Mini-Post: Hate In Connecticut

A follow-up to a post yesterday on an incident outside an Islamic center over the weekend...

Stamford man charged over 'derogatory statements' outside Islamic center, police say

CT Post

By Christine Dempsey,

Aug 13, 2025

Police Tuesday arrested a Stamford man they say directed derogatory remarks at people outside an Islamic center over the weekend.

[...]

His words were “a deliberate and targeted verbal assault meant to intimidate Muslim families, including children, as they peacefully left their house of worship," said Farhan Memon, CAIR-CT’s chairman. "We call on law enforcement authorities to take this incident seriously and to send the message that hate and bias-motivated harassment have no place in Connecticut," he said in a Sunday statement.

I know many people think that this should be a bias crime but he never made any threats of violence nor discrimination. Therefore, it didn't reach the level of a bias crime. Being a bigot is not a crime.

The Hartford Courant reported that...

“This was not just a case of disturbing the peace. It was a deliberate attempt to harass and intimidate an entire community because of their faith. The law is clear: when someone acts with the specific intent to target people based on religion, it’s a hate crime. We urge the authorities to review the evidence and consider amending the charges to reflect that reality.”

No it is not! The law states...

First-Degree Intimidation

A person commits the 1st degree crime of intimidation based on bigotry or bias if he or she, maliciously and with specific intent to intimidate or harass someone because of any of the attributes listed above, whether actual or perceived, caused physical injury (serious or non-serious) to that person or a third person (CGS § 53a-181j, as amended by PA 17-111 § 5). 

Second-Degree Intimidation

A person commits the 2nd degree crime of intimidation if he or she acts maliciously and with specific intent to intimidate or harass another individual or a group of people because of any of the attributes listed above, whether actual or perceived, by:

1.    making physical contact with the victim;

2.    damaging, destroying, or defacing property; or

3.    threatening to do either of these things, and the victim has reasonable cause to believe he or she will carry out the threat (CGS § 53a-181k, as amended by  PA 17-111 § 5).

Third-Degree Intimidation

A person commits the  3rd degree crime if he or she intends to intimidate or harass someone or a group of people because of any of the attributes listed above, whether actual or perceived, and he or she (1) damages, destroys, or defaces any property or (2) threatens to do so by word or act or advocates or urges another person to do so and gives the victim reasonable cause to believe the act will occur (CGS § 53a-181l).

Now, it might be Third-Degree Intimidation, however is it harassment... that is where it gets dicey.

A person is guilty of harassment in the second degree when, with intent to harass, annoy or alarm another person, they:

• Use indecent or obscene language over the phone,
• Communicate with a person in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm,
• Make a telephone call or other form of communication without a legitimate purpose and in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm,
• Repeatedly contact a person at inconvenient hours,
• Or threaten to injure a person or their property.

The part where, "...other form of communication without a legitimate purpose and in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm..." That bumps right in with the First Amendment.

You might remember where on the UConn campus some student said racial epithets are they walk by a dorm and the courts ruled that the speech was protected by the 1^st Amendment. So as much as we would like it to be a bias crime it doesn't met the standard.