Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › News › Local News

Hate charge added to killing of Angie Zapata

Greeley Tribune

Published August 1, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.

Text size  

More Local News

More stories »

Weld District Attorney Ken Buck said Thursday his office has filed first-degree murder charges in the Angie Zapata case.

The suspect, Allen Ray Andrade, 32, of Thornton, also will be charged with a bias or hate crime, because Zapata was a transgender woman. Zapata, 20, was living as a woman although she was born male.

It will be the first killing in Weld charged as a hate crime.

Comments

  • August 1, 2008

    8:04 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    tracer123 writes:

    GOOD JOB . KEN BUCK.

  • August 1, 2008

    10:22 a.m.

    Chelle writes:

    (This comment was removed by the site staff.)

  • August 1, 2008

    10:29 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    dwander501 writes:

    What does the addition of Hate Crime mean? Do people get so calloused hearing about murder that the added words make it more meaningful? It is as crazy as doling out TWO life sentences
    Next up
    Really REALLY hate crime and we mean it;
    Super Duper Burglary;
    Humdinger of a Homicide;
    Self defense Rape:

    Stupid justice system

  • August 1, 2008

    10:50 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    redwhiteandBLUE writes:

    I understand what you all mean..and you;re all right. I guess Hate crime= hate Gay's ..hate crime= hate a minority, or offending them
    verbally. Ya think ?

  • August 1, 2008

    11:39 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    esarem writes:

    Guy pretending to be woman seduces guy. Seduced guy snaps. I like manslaughter for this or temp insanity. You gender-mixers out there may want to consider some sort of "truth in labelling" or "full disclosure" behavior to avoid bad reactions in the future.

    As for "hate"; Hmm, I would sort of hate it if I made a move on a woman only to find out there was some sort of "misrepresentation" going on.

    Andrade's attorney might want to consider that under some definition, the deceased might have been attempting to rape the defendant as the defendant had not consented to sex with a man.

  • August 1, 2008

    11:59 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    RUKidding writes:

    Blame the victim....I am sure the convicted criminal is telling the truth. He was lied to, and decieved. Blah...Blah....Blah

  • August 1, 2008

    2:07 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    HippyLippy writes:

    The hate crime addition should be subtracted since she/he did not tell the guy she/he was really a man. Cite her/him for fraud, or lying, or whatever and that should cancel out the "hate" crime part of it. That'll leave them with just the murder charge.

    I heard the black guys who killed the Class President in NC did like her so they are not being charged with a "hate" crime.

  • August 1, 2008

    2:26 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    davies writes:

    People, let me explain this to you:

    If the victim is gay (or transgendered or suffering from Gender Identity Disorder or whatever) or a member of a minority of some type that has suffered discrimination; then if you harm that person because of their protected minority status, it can result in the added charge of being a "hate crime", because of the discriminatory hate that you fostered in your miserable hateful soul. The 'hate crime' charges are society's way to say "Shame on you!" Who could be against that?

    As opposed to a case where say, the victim is a skinny little 7 year old white boy named Chandler who was locked in a closet and dehydrated and starved to death. Now the type of hate that causes a murder such as this is considered to be sexual-identity-and-minority-neutral hate, and this hate is not sufficient to warrant the additional 'hate crime' charges. This is due to the fact that most little white boys are considered to be quite lucky.

    You see? It makes perfect sense.

  • August 1, 2008

    4:22 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    roger44 writes:

    Don't agree with the hate crime at all, I hope the jury has a say in this. The victim did not inform the guy what he was, and I know few guys that would be happy about a situation like that. Murder, yes, 2nd degree but this is crazy. The people that starved the boy to death is a death penalty in my opinion, imagine what that child went through. This Justice system is getting crazy.

  • August 1, 2008

    4:33 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    RUKidding writes:

    I missed the part where it was confirmed Zapata did NOT disclose he was a male? This is all based on what Andrade told police. Is it fair to ASSume that because Zapata was a transgenedered person, he was automatically a liar and deceived Andrade? I can not beleive that no one is willing to accept two sides to the story, and automatically blame the victim.

  • August 1, 2008

    4:43 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    davies writes:

    Story I saw yesterday was that he definitely posed as a woman. He gave the killer oral sex but they slept in different beds overnight. While the victim was out the next morning getting coffee or whatever, the killer found pictures of the victim as a man. He waits for the victim to get back and then bashes his head with the fire extinguisher twice. Covers the victim with a blanket and starts to collect his stuff to leave, and the victim sits back up and groans, whereupon the guy bashed his head one more time. This is the version the killer confessed to the police.

  • August 2, 2008

    9:02 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    NikkiLaVey writes:

    Hippylippy "The hate crime addition should be subtracted since she/he did not tell the guy she/he was really a man. Cite her/him for fraud, or lying, or whatever and that should cancel out the "hate" crime part of it."

    Ok let's say Angie had been a very light skinned black person and "Passed" as white then he killed her because she was a <insert "N" word>

    Nikki

  • August 2, 2008

    9:08 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    NikkiLaVey writes:

    Jimminy - "Transgendered?Nope.Gotta have the surgery first.Pending that procedure,Zapata was a drag queen,and calling him transgendered insults anyone who has completed the process and truly IS transgendered." You are confusing Transsexual and Transgendered and No a Drag Queen is a preformer again you are Confussing that with a Cross Dresser and most doctors agree once someone starts the Benjimin Standards of Care they are in fact a Pre OpTranssexual ... I hope this lears thing up for you.

    Nikki

  • August 2, 2008

    8:28 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    durangoNative writes:

    As long as there is an excuse to harm another person then murder is alright? Any excuse or just one or two, or maybe five, or maybe we each get to have a dozen personal excuses. So if you can’t stand people who think the flag is acceptable as a fashion statement then you can plug ‘em, right?
    If someone gives you the “stink-eye” you can shoot them. In Florida. So much for a rational, intelligent, or remotely moral civilization. Just keep your gun loaded and self-serving morality handy.
    Or how about this. Two strangers waiting in line get to talking. One person realises that the other is a (Texan) or (Dodgers fan) or (fill in blank). They did not disclose this, gasp, “horrible secret” and so can be murdered without legal ramification. Is this a good justification for murder or the top of a slippery slope down to hate?
    It seems like a hate crime is something to do with the motive for the crime. In a court of criminal law, motive is very important. If one person simply robs another, that charge would be robbery or larceny or whatever. Stealing with a loaded gun would be a different motivation. Killing someone while robbing them is certainly more serious and requires a more serious motive. Making a bad choice in a situation where there is freedom to just walk away or choose to kill requires a really messed-up motive.
    This is entirely different than having an opinion about people who are different than yourself. Which, by the way, is everbody else. The hate-crime includes a crime, after all.
    Oh yeah, one last observation. Anybody out there believe in responsibility? How about taking responsibility for your actions. Would a real man “own up” to doing something wrong or get a fancy lawer to make up some kind of totally aburd excuse. Better yet an excuse that feeds a group hysteria. An excuse like “my client is innocent because (those people) are out to get us.”
    Fear is no excuse for anything.

  • August 4, 2008

    2:16 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    NikkiLaVey writes:

    Jimminy - "Zapata was a gay man who not only dishonestly represented his gender,he kept up his deception until the two persons involved were at the most volatile point in their encounter.As a homosexual man on the transgender track,Zapata should have known and perhaps did know of the likelihood of a violent reaction to discovery of his having lied about the most basic nature of his being during the most basic and intimate of personal interactions."

    Angie should have been given harsh words for what she did .. Not Murdered! A "Real Man" would have just walked away swearing, but in this case he killed her to save his wounded male ego.

    Dream the Good Dream,

    Nikki

  • August 14, 2008

    10:54 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Agawa writes:

    What a ridiculous defense! Aren't human beings capable of dealing with disagreements through methods other than extreme violence? I agree with Nikki - he killed Angie Zapata to defend his wounded male ego. This was cold blooded, pre-meditated murder and it should be treated as such. Zapata's relationship with Andrade is irrelevant in trying him for murder.

    Also, why take the murderer's words at face value?