Angie Zapata's killer convicted.

Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

DarkSteven -> Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/22/2009 4:58:10 PM)
Here's the story. Synopsis: Angie Zapata was a pre-op trangender that met Andrade on a website aimed at the GLBT community. Everything about Andrade states that he's a homophobe, and you gotta wonder why he was on the site unless he intended to beat up/kill someone he met there. Andrade was convicted using a hate-crime law, although why a simple charge of murder would not have sufficed beats me. Anyone have any insight into that?

kittinSol -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/22/2009 5:14:40 PM)
I thought the defence attorney's argument was particularly heinous: "During the trial, Kundelius constantly referred to Zapata as Justin, which was Angie's name given at birth. "Justin deceived a lot of people," Kundelius said. "And this case is about that deception."

winterlight -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/22/2009 5:28:15 PM)
I think the book should have been thrown at him. First degree or second degree murder.. Yes, i think some people deceive others. I have no idea what facts were brought up since i wasn't on the jury. If you do not tell somebody upfront about something as important as that you are deceiving them. I have heard (don't know if its true) that the murderer felt the transgendered female privates and found out she is a man. How knows what was going on through his mind. To murder is wrong pure and simple. I don't care what/who you are. You don't deserve to be murdered. If you are evil and have done something wrongfully to somebody i hope one is caught and punished. What goes around comes around as the saying goes... If it is true that he was on a site then to me that is premeditation isn't it? You are actively looking for someone to do what to?

angelikaJ -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/22/2009 5:39:03 PM)
Other information here. Also: http://www.angiezapata.com/

DesFIP -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/22/2009 9:57:29 PM)
It said that they used the charge of hate crime because that makes the sentence longer than otherwise.

stella41b -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/22/2009 10:49:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Here's the story. Andrade was convicted using a hate-crime law, although why a simple charge of murder would not have sufficed beats me. Anyone have any insight into that? My take is that it would have then carried the special set of circumstances allowing for the death penalty to be imposed, but nowhere was it indicated that the death penalty was sought by the prosecution. It might have been harder to secure a conviction with a maximum sentence had the death penalty been on the table, as it would have changed the trial to a two stage one. But then again that 'hate crime' component would have been translated as aggravating factors and weighed in heavily against Andrade during the sentencing phase. It could also be because of the victim Zapata being pre-op and not post-op, which here emphasizes the need in North America at least for gender recognition to come sooner than surgery perhaps either with the diagnosis - as is the case in Europe - or at least with the prescription of hormones. In the eyes of the law Zapata was transgendered, and not female and I feel that some form of gender recognition would have made it much clearer from the legal perspective. On the one hand it's a case of semantics - transgendered female - but on the other it's recognition of the whole transgendered process and the acquired gender and that in itself would afford more protection of the transgendered. But Andrade being on the LGBT site would indeed suggest a certain degree of premeditation, but let us not forget also that way of thinking which suggested that Zapata was being deceptive simply through going through the process of gender reassignment - this way of thinking is unacceptable and it is this way of thinking which ought to be addressed by bringing in gender recognition legislation.

kazzaslave -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 2:27:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: winterlight I think the book should have been thrown at him. First degree or second degree murder.. Yes, i think some people deceive others. I have no idea what facts were brought up since i wasn't on the jury. If you do not tell somebody upfront about something as important as that you are deceiving them. I have heard (don't know if its true) that the murderer felt the transgendered female privates and found out she is a man. How knows what was going on through his mind. To murder is wrong pure and simple. I don't care what/who you are. You don't deserve to be murdered. If you are evil and have done something wrongfully to somebody i hope one is caught and punished. What goes around comes around as the saying goes... If it is true that he was on a site then to me that is premeditation isn't it? You are actively looking for someone to do what to? It appears that she was upfront from the start about being a pre-op transexual: "All indications are she was upfront about who she was," Miller said.

angelikaJ -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 4:12:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Andrade was convicted using a hate-crime law, although why a simple charge of murder would not have sufficed beats me. Anyone have any insight into that? I think part of the reason why they tried for a hate-crime prosecution may be geographical. Matthew Shepard was beaten in nearby WY and actually died in a Fort Collins CO hospital. In 2005 Colorado extended Colorado's Hate-Crime law to include sexual orientation and disability. This was the first time someone had been prosecuted under the sexual orientation section of the law. Re: Stella's post, CO currently has a bill that passed in their House of Representatives that would repeal the death penalty. If it is signed by Gov. Bill Ritter, the money saved would be used to prosecute cold cases. In the last 40 yrs there has only been one execution in Colorado.

CatdeMedici -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 5:00:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Here's the story. Synopsis: Angie Zapata was a pre-op trangender that met Andrade on a website aimed at the GLBT community. Everything about Andrade states that he's a homophobe, and you gotta wonder why he was on the site unless he intended to beat up/kill someone he met there. Andrade was convicted using a hate-crime law, although why a simple charge of murder would not have sufficed beats me. Anyone have any insight into that? Murder convictions get overturned and or reduced more often than you can imagine--murder becomes 2nd degree or manslaughter which can carry a paroleable sentence. Hatecrimes are much harder to get reduced or even overturned due to juries natural emotional reactions to the very concept. To add, hatecrime convictions make life in jail much harder too as inmates don't cotton to that behavior---where murder, eh, you're one of the boys.

servantforuse -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 6:22:01 AM)
The 'hate crime' add on only increased his sentence by 18 months. He does have 6 prior felonies and because of that he will get an additional 50-60 years + the life without parole sentence. This guy is a creap and will die in prison.

gman992 -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 11:57:46 AM)
Hate crimes laws means that other person are more equal under the law than others...it punishes thought crimes as oppose to the actual crime.

Vendaval -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 2:45:46 PM)
Fast Reply - Let the perp rot in prison for the rest of his life. Fine by me.

philosophy -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 3:44:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gman992 Hate crimes laws means that other person are more equal under the law than others...it punishes thought crimes as oppose to the actual crime. ...bollocks. Hate crimes are when someone targets a victim according to a preconceived bigotry. By your logic all convictions are thought crimes, ever heard of mens rea?

sirsholly -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 4:48:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: gman992 Hate crimes laws means that other person are more equal under the law than others...it punishes thought crimes as oppose to the actual crime. huh?

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 5:12:39 PM)
Only thing that matters is he was a cold-blooded murderer. Whatever else he was is of little relevance. Fry him. (Does that jurisdiction have the death penalty?)

MichiganHeadmast -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 5:14:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: gman992 Hate crimes laws means that other person are more equal under the law than others...it punishes thought crimes as oppose to the actual crime. ...bollocks. Hate crimes are when someone targets a victim according to a preconceived bigotry. By your logic all convictions are thought crimes, ever heard of mens rea? Sooooo...... if the perp was an aids activist, and ran a charity for indigents, but killed someone just because he wanted their car, then what? He would be less culpable or less evil than someone who killed because he hated homosexuals?

philosophy -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 5:22:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MichiganHeadmast quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy quote: ORIGINAL: gman992 Hate crimes laws means that other person are more equal under the law than others...it punishes thought crimes as oppose to the actual crime. ...bollocks. Hate crimes are when someone targets a victim according to a preconceived bigotry. By your logic all convictions are thought crimes, ever heard of mens rea? Sooooo...... if the perp was an aids activist, and ran a charity for indigents, but killed someone just because he wanted their car, then what? He would be less culpable or less evil than someone who killed because he hated homosexuals? ........it's not about degrees of culpability. That is a black and white issue. The issue is how many crimes were committed. A hate crime is essentially a second crime layered over the first one. Society has the right to discriminate between crimes. To make different crimes have different punishments. Look up the history of the word Draconian for what happens when we don't. Given that, society also has the right to say that one murder (or any other crime) is more heinous than another. Otherwise we'd be using a set table of punishments, rather than allowing judges to rule on the relative merits of cases. Society, at this time, feels that bigotry is wrong.......and that when a crime is based on bigotry is merits a stronger sentence. So, back to your question. As to culpability....no, equally culpable of murder.....but the real life killer is also culpable of committing a crime on the basis of bigotry. As to evil......that's a metaphysical term and one that has no place in legality.

angelikaJ -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 8:58:22 PM)
In the last 40 yrs CO has only had one execution and currently there is a bill that may repeal the death penalty. The money saved from death penalty cases not being appealed would be put towards solving cold case files.

aravain -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/23/2009 10:28:52 PM)
Having hate crimes laws mean that those who perform heinous acts strictly because of their hate will be less likely to ever perform acts based on those hate again. It adds an extra 'life' sentence (15 years) to the sentence in most places... I can't remember other things, but I believe it makes parole not possible? Is that right? I'm sure someone knows more than I do on this. Hate crimes are crimes based on hate or discrimination... PERIOD. If someone killed me because I was white, they should tried (and sentenced) for a HATE crime. I don't see how it makes anyone 'more equal' than anyone else. I also don't see adding it as a punishment for the perpetrator, as much as an assurance to the group their hate was pointed at that they're safe from that happening again.

Irishknight -> RE: Angie Zapata's killer convicted. (4/24/2009 11:54:03 AM)
I am on the fence on the hate crime thing. It seems to me that any time someone kills members of certain groups, it is automatically treated as a hate crime. Yet when a hate crime is perpetrated by a member of one of those same groups, everyone says that they couldn't have been committing a hate crime. Not neccessarily a failing in the law or the idea behind it but a failing in our society. When a representative of the ACLU tells someone that they "couldn't have been discriminated against because they are white" we have a definite issues in this country. Since the victim was my sister-in-law when she was suing a city police department and was trying to get help I can swearfor a fact that it happened. Take that same mentality into a court room and you see where some people feel that these laws create a preferred class or a group that is "more equal." Personally, I think murderers need to be removed from society forever just as their victims were no matter who they murder. Whether you believe in the death penalty or not is irrelevant. It can be accomplished without it. Build an island prison and they never get to leave it.... ever. They removed someone from society for whatever reason and there is no "time served" that can make up for that. This particular individual obviously went fishing for his victim and planned it. If you are on a trangendered board, what the hell are you looking for? I think the answer is obvious. That shows premeditation and he should never see the light of day again or breathe the air of freedom. It shouldn't matter who he murdered simply that he murdered someone.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875