned in certain situations. The answer John Thomas received from his prayers was to put an end to the victim's life. John Thomas stated that he struck the victim approximately 10 times in the head. After the final blow, John Thomas made sure the victim was dead."
"He is a deeply religious man. Or so he says," said Lansdowne Police Chief Dan Kortan.
Delaware County Medical Examiner Fredric Hellman ruled that Seidman had been dead for five to 10 days before Thomas started banging on doors in the hallway of Seidman's apartment building on Jan. 12.
Police said Thomas, who is the executor and sole beneficiary of Seidman's will, returned to the apartment and pretended that he had just discovered Seidman's body.
Thomas had no comment as he was led out of the Delaware County Courthouse on Friday. Seidman was a longtime worker in the laundry department at Mercy Fitzgerald Hospital, where he was "very popular," Kortan said.
"As far as we are concerned, he was a model citizen," Kortan said.
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/03/18/state/n094345D97.DTL
Showing posts with label gay man killed. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay man killed. Show all posts
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Constitution does not ban sex bias, Scalia says
From sfgate.com: "The U.S. Constitution does not outlaw sex discrimination or discrimination based on sexual orientation, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia told a law school audience in San Francisco on Friday.
"If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, you have legislatures," Scalia said during a 90-minute question-and-answer session with a professor at UC Hastings College of the Law. He said the same was true of discrimination against gays and lesbians.
The 74-year-old justice, leader of the court's conservative wing, is also its most outspoken advocate of "originalism," the doctrine that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the original meaning of those who drafted it.
The court has ruled since the early 1970s that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws applies to sex discrimination, requiring a strong justification for any law that treated the genders differently. That interpretation, Scalia declared Friday, was not intended by the authors of the amendment that was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War.
"Nobody thought it was directed against sex discrimination," he said. Although gender bias "shouldn't exist," he said, the idea that it is constitutionally forbidden is "a modern invention."
The court has not applied the same exacting standard to discrimination based on sexual orientation, an issue it could reach in several cases now in lower courts, including the dispute over California's ban on same-sex marriage.
But when the justices overturned laws against gay sex in 2003 as a violation of personal autonomy and due process, Scalia dissented vehemently. He compared the anti-sodomy laws to statutes against incest and bestiality and said many Americans view bans on homosexual conduct as protections for themselves and their families against "a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive."
Scalia said Friday he's not a purist and is generally willing to accept long-standing court precedents that contradict his views. One exception, he said, is abortion, in which he continues to advocate overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision and later rulings that have narrowed but not eliminated the constitutional right to terminate one's pregnancy.
He derided the court's 1992 Casey decision, which allowed states to restrict abortion as long as they did not place an "undue burden" on women's access to the procedure.
Having to decide whether a new staffing requirement for abortion facilities, for example, imposes an undue burden "puts me in the position of being a legislator rather than a judge," he said. "That's not law, and I won't do it."
He also described the legal underpinnings of the court's 1965 ruling declaring a constitutional right of privacy - the basis for Roe vs. Wade - as a "total absurdity."
Scalia is the longest-serving justice on the current court. He spoke to an auditorium filled with law students on the 24th anniversary of his unanimous Senate confirmation, after his appointment by President Ronald Reagan.
He said most of his views haven't changed since then, but one exception is the idea of allowing cameras in the court, which he supported when he was appointed. The issue resurfaced in January when a 5-4 majority, including Scalia, vetoed a federal judge's plan to allow closed-circuit televising of the same-sex-marriage trial in San Francisco.
"If I really thought it would educate the American people, I would remain in favor of it," he told the students. But instead of educational gavel-to-gavel coverage, he said, most people would see 30-second snippets on the nightly news that would "distort the public perception of the court."
E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
"If the current society wants to outlaw discrimination by sex, you have legislatures," Scalia said during a 90-minute question-and-answer session with a professor at UC Hastings College of the Law. He said the same was true of discrimination against gays and lesbians.
The 74-year-old justice, leader of the court's conservative wing, is also its most outspoken advocate of "originalism," the doctrine that the Constitution should be interpreted according to the original meaning of those who drafted it.
The court has ruled since the early 1970s that the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection of the laws applies to sex discrimination, requiring a strong justification for any law that treated the genders differently. That interpretation, Scalia declared Friday, was not intended by the authors of the amendment that was ratified in 1868 in the aftermath of the Civil War.
"Nobody thought it was directed against sex discrimination," he said. Although gender bias "shouldn't exist," he said, the idea that it is constitutionally forbidden is "a modern invention."
The court has not applied the same exacting standard to discrimination based on sexual orientation, an issue it could reach in several cases now in lower courts, including the dispute over California's ban on same-sex marriage.
But when the justices overturned laws against gay sex in 2003 as a violation of personal autonomy and due process, Scalia dissented vehemently. He compared the anti-sodomy laws to statutes against incest and bestiality and said many Americans view bans on homosexual conduct as protections for themselves and their families against "a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive."
Scalia said Friday he's not a purist and is generally willing to accept long-standing court precedents that contradict his views. One exception, he said, is abortion, in which he continues to advocate overturning the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision and later rulings that have narrowed but not eliminated the constitutional right to terminate one's pregnancy.
He derided the court's 1992 Casey decision, which allowed states to restrict abortion as long as they did not place an "undue burden" on women's access to the procedure.
Having to decide whether a new staffing requirement for abortion facilities, for example, imposes an undue burden "puts me in the position of being a legislator rather than a judge," he said. "That's not law, and I won't do it."
He also described the legal underpinnings of the court's 1965 ruling declaring a constitutional right of privacy - the basis for Roe vs. Wade - as a "total absurdity."
Scalia is the longest-serving justice on the current court. He spoke to an auditorium filled with law students on the 24th anniversary of his unanimous Senate confirmation, after his appointment by President Ronald Reagan.
He said most of his views haven't changed since then, but one exception is the idea of allowing cameras in the court, which he supported when he was appointed. The issue resurfaced in January when a 5-4 majority, including Scalia, vetoed a federal judge's plan to allow closed-circuit televising of the same-sex-marriage trial in San Francisco.
"If I really thought it would educate the American people, I would remain in favor of it," he told the students. But instead of educational gavel-to-gavel coverage, he said, most people would see 30-second snippets on the nightly news that would "distort the public perception of the court."
E-mail Bob Egelko at begelko@sfchronicle.com.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Girls accused of killing gay man in attack like Clockwork Orange
From TimesOnline.co.uk:
Adam Fresco, Crime Correspondent
Ruby Thomas and Rachel Burke, both 18, stamped on Ian Baynham’s chest and kicked him in the head after their friend Joel Alexander, 19, had punched him to the ground, knocking him unconscious, the Old Bailey was told.
As Mr Baynham lay bleeding the teenagers continued to assault him, it was said, causing him to suffer a fit from brain damage after his skull had been fractured.
When Mr Baynham’s friend stepped in to try to save him, Ms Burke attacked him too, punching him in the face, the jury was told.
The three alleged killers fled from the scene and Mr Baynham was taken to hospital in East London, but he never regained consciousness and died 18 days after the attack in September last year.
Brian Altman, QC, for the prosecution, told jurors that Mr Baynham and Philip Brown were walking through Trafalgar Square, in Central London, “minding their own business”.
He said: “The scene is Trafalgar Square at the very heart of London, one of this city’s most famous open spaces, home to the National Gallery, Nelson’s Column, the famous plinths and late that evening, a scene of despicable violence.
“One onlooker likened the level of violence to a scene from the film A Clockwork Orange. What happened was an all too familiar and depressing tale of drunken, loutish behaviour. But what they did went far beyond mere antisocial conduct.
“Remarkably, two of these defendants are teenage girls. Fuelled by copious amounts of alcohol, all three jointly participated in a violent attack on a defenceless man in public.”
Mr Altman continued: “Mr Baynham was openly homosexual and what led to his death began with Thomas hurling homophobic abuse at him and his friend Mr Brown. She called them ‘f***ing faggots’. Mr Baynham grabbed and slapped her.
“Alexander intervened and lunged at him, punching him in the face. He fell to the ground. It is certain that the force of the punch was such as to render him unconscious. His head hit the pavement and there was nothing to break his fall. The impact was so heavy that he suffered severe brain damage from which ultimately he was to die.
“However, that did not suffice. There’s evidence that the females then began putting the boot into Mr Baynham as he lay unconscious on his back. He was deeply in distress from the blow. Shocked onlookers saw repeated stamping on his chest and forceful kicks to the head. He began making snoring noises, evidence of unconsciousness, and fitting on the pavement, signs of primary brain damage.”
Mr Alexander, from Thornton Heath, Surrey, Ms Burke, from East Sussex, and Ms Thomas, from Litchfield, Staffordshire, all deny manslaughter and violent disorder. Ms Burke also denies causing Mr Brown actual bodily harm.
The trial continues.
Adam Fresco, Crime Correspondent
Ruby Thomas and Rachel Burke, both 18, stamped on Ian Baynham’s chest and kicked him in the head after their friend Joel Alexander, 19, had punched him to the ground, knocking him unconscious, the Old Bailey was told.
As Mr Baynham lay bleeding the teenagers continued to assault him, it was said, causing him to suffer a fit from brain damage after his skull had been fractured.
When Mr Baynham’s friend stepped in to try to save him, Ms Burke attacked him too, punching him in the face, the jury was told.
The three alleged killers fled from the scene and Mr Baynham was taken to hospital in East London, but he never regained consciousness and died 18 days after the attack in September last year.
Brian Altman, QC, for the prosecution, told jurors that Mr Baynham and Philip Brown were walking through Trafalgar Square, in Central London, “minding their own business”.
He said: “The scene is Trafalgar Square at the very heart of London, one of this city’s most famous open spaces, home to the National Gallery, Nelson’s Column, the famous plinths and late that evening, a scene of despicable violence.
“One onlooker likened the level of violence to a scene from the film A Clockwork Orange. What happened was an all too familiar and depressing tale of drunken, loutish behaviour. But what they did went far beyond mere antisocial conduct.
“Remarkably, two of these defendants are teenage girls. Fuelled by copious amounts of alcohol, all three jointly participated in a violent attack on a defenceless man in public.”
Mr Altman continued: “Mr Baynham was openly homosexual and what led to his death began with Thomas hurling homophobic abuse at him and his friend Mr Brown. She called them ‘f***ing faggots’. Mr Baynham grabbed and slapped her.
“Alexander intervened and lunged at him, punching him in the face. He fell to the ground. It is certain that the force of the punch was such as to render him unconscious. His head hit the pavement and there was nothing to break his fall. The impact was so heavy that he suffered severe brain damage from which ultimately he was to die.
“However, that did not suffice. There’s evidence that the females then began putting the boot into Mr Baynham as he lay unconscious on his back. He was deeply in distress from the blow. Shocked onlookers saw repeated stamping on his chest and forceful kicks to the head. He began making snoring noises, evidence of unconsciousness, and fitting on the pavement, signs of primary brain damage.”
Mr Alexander, from Thornton Heath, Surrey, Ms Burke, from East Sussex, and Ms Thomas, from Litchfield, Staffordshire, all deny manslaughter and violent disorder. Ms Burke also denies causing Mr Brown actual bodily harm.
The trial continues.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)