Your Host
Lee Rawles

Lee Rawles joined the ABA Journal in 2010 as a web producer. She has also worked for the Winston-Salem...

The Amish religion is a branch of Christianity that adheres to a doctrine of simplicity, nonviolence and forgiveness. How then did a breakaway group come to be implicated in the first federal trial to prosecute religiously motivated hate crimes within the same faith community?

From September to November in 2011, there was series of five attacks against nine Amish victims in Ohio in which their beards or hair were shorn. Some were left bruised and bloodied. Several victims had their homes invaded in the dead of night, while others were lured to a settlement in Bergholz, Ohio, and then attacked. The alleged perpetrators were from a breakaway Amish community in Bergholz, led by a bishop named Samuel Mullet. Some victims were estranged family members of the attackers, while others had crossed Mullet in some way.

State officials called on federal prosecutors to take over the case and to try the alleged perpetrators under the Shepard-Byrd Act, a federal hate crimes law. Sixteen people were charged in the attacks in U.S. v. Miller, including Mullet. The jury found the 10 men and six women guilty of a total of 87 counts out of 90. But how did it come to this?

Donald Kraybill, a professor of Amish studies, was an expert witness in the trial. He has written Renegade Amish: Beard Cutting, Hate Crimes and the Trial of the Bergholz Barbers, to explain the history of the case, and the sociological and religious factors that led to the attacks.

Though the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the convictions in a 2-1 decision, based on their interpretation of “but for” causation in the 2009 hate-crimes act, they allowed for a retrial.

Kraybill does not think that this will be the end of the case. In this podcast, he shares with the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles the backstory behind the case; what it was like for him to testify; and what he feels the implications of the 6th Circuit’s decision will be.

Episode Details
Published: September 30, 2014
Podcast: ABA Journal: Modern Law Library
Category: Legal News
Podcast
ABA Journal: Modern Law Library
ABA Journal: Modern Law Library

ABA Journal: Modern Law Library features top legal authors and their works.

Listen & Subscribe
  Apple Podcasts
  Google Play
More Episodes
09/19/18
How to be (sort of) happy in law school

Kathryne M. Young talks about her book, How to Be Sort of Happy in Law School, which talks about what alumni would advise their...

08/22/18
Can you become a better lawyer in 5 minutes a day? This author thinks so

Jeremy Richter on why he decided to channel energy into blogging during the early years of his practice as an insurance litigator.

07/25/18
What would it mean to impeach a president?

Joshua Matz discusses his book "To End a Presidency: The Power of Impeachment" and why he believes that the partisan use of impeachment rhetoric...

06/20/18
Meet the nominees for the 2018 Harper Lee Prize for Legal Fiction

In this special episode, the ABA Journal’s Lee Rawles speaks with Lisa Scottoline, C.E. Tobisman and Scott Turow about their nominated books, their...

06/06/18
How Anthony Comstock’s anti-obscenity crusade changed American law

Amy Werbel explains how Comstock’s religious fervor and backing by wealthy New York society members led to a raft of harsh federal and state...

05/23/18
How Nixon used a law firm stint to resurrect his political career and win the presidency

Victor Li explains how Nixon leveraged his time at Nixon, Mudge, Rose, Guthrie & Alexander to resurrect both his political viability and the firm’s...