> "It's an assault case."
Well, as long as people seem to have a need to quote me, and do it in a contradictory manner, at that, rather than just making their own post, let's see if I can do the same.
> Actually, it is a hate crime/attempted murder.
That's your own characterization, which doesn't mean much.
> While I don't think it is fair to pre-label any
> eventual verdict rendered by the judge as the
> final word on equal treatment under the law for
> gay tourists (with evidence yet to be presented at
> a trial),
Let us guess, but you're going to do it, anyway, right?
I do think it is reasonable to question
> whether initial police apathy was at least, in
> part, due to a bias against gay victims. Proving
> this is virtually impossible,
It's virtually impossible to prove because it's not based in fact.
That's your own bias at work. There are things necessary, like, investigation, probable cause etc. Because things didn't happen fast enough for you, that doesn't in any way mean that there was apathy on the part of the police force.
> numerous other reported cases of seeming
> unwillingness to actively investigate crimes.
And you can prove this, how?
Especially with the media coverage, to suggest they weren't interested in resolving the situation is absurd.
> Regardless, I have to wonder whether the
> investigation and criminal case would have made it
> this far if the victims were not persistent
> advocates on their own behalf with ready access to
> the US media.
Well, without the media connections they wouldn't be able to try to make this a "gay rights" issue, first, and an assult case, second.