Skip to main content

Louisiana Man Convicted of Federal Hate Crime for Burning His Neighbors’ Home

WASHINGTON – A Louisiana man pleaded guilty today to firing three shots from a shotgun at the home of three Hispanic men and, after they fled, entering the home and setting a fire that burned it to the ground, the Justice Department announced. Johnny D. Mathis, 46, of Lecompte, La., entered his plea minutes before a jury trial was set to begin before U.S. District Judge Dee Drell in Alexandria, La.

Mathis pleaded guilty to all three counts in the pending indictment: criminal interference with the right to fair housing; use of fire to commit a felony; and use of a firearm during a crime of violence. Each count carries a maximum penalty of ten years in prison, a $250,000 fine, or both. Furthermore, the ten year penalties for use of fire to commit a felony and use of a firearm during a crime of violence are mandatory, meaning that Mathis now faces a maximum sentence of 30 years and a mandatory minimum of 20 years in prison. Sentencing is scheduled for Jan. 13, 2010.

Testimony at today’s guilty plea hearing established that on June 15, 2008, Mathis fired three shots from a shotgun at the home of three Hispanic men who shared the residence in a rural area of western Louisiana. Mathis’ home was across the street from the victims’ house. After hearing two shots, the victims fled their house. Once outside, the victims watched as Mathis fired a third shot into the trees and then entered the house, left briefly, and then returned. Minutes later, the house was engulfed in flames as Mathis exited the house. Subsequent investigation determined that the fire started in the kitchen where the victims had seen Mathis. Mathis admitted that his crime was motivated by the victims’ race and national origin and was intended to interfere with their right to live in their home.

"Motivated by hate, the defendant fired a shotgun at a home that he later entered and burned down. No one should have to endure such an abhorrent act of criminal violence," said Assistant Attorney General Thomas E. Perez of the Civil Rights Division. "The Justice Department will vigorously prosecute cases of bias motivated violence to the full extent of the law."

U.S. Attorney Donald Washington stated: "These victims were targeted and subjected to acts of violence for no other reason than their race and national origin. We will continue to vigorously enforce federal laws that guarantee the civil rights of all people."

This matter was investigated jointly by the FBI and the Rapides Parish, La., Sheriff’s Office. The case was prosecuted by Michael J. Frank, a Trial Attorney with the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Mary J. Mudrick of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Louisiana.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...