Questions, comments or a tip? Let us know.
Officer Briefs on Hate Crimes
Rows of empty seats greeted New York Police Officer Michael Osgood as he discussed how police respond to hate crimes Monday evening.
Despite many Columbia students’ demonstrated outrage towards the recent series of campus hate crimes, the only people in attendance were four students from Columbia College Student Council and Engineering Student Council who helped organize the event along with Columbia’s Department of Public Safety, and a lone University Senate member.
Officer Osgood lectured the five students and an untouched plate of cookies about how “everyone has the right to walk down the street and be safe in their identity.”
“I’m a little disappointed that more students couldn’t be here tonight to hear one of New York City’s leading experts on a timely issue at this campus,” said Associate Vice President for Public Safety James F. McShane.
Osgood’s presentation came just a few days after a bill allowing the Justice Department to assist local governments in the investigation and prosecution of hate crimes passed the U.S. Senate. The act, sponsored in part by Senator Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is a response to hate crimes at Columbia and in New York. It is currently being considered in a joint House-Senate committee.
A spokesperson for Senator Schumer said Schumer was “optimistic” about the passing of his legislation, the Matthew Shepard Act, which would increase technical, forensic, and prosecutorial support from federal to local officials in dealing with hate crimes, including up to $100,000 in grants.
“Hate crimes shake our communities to the core,” Schumer said in a press release. “This rash of hate crimes and intimidation flies in the face of the best inclusive and diverse traditions of New York and America and needs to be stopped immediately.”
“It [Schumer’s legislation] would be a deterrent if people saw they [perpetrators] were actually being prosecuted and there were arrests occurring,” said Columbia Law School professor Jack Greenberg.
The NYPD has six open noose cases in the city, after five years without a single incident.
“Right now, I think we’re seeing a clustering,” Osgood said, calling it “copycat-type behavior.”
A key point of Osgood’s presentation was explaining what distinguishes hate crimes from other crimes: the victim’s identity is the main motivation.
“When you have a hate crime, you don’t have just one victim—the whole group is victimized,” Osgood added.
He also mentioned that about 50 percent of hate crime offenders are between the ages of 15 and 20.
ESC President Elizabeth Strauss, SEAS ’08, said the meager turnout at the event was “unfortunate, but it was something we put together quickly.”
Strauss said she would pass on what she learned to fellow students, but that “it would have been beneficial for them to have heard it for themselves, instead of hearing it from us.”
When asked about hate crimes in the college campus environment, Osgood explained, “Right now we have a spike,” but typically, he said, students behave better: “If you didn’t have control of your emotions, you wouldn’t be here. You’d be pumping gasoline.”
Sara Vogel contributed reporting to this article.
Betsy Morais can be reached at news@columbiaspectator.com.
Article Tools:
View Comments ( 6)
Post a Comment
-->
















When asked about hate crimes in the college campus environment, Osgood explained, “Right now we have a spike,” but typically, he said, students behave better: “If you didn’t have control of your emotions, you wouldn’t be here. You’d be pumping gasoline.”
wow. that's a really dickish thing to say. i remember someone in politics saying something similar not too long ago...
BLAHAHHA! Nobody attended for one simple fact: there wouldnt be any media cameras there to catch the 'diverse elite' on film with their 'no justice no peace' signs. It's far easier to skip class and riot for communism in font of television cameras than to be lectured by cops on thought'...oops..I meant 'hate crimes.
GEE HOW COME THE UNIVERSITY DID NOT COOPERATE WITH THE POLICE IN TRYING TO FIND OUT WHO HUNG THE NOOSE,OH YEAH THEY SAID THEY WERE PROTECTING THE PRIVACY OF THE STUDENT WHEN THEY WOULD NOT RELEASE ANY VIDEO TAPES OF THE HALLWAYS AND MADE THE POLICE LEAVE AND GET A WARRANT FROM A JUDGE???IM CONFUSED,DONT THEY WANT TO CATCH THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE???STUDENT PRIVACY???WHY HAVE THE CAMERAS THEN?SO IF SOMEONE GOES NUTS AND STARTS SHOOTING PEOPLE ON THE CAMPUS WILL THE SCHOOL NOT IMMEDIATELY GIVE POLICE THE VIDEAOS BECAUSE OF STUDENT PRIVACY?I THINK NOT?SO THEN YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF WHY THEY DIDNT COOPERATE!WHAT IF THE PERSON IS ON THE VIDEO BUT HAD TIME TO LEAVE THE COUNTRY!MMMMMMMM!AND NOW THAT THE POLICE HAVE HAD THE VIDEOS FOR DAYS TO REVIEW HAVE NOT MADE ANY STATEMENTS AT ALL REGARDING THE CONTENTS!!MMMMM-MAYBE IT WAS ALL A SET UP TO THROW FUEL ON THE "RACIST"FIRE BY THE SO CALLED "VICTIM"OR SOME CRAZED "SHARPTON SOLDIER"WHY HAS THIS STORY FADED AWAY??
"WHY HAS THIS STORY FADED AWAY??
Nobody wants to know when a thought "crime" is actually a hoax... or is it satire yet?
It might have had something to do with midterms.
Post new comment