HATE CRIME LEGISLATION
On the evening of October 6, 1998, Matthew Shepard, a freshman at the University of Wyoming, walked alone into a local gay bar in Laramie, Wyoming. Two men lured him outside, brutalized him, and left him for dead. He remained in a coma for five days before passing away from his injuries on October 12th. Investigators realized the perpetrators’ intent during interrogations when the men repeatedly used homosexual slurs when referring to Matthew. They also admitted to luring him outside the bar that night because of his sexual orientation. The crime gained international attention due to its brutality and the clear link to Shepard’s sexual orientation as motive. At the time, however, this was not included among the possible motivations in the 1968 federal hate crime law.
Image of Matthew Shepard | Photo Credit: Gina van Hoof | Donated by Greg Miraglia
Image of James Byrd, Jr. | Public Domain
That changed in 2009, when the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act was signed into law. The act was motivated by the 1998 murders of Shepard and Byrd, a Black man who was murdered by white supremacists; it expanded federal hate crimes legislation to include crimes motivated by the victim’s gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Since the law’s passage, law enforcement investigators have been able to use the Hate Crimes Prevention Act to bring charges against perpetrators like the men who killed Matthew Shepard. Data on hate crimes is also now tracked by the FBI; in 2022, 20.4% of reported single-bias incidents were related to sexual orientation, gender, and gender identity.
When the 2009 Act passed, it also broadened the mandate of the Department of Justice’s Community Relations Service (CRS), which serves communities facing disputes, disagreements, or difficulties relating to allegations of discriminatory practices. After an incident occurs, city leaders, law enforcement departments, local organizations, and prominent community leaders can reach out to and work with CRS to advise on new policies, future best practices, improved training to address issues of bias. CRS has helped multiple communities overcome bias-motivated crimes and address both the causes and aftermath of discrimination.
LGTBQIA+ COMMUNITY LIAISONS
Since the first LGBTQIA+ liaison officer was first appointed by San Francisco (CA) PD in 1962, other departments have slowly been adding these types of community engagement officers to their ranks. Many were first appointed in the 2000s and 2010s. These officers began to conduct outreach to their local LGBTQIA+ community as well as help to train their fellow officers on how to engage with that community during the course of their work. Many of the officers that served in this capacity identified as LGBTQIA+ themselves.
Chief Deirdre Jones with officers and community members in front of the B. Riley House in Cleveland, Ohio.
Image donated by Chief Deirdre Jones
The LGBTQIA+ community has long been disproportionately vulnerable to crimes such as assault, sexual assault, and domestic violence as well as hate crimes. Due to a history of distrust and harassment by the police, LGBTQIA+ Americans are also reluctant to report these crimes to law enforcement. This is especially true for people of color and for those who identify as transgender. In 2005, the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs reported that only one-third of the bias-motivated crimes reported to its member organizations were also reported to law enforcement.
The ongoing creation of LGBTQIA+ liaison units in the early 2000s began the work to improve relationships between law enforcement and LGBTQIA+ Americans on both sides. After Washington, DC’s Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) created their Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit (GLLU) in 2000, the number of reported hate crimes against LGBTQIA+ people doubled. The unit was also able to more effectively address domestic violence cases in their local LGBTQIA+ community: before the unit's creation, there had never been a report of same-sex domestic violence, but in 2005 the GLLU investigated over 300 such cases. This led to the department winning an Innovations in American Government award from Harvard University in 2006.
THE TRANSGENDER EXPERIENCE
During this time period more and more law enforcement officers felt comfortable coming out as transgender or gender-nonconforming at their jobs. Unfortunately, their experiences were often difficult and many faced harassment, threats, and isolation at work. In a 2012 survey of members of the Transgender Community of Police and Sheriffs (TCOPS), an organization that supports transgender law enforcement officers, more than 90% reported negative experiences at work after transitioning on the job. This has led many officers to avoid being out about their gender at work at all; in 2021 TCOPS reported that only about 10% of their members globally were out to their departments.
PULSE NIGHTCLUB
June 12, 2016 was Latin Night at Pulse, a popular gay nightclub in Orlando, FL. An armed man entered the club and began indiscriminately firing; he eventually holed up in a bathroom with hostages and was killed by law enforcement hours after the attack began. As the sun rose, the death toll hit 49, with more than 50 others wounded, in what became the deadliest attack in the United States since the September 11th attacks.
This attack deeply shook both the local and national LGBTQIA+ community. The gunman’s motives were initially believed to be motivated by hate and there was a lot of fear about further attacks against the community. The Orlando Police Department was praised in an after-action report conducted by the Department of Justice’s Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) for their relationship with Orlando’s LGBTQIA+ community and their interactions following the Pulse attack.
OPD’s Chief John W. Mina had appointed the department’s first LGBTQ liaison prior to 2016; this officer and other OPD officers were known by LGBTQIA+ community leaders. Building this relationship in advance of the tragedy on June 12th allowed OPD to leverage support from the community in the aftermath. Direct communication between OPD and LGBTQIA+ community leaders meant that OPD was able to address the community’s concerns about safety, provide protection and security as requested, and keep tensions low during subsequent public protests and demonstrations.
