Riddle Compares Hair Color To Race, Sexual Orientation When Discussing Hate Crimes

During testimony on a bill to study the effectiveness of the James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Act before the House Criminal Jurisprudence Committee yesterday, State Rep. Debbie Riddle (R-Tomball) made comments in which she essentially compared having red hair to being black, Hispanic, or gay.

Riddle’s remarks came as she questioned one of the witnesses to appear before the committee in support of HB 616, Jesus Garcia of the Dallas Chapter of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC).

During his testimony, Garcia mentioned the death of Hispanic youth David Richardson in suburban Houston a couple of years ago. Richardson was taken from a house party, beaten, and sodomized by his attackers. The offense was not prosecuted as a hate crime.

After Garcia’s testimony, Riddle questioned Garcia, telling him, “you made an accusation toward community; that community is in my district, I’d like you to explain that,” referring to comments the witness made about how there should have been community outcry for Richardson’s attackers to have been prosecuted for a hate crime.

After Garcia responded, Riddle retorted as follows, saying most people in her district, herself included, would have preferred to shoot the people who perpetrated the crime (you can watch the video here; Riddle’s remarks relating to hair color are at about 1:23):

RIDDLE: Let me share with you, that is in my district, and I live in my district, I know my district, and the people in my district. So, it might be a comfort to you, quite frankly, to know that the people in my district, and that was in Spring, Texas, were shocked, they were horrified, they were sickened, and I don’t know that I talked to anyone in my district that didn’t say, given the options, as to what they would do with the perpetrators  of the crime, they’d shoot ‘em. I’d do the same thing.

Riddle went on to compare hair color to the statutory provisions governing the prosecution for a hate crime, essentially expressing her disdain for the legislation:

Crime is crime, horrific. And I can’t think, and my heart broke for this young man and his family. Look, I’m a mother, I’m a grandmother of nine and when a crime is perpetrated on a young person like this, whether they be black white, brown, yellow, purple, I don’t care what color they are, it is wrong.

And, I will tell you this, and it is probably a moot issue at this point, but I have a son who has red hair. If a crime is committeed like that against someone else because, they, you know, have blonde hair, but if the [the attack on the] red haired kid is enhanced, that doesn’t mean that that crime is less horrific for the blond headed kid. I don’t know if I am making any sense. But the crime is horrific…I just wanted to make the point very clear, becaus I thought the accusation was made of the people in my district, that they just went on status quo. The fact of the matter is, sir, that they didn’t go on status quo. [Emphasis added]

First of all, whether Riddle likes it or not, the issue of hate crimes was settled by the Texas Legislature back in 2001. The James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes was passed, and Governor Perry signed it into law. Hate crimes are hate crimes and the people of Texas, along with people all across the nation, know that crimes based on race, sexual orientation, or gender identity and expression are different than run-of-the-mill crimes, and supported their elected leaders enacting this law.

Second, Debbie Riddle should know that real life is not like an episode of South Park, and nobody behaves like Eric Cartman and declares, with true hate and an attitude that devalues their humanity,  that “ginger kids” are dumb and have no souls. People do, however, target people for crime because of their race and sexual orientation. And, in Texas, it was settled almost a decade ago that the citizens of this state believe prosecutoral enhancements are appropriate when this kind of crime is committed.

We don’t need Debbie Riddle out on the streets of Spring, Texas with a hot metal .45 taking justice into her own hands because she thinks the morals of Spring, Texas so dictate that to be appropriate, and because she thinks shooting a defendant is better than seeing them prosecuted for a hate crime. That’s precisely why we have hate crime laws, and an entire penal code.

After Riddle spoke, it is worth noting that State Rep. Terri Hodge (D-Dallas) responded, and apologized for the fact that Riddle, in part, completely misunderstood the testimony:

HODGE: I am very proud of you being here today and testifying not only on behalf of this bill but on discrimination itself. I am so sorry that you were misunderstood. I don’t think that you meant anything derogatory or personal to Rep. Riddle’s constituents in her district. I think what you were trying to say was, if that community had recognized the hate crimes act and its worth–whether the guy was Hispanic, gay, straight, black, or had red hair–that community should have demanded more from its police department to ensure that this kind of crime does not occur. I understood what you meant and I am sorry that it was taken a little bit to mean those people didn’t understand it.  Because I think what you are saying is that if we as people recognize this from every perspective, maybe there would be no need to have the James Byrd Hate Crime Act as law. [Emphasis Added]

Tweet This Post   Ping This Post

Bookmark It