General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsGuy who was blasting monkey noises at a neighbor has been doxxed...
Good.
I see him being canned at his job, and/or sued for harassment soon.
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2021/10/06/shocking-virginia-beach-video-shows-john-eskildsen-taunting-neighbours/
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,374 posts)Archae
(46,338 posts)That racist fat fuck who was slamming his black neighbors, while drunk.
SoCalDavidS
(9,998 posts)I'll make an exception in this case though.
lpbk2713
(42,761 posts)Sorry pal. Hatefulness is not covered under 1A.
Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 6, 2021, 07:35 PM - Edit history (1)
You are free to be as hateful as you want (with words, not actions). And your neighbors have the right to let everyone know how hateful you are.
Dustlawyer
(10,495 posts)Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)Most noise ordinances, especially during the day, are quite loose to allow for normal noise generating activities like power tools and gardening equipment.
A speaker system putting out as much noise as a gas lawn mower would be more than enough for neighbors to hear clearly.
spooky3
(34,461 posts)spells out how this is not simply a "hateful words" case.
The neighbor DID engage in "actions" that could also be objectionable under noise or disturbing the peace ordinances. Not sure why you are not seeing this. Nothing I have read has said that the noise was limited to daytime hours; in fact, the video posted online was clearly after dark in the summer, and the articles state that the noise occurred any time anyone left the Martinez house.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/10/06/virginia-beach-black-family/
"Although police say the neighbors actions are 'not criminally actionable,' the Virginia hate-crime law suggests that this instance of targeted intimidation is a perfect example."
Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)And more than once suggests the actions are not illegal.
Hate crime laws are enhancements on crimes, not crimes in and of themselves. The racist asshole also seems to understand the nuance in local laws regarding inciteful speech by using recordings of TV shows and monkey sounds.
Noise ordinances are not criminal codes, so even if he is breaking them at times, the consequence is someone ordering him to stop and maybe a fine if he continues to break them.
For better or worse, you are free to be a racist bigot in this country provided you stick to hateful speech.
spooky3
(34,461 posts)But there are other laws or ordinances that may be violated here. Obviously, the attorney general of Virginia disagrees with you.
It's not at all clear that you are correct about the hate crimes laws. See the "crimes against persons" and "harassment" portion of this:
https://virginiarules.org/varules_topics/crimes-against-persons/
"Crimes against persons involve direct physical harm or force applied to another person. The most serious crime in this category is homicide, but threatening someone and even making someone fearful that he or she will be harmed are also crimes against persons."
Clearly it is reasonable that any the neighbors, including children, would be fearful that he or she would be harmed.
"Harassment means to repeatedly annoy or attack a person or group in such a way as to cause anxiety or fear for safety. Several different types of harassment are against Virginia law."
Seems very reasonable to view this behavior as "repeatedly annoying" a person to "cause anxiety" etc.
Layer on either of these that there is a clear racial motivation (view the video for evidence of the n-word's use, for example), and you have at least some basis for questioning the legality of these actions.
You are still missing the point about words and actions. The neighbor is not simply "being a racist bigot." He is engaging in behavior clearly intended to harass his neighbors because of their race. He isn't attending private meetings of fellow bigots to discuss the joys of bigotry, or writing letters to the editor of his local paper.
Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)I do not see a law that is being broken. Their harassment laws require specific threats. If I've missed something in the code, I'd love to know if you could point me in the direction of the specific law you might be referencing.
His behavior, so far, has only involved speech or more specifically the use of recorded speech. And I don't see where the law allows for that to be punished criminally.
TheProle
(2,179 posts)Mariana
(14,858 posts)Of course, so is doxxing.
BradAllison
(1,879 posts)CaliforniaPeggy
(149,648 posts)But I think you may be right about him being sued.
budkin
(6,703 posts)Hopefully that changes very soon.
AZLD4Candidate
(5,703 posts)TheProle
(2,179 posts)Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)What noise violation? Do you have any evidence that he is braking local noise ordinance? Not defending this guys behavior in any way, but I have not seen or heard anything suggesting he has broken local ordinances and local PD seems to indicate he has not, which seems likely given my experience dealing with noise issues in the past.
wellst0nev0ter
(7,509 posts)If someone is having too loud of a party next door?
There should be a public nuisance law that can be applied
Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)I have before when I lived in town. Where I used to live the cutoff was 10:00PM and after that the Db levels may or may not have covered the noise involved in this incident. And even then it is not a crime and only a code violation so hate crime laws would not be in play.
spooky3
(34,461 posts)by the S. F. Cobb, the C.S. Wong Professor of Law at Cornell University.
Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)It does not address this situation.
That article addressed the misguided POV that hate crime laws punish free speech, which of course they do not, they criminalize motive for another crime. What it does not address is the fact that hate crime laws require an underlying criminal act before they come into play and can not be applied to otherwise legal activity.
So, if someone uses racist or bigoted language while committing a crime like assault, they are guilty of assault and a hate crime.
But if someone uses racist or bigoted language while otherwise not committing a crime, they are not guilty of a hate crime.
spooky3
(34,461 posts)They don't offer specific or relevant information and talk in general terms about what could or may happen.
I prefer specifics and actual criminal code citations and case law.
I understand this is an emotional issue and I'm in no way defending this PoS. But free speech is an interest of mine and I find cases like this curious. If you can't provide more relevant information, I agree, it's best for you to scamper off.
sboatcar
(415 posts)and he's unemployed, living with his mom, has an ex wife and two non-custodial children.
He'll probably be a tough nut to crack, since it seems like he's got nothing to lose. I feel sorry for his mom, but she is enabling that behavior.
Sanity Claws
(21,849 posts)He might like that. My guess is that he will be shunned by neighbors but he might not mind that either. I doubt that he has many social connections.
AZLD4Candidate
(5,703 posts)A HERETIC I AM
(24,371 posts)I see a Pilonidal cyst
There. Close, but perhaps more descriptive!
BradAllison
(1,879 posts)Hell, probably Bill Clinton's fault.
Crunchy Frog
(26,587 posts)LakeArenal
(28,827 posts)How can this not be harassment?
They should start a civil suit.
Skittles
(153,169 posts)noise like that - hell fucking no......and the worst part is how stressful it would be for the family, especially kids
I don't buy for one minute this is something they could not do anything about, that is crazy.
Zeitghost
(3,863 posts)Generally includes threats in most jurisdictions and decibel limits are pretty generous, especially during the day.
Skittles
(153,169 posts)that is flat-out HARASSMENT
WTF
It is harassment in my way of thinking. I dont understand how its not disturbing the peace as well.
Auggie
(31,174 posts)Every. Neighbor. On. The. Street. One at a time. Drag him into court again and again. See how he likes being harassed.
calimary
(81,350 posts)CONSEQUENCES. What a concept!
Actually, Auggie, this is a MOST devious and scathingly brilliant tactic to muse upon! DAYUM! I LIKE how you think!
marble falls
(57,124 posts)AllaN01Bear
(18,275 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(145,374 posts)KT2000
(20,585 posts)the same thing could happen in a wealthy neighborhood and the cops would throw up their hands? Ha!
erronis
(15,306 posts)Unless we're servants, serfs, slaves.
LeftInTX
(25,415 posts)[url=https://postimages.org/][img][/img][/url]
Escurumbele
(3,396 posts)will not like that...or rap, or reggaeton, that will stop him very fast.
Johnny2X2X
(19,074 posts)This scumbag deserves what he gets.
spooky3
(34,461 posts)Looks as if the a-hole was interfering with quiet enjoyment.
"When deciding if a neighbors actions violate a property owners right to quiet enjoyment courts typically consider the duration of the neighbors actions, the reason for the actions and the impact or burden on the property owner. "
This was posted in a reply to Mark Herring's (the VA attorney general) tweet.
Hassin Bin Sober
(26,330 posts)Let this guy or his mommy/landlord stand in a court and explain how the N-word and chimp noises automatically and consistently blasted at an African American family isnt Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress.
Free speech my ass. It may not be criminal but any fair minded jury would find for the plaintiff.
2. Defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous; and
3. Defendant's act is the cause of the distress; and
4. Plaintiff suffers severe emotional distress as a result of defendant's conduct.
Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED; sometimes called the tort of outrage)[1] is a common law tort that allows individuals to recover for severe emotional distress caused by another individual who intentionally or recklessly inflicted emotional distress by behaving in an "extreme and outrageous" way.[2] Some courts and commentators have substituted mental for emotional, but the tort is the same.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_infliction_of_emotional_distress
spooky3
(34,461 posts)Response to spooky3 (Reply #37)
Hassin Bin Sober This message was self-deleted by its author.
nolabear
(41,987 posts)LetMyPeopleVote
(145,374 posts)BeckyDem
(8,361 posts)K&R
maxrandb
(15,336 posts)like Germany treats the Nazis.
You can't fly a swastika in Germany, and you shouldn't be able to fly a Confederate flag in America.