By Lovepreet Dhinsa
SAN FRANCISCO – District Attorney Chesa Boudin’s office charged Sidney Hammond with the attacks on members of the Asian American community and concludes that his actions were racially motivated.
According to Boudin, “we received new evidence that Sidney Hammond’s attacks on Asian victims–including an Asian father pushing a stroller–were racially motivated. We will be charging Mr. Hammond with hate crimes. We are fighting for the victims in these attacks and for all victims of hate crimes.”
26-year-old Sidney Hammond attacked a 36-year-old Asian American father who was out on a walk with his one-year-old child in a stroller. The father was walking in the Mission Bay neighborhood on a Friday afternoon, in broad daylight, when Hammond attacked from behind.
The attack was captured by surveillance video, which was seemingly unprovoked and no words had been exchanged between the two. Because of this, the fact that this incident could have been racially motivated did cross the mind of the 36-year-old father.
Hammond punched the father, which caused him to fall face down, after which he was punched a total of 14 times to the head and back, as his baby’s stroller rolled away.
The surveillance video shows the father running to grab his child’s stroller after being attacked, as several bystanders watch. The baby was unharmed; however, the police stated that the father 
sustained several “non-life-threatening injuries”.
According to the surveillance cameras, it appeared that Hammond did not cease his attack until nearby law enforcement arrived on the scene. A police officer had to physically pull Hammond away from the father.
According to the father, his “sense of security has been shattered, [when he] was right on the ground and in that exact second I was trying to shield my head and prevent any worse injuries. I couldn’t protect my child. I was on the floor and he was in a stroller that was slowly rolling away, so it’s definitely very scary as a parent.”
The father did offer his encouragement for more rehabilitative processes, in which he stated that he wanted his attacker to be “somewhere where he can’t harm anyone else or if he needs help, he can get the help he needs.”
The Police Department arrested Hammond, charging him with assault, false imprisonment, and child endangerment. Hammond had not been charged with a hate crime, until very recently.
However, the series of attacks Hammond has committed on different members of the AAPI community have added up.
Less than a month before this incident, Hammond was arrested for shoplifting from the same market he had pushed the father in front of and for pushing someone onto train tracks. He was able to be released on bail.
Further, one day before the incident, Hammond also had been caught on video attacking a 61-year-old Asian man from behind in the Tenderloin district, who ultimately hit his head on a nearby pole falling to the ground.
The Police Department was able to identify Hammond in this assault from another previous incident, where he had threatened and assaulted a grocery store worker, when he was found stealing from the store.
Hammond remains in custody and will be presented for a preliminary hearing on May 27th.
These attacks were not charged as hate crimes, but have been recorded as such when the District Attorney got involved. Numerous attacks have occured to members of the AAPI community in the city, and the District Attorney’s office has been proactive in prosecuting these cases, and continues to remain so.
Lovepreet Dhinsa is a junior undergraduate student at the University of San Francisco, pursuing her bachelor’s degree in Politics with a minor in Legal Studies. She has a passion for criminal defense law, and strives to go to law school to fight for indigent clients. As such, she is also involved in her university’s mock trial program and student government.
To sign up for our new newsletter – Everyday Injustice – https://tinyurl.com/yyultcf9
Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:
The attacker must of been another “Trump supporting white facist”, oh wait, oops.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/05/surveillance-video-shows-black-man-repeatedly-punching-asian-man-pushing-stroller-unprovoked-attack-san-francisco-video/
Because only whites are somehow infected by Trumpism?
https://www.vox.com/22321234/black-asian-american-tensions-solidarity-history
But hey, it’s much better to make crass remarks rather than attempt to understand the underlying cause here.
Yes, your cherrypicked article from a biased left leaning publication proves your point, whatever that might be….LOL
Since you’re cherrypicking, here’s my cherrypicked response to your Vox article:
You were so busy attacking the messenger, you never even bothered to consider the message.
The problem here is that Asians were so thoroughly scapegoated that it wasn’t just white conservatives lashing out at them. That atmosphere was created by Trump. It is similar to what you saw in Poland, where Poles themselves were among the worst persecutors of Jews even as they themselves were persecuted under the Third Reich.
I was waiting for the “White Supremacy” drop, and there it was, in paragraph three — the t¨rd in society’s punch bowl.
‘nuf said
AND . . .
Yeah, it’s just like that 😐
Black man attacks Asian man = White man’s fault…..go figure
Probably making it even more difficult to blame Trump for that, for anyone who isn’t steeped in political partisanship. Especially since he’s been out of office for months.
I thought that everything was supposed to be “evidenced-based” on here.
No – apparently it’s only the white man’s “systems”, without ever actually defining what that means. 🙂
How do you explain then the huge rise in hate acts against Asians absent a Trump explanation as catalyst?
Trump was not in office, when this (and other) attacks have occurred.
Regardless, I do have some other (possible) explanations. One is the recent rise of organizations which “report” this, sometimes apparently labeling crimes as “hate” crimes without evidence.
And which seem to focus on attacks in which the perpetrator is “white”. I recall reading examples of many alleged, anecdotal incidents (for one of the organizations that was referenced on here), in which all of the alleged attackers/instigators (without exception) were “white”. That alone is enough to raise suspicion that much of this is politically-motivated.
As far as the “white man’s system”, this is the same system that’s probably going to lock-up the attacker (and others like him) for a long time. And it’s the same system that Republicans/conservatives have been championing, for decades, for what that’s worth.
By the way – I just saw a headline stating that the (presumably “white”) man who brutally stabbed two Asian women is (still) not facing hate crime charges, despite what the Vanguard “reported”.
At some point, does the Vanguard/David ever feel embarrassment or shame, regarding what they “report”? It seems not.
Seems to me that this is similar to the strategy of a recent, former president. Just dig in, maintain the “line”, and attack those who challenge you. Well, we know what happened to him, regarding how that ultimately resonated with voters.
[edited]
The Vanguard never said he was facing hate crimes charges.
The Vanguard literally reported it as a hate crime. Should we dig-up the headline and text?
We had this discussion last week. We called it a hate crime, we did not say it was charged as a hate crime.
You do realize how this “differentiation” sounds to those not already in the “cult”, right?
If not, it seems to me that the fate is already-sealed, regarding the entire underlying, broader movement (for the most part). It might already be.
At this point, I suspect that the only way to “revive” it is to free Chauvin.
No idea what you’re trying to say. All I’m saying is there is a different standard for charging a crime and using a term in a headline.
I am not surprised by that, despite pointing out multiple examples of how your overall philosophy and goals are riddled with self-contradiction.
But as far as the headline, it was borderline dishonest and irresponsible. You’re not the only one engaging in this, but i’s likely going to lead to unintended and unforeseen consequences. Which is unfortunate, as there are actual problems which might then be ignored, for example.
[Moderator: this is your sixth comment on this thread. I’ll leave it but you’re done here now.]
You may remember my response to that discussion. The response that was deleted? Truth hurts — hurts so much it can’t be seen.
It’s unfortunate that some would harp on the wording of a headline instead of focusing on the real issue. It was not unreasonable to refer to this incident as a hate crime, given the circumstances and no other apparent plausible explanation.
But more is required than common sense and plausibility to bring charges, which is why so few hate crime charges are brought. One needs evidentiary proof of intent, which is rarely there—e.g., statements made by the perpetrator during, prior to, or after the crime expressing hatred or intent; a pattern of similar acts of violence directed at Asians.
Harping on the wording of headlines is my THING. And watch it with calling people unfortunate.
That statement is patently ridiculous.
That’s why George Gascon and Bretton Woods say the Vanguard is so important: so that there is a “media” outlet that will call crimes hate crimes, even without evidentiary proof off intent.
DA Boudin, Who Also Thinks the Vanguard is Important, Charges Hammond with Racially Motivated Attack on Asian Community Members
Maybe we should hire Alan to do our marketing…
Is that a paid position? 😐
4 figures a year, with a floating decimal point…
Yet clearly another “Trump supporting white fascist” attacked Asians in New York:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/suspect-arrested-hammer-attack-asian-141100687.html
Keith continues to demonstrate he doesn’t understand the issue