The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

Nebraska Police Not Ruling Out Hoax in Attack on Lesbian

By Ryan Lenz on July 26, 2012 - 10:28 am, Posted in Anti-LGBT, Hate Crime

Police investigators in Lincoln, Neb., have not ruled out the possibility that a 33-year-old lesbian allegedly attacked last weekend because of her sexual orientation might have staged the hate crime. But they’re also not ready to call her story, which has ignited interest across the country, a complete fabrication.

Chief Jim Peschong told the Lincoln Journal Star that investigators, aided by the FBI, continue to search for suspects in the case but remain uncertain whether the attack even took place.

The woman, whom Nebraska gay advocates have dubbed “Rainbow Jane,” told police that three men wearing masks stormed into her house on Sunday, tied her ankles and wrists with zip ties and used knives to carve anti-LGBT epithets into her arms and stomach.

Lincoln attorney Megan Mikolajczyk, who represents the woman, told the Omaha World-Herald on Wednesday that her client was not yet prepared to make a statement on the attack.

“My No. 1 priority is her health and safety and her emotional well-being,” Mikolajczyk said. “I don’t know when she’ll be ready.

  • Aron


    Considering he is an admitted Stormfronter, that wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest.

  • Erika

    CoralSea, good call with the comparision between funformenonlyinsnow and the Islamic extremists – my guess is that funformenonlyinsnow fully agrees with them about women

  • Supersonic250

    Wow. Funinsnow isn’t just a raging moron, but he’s also a eugenicist. Who’d’ve thunk it. It’s hard to believe he’s SUCH a likable person with SO many loved ones…

  • CoralSea

    Funinsnow —

    I just LOVE people who try to solve THEIR problems by dictating how other people should live. How does it hurt YOU if gays and lesbians exist and go about their lives? Your hatred is YOUR problem — not theirs. You remind me of the Islamic extremists who believe that women must be covered from head to toe lest men, who are (apparently) inherently incapable of exercising any self control, rape them. Such a worldview sells men short and makes women pay a price simply for being who they are.

    The world doesn’t revolve around you — although I believe that you have figured this out and it enrages you, hence your on-line tantrums. You are a frightened man who thinks you can solve your own problems by lashing out at those who elect to live their lives as they see fit. I am sad for you — but I am a lot sadder for the people on the receiving end of your venom (in the real world), although you probably keep mum most of the time because you know that “the idiots” don’t agree with you.

  • aadila

    Oh dear…

    It looks like funinsnow read World Net Daily a few years back when I cannot remember what fringe columnist (maybe Farah himself or his bald-headed chief consort, can’t remember his name) wrote that the way to perplex progressives is to propose abortion as a means to eradicate LGBT genetic markers.

    Could you not at least cite your source instead of claiming this idea for yourself funinsnow? Don’t assume people here are unread or uneducated. We actually do pay attention to the crap that is unloaded onto the internet by the radical right. We are neither shocked nor surprised by such things, and it really just speaks to your own insecurities.

    My guess is that you are deeply repressed in your own sexuality and project this as hatred upon those who are fully realized in theirs. By the way “celibate” means unmarried, not non-sexual.

    Now then, let us help you, my dear. What is it exactly about same sex intimacy that bothers you? That you are not taking part? There are support groups who can help you with this you know…you might find someone there just like you!

  • Erika

    funformenonlyinsnow, woudln’t it be easier to prohibit anyone from engaging in heterosexual sex to avoid the danger of the possibility of a homosexual baby being born? Obviously the first step will be banning straight marriage because it leads to straight sex which could lead to babies.

    When that fails, due to heterosexuals just not being able to control their urge to copulate, we will have to go to step two – requiring all female or all male schools, workplaces, etc.

    When that fails, the next step will be to require people engaging in sexual activity to conduct mutual masturbation or sodomy since there would be no chance at pregnancy resulting.

    When that finally fails, the final step will be to lock all men and boys up in prison – why men, because if men are free, there is the possibility of rape which could potentially result in pregancy.

    So funformenonlyinsnow – unless you are ready to volunteerly report to prison for the crime of being male I do not believe you are being serious ;)

  • funinsnow

    If gays & lesbians quit their sexual behaviors and go celibate, then ‘homophobia’ would disappear. If it’s predicted an unborn baby would take part in gay/lesbian activities in adulthood, then go ahead and abort. Also abort unborn transexauls. Aborting unborn gay, lesbian and transexual fetus is same as aborting unborn babies predicted to be retarded. Transexuals are worse and they should make it a crime to do sex change maimings.

  • aadila


    Regarding Chick-fil-A “defending traditional marriage”, it’s pretty clear that cash flow speaks louder than so-called Christian principles.

    No sooner did sales tank than the corporate spokesman Don Perry, who died shortly thereafter of a heart attack (unrelated I suppose to a diet of fried chemical-saturated foods), went on the defensive claiming that Chick-fil-A wants to leave the debate.

    It’s pretty obvious that this organization “guided by Christian principles” in fact worships Mammon. By the way if you want to find out more about the frightening list of chemicals, preservatives and food additives that go into a Chick-fil-A sandwich peep this blog post:

  • Reynardine

    Well, Evan got the Hammerhead last week, and this week he hardly got noticed, so now he’s trying for that Shuttle award.

    Erika, the Sixties stood for everything Ayn Rand hated, such as egalitarianism, a contempt for materialism, dialogue with foreign peoples, and a spirit of helpfulness.. That’s why, from the Reagan era on, they were portrayed as evil.

  • Aron


    I’ve lived in Boston my entire life, and I read the Globe every day. I’ve never heard of this mosque controversy before.

    I think Evan is pulling this from the southernmost sphincter on his person.

  • Erika

    Renardine, I suspect that someone told Evan that the 60s were “evil” and therefore he has to oppose them. Being born several years after the 1960s ended I don’t really know what it could possibly mean.

  • Reynardine

    Coral Sea, sounds like the sigmoidoscope hit a hopelessly malignant condition, rather than just the usual fecal impaction. Certainly, I recommend Supersonic consider him for a Shuttle, though that fellow with the red-black Christ, though not as prolific, seems even spacier.

  • CoralSea

    Okay, Evan — I give up trying to understand you. You didn’t respond in a way that provided any additional insights into your thoughts.

    I Googled (or, actually, Yahooed) Vottorio Arrigoni, who you had mentioned, and read the Wikipedia entry on him (I thought, perhaps, he was the “liberal donor” of the Mosque property you were referencing before). He is (was) instead an Italian reporter, writer, pacifist, and activist (according to Wikipedia) who was pro-Palestinian, but was apparently killed by a Palestinian fiction.

    Okay…so how is he connected to homophobic Mosque members in Boston and/or Chik-Fil-A?

    I have concluded from your posts that apparently, if someone is unacquainted with something that you are aware of (the Mosque in Boston), this means they are “living in the past.” My dear — there are many things I could bring up to you of which you are likely to be completely ignorant. I wouldn’t consider you to be either stupid and/or living in the past if you were unaware of some regional news item. No one — no matter how well informed — is conversant with every issue of current interest or concern EVERYWHERE.

    And how is lack of awareness regarding something that has been going on in Boston a mark that someone who is living in Chicago and works in Houston, Fort Worth, and New Orleans an indication that someone is living in the past?

    I think I shall return to my original impressions of you that you are either suffering from depression or some other mental disorder that causes you to act like a raving pr&ck, or that you are simply doing so for your own amusement.

    I’m done. In your case, I cede to the conclusion that talking to you is useless.

  • Reynardine

    I believe that the accusation that we’re “living in the Sixties” means that we still hope to achieve a more just world.

  • Erika

    Evan, if your goal was complete and total incoherence you have achieved it.

    Perhaps you do live in the present since unfortunately grade school level insults have been made acceptable as “political discourse” thanks to some people with a whole lot of money looking for a whole lot of power and not really caring how they achieve it. And of course, there are many people who are perfectly willing to take the money to drag the public discourse through the sewer. Of course, for most people grade school level insults would be a decent – but for you they may be an improvement.

    If you want to eat the greasy overpriced chicken sandwiches from Chik-Fil-A nobody is stopping you.

    If you post unsubstantiated claims about something, don’t be surprised when nobody takes your word for it.

  • CM


    No apology necessary, a few minutes’ difference and I would have been the one looking repetitious.

  • Reynardine

    Evan, your last utterance may qualify you for a Shuttle award, but I’ll leave that to Supersonic.

  • CM

    Yusuf Qaradawi was banned from the U.S. in 1999 and the U.K. in 2008 for opinions he had expressed, something Evan should be arguing he has “evedry [sic] constititional right to do.” And likewise, we all have the same right to “rake Chik-fil-A over the coals,” though only figuratively, of course.

    Just another example of the sophistic right-wing claim that anyone’s criticism of a right-winger amounts to a call for censorship, but their own criticism of anyone they don’t like is simply the exercise of free speech.

  • Evan

    If so, that’s despicable, and I don’t know anyone who is a progressive who wouldn’t think so. What is your point? Someone donated land? I don’t know the backstory there.

    If so??

    What is your point?

    Vottorio Arrigoni?

    And you don’t know the “backstory”.

    Like I said, everyone commenting here lives in the past.

    Sorry for living in the present.

  • Erika

    CoralSea, you really are so much more patient and nicer than I am with people like Evan :)

  • CoralSea

    Reynardine —

    ewwwww! I just Googled that term (thought I knew, but wanted to be sure). Again — eewwww!

    I work with a lot of people who, at least at first glance, may have odd or even icky ideas, but who, after you dig a bit further, (oh, God — now I’m thinking of “dig” in regard to intestines) their ideas may have some interesting bases in fact. I may not agree with them, but I am always interested in where people’s ideas come from.

    Also, lame as it is to say, language — as in the words that get used — can sometimes lead to massive misunderstandings, hence my interest in probing (oh!) further and trying to determine whether we are, indeed, on the same page.

  • Reynardine

    Coral Sea,

    Your patience with such people as these goes beyond Anvil territories. We may be looking at a Golden Sigmoidoscope.

  • Erika

    Evan, perhaps you would prefer:

    a lesbian who is pro-conservative is like a red herring who is pro-Evan

  • Erika

    Evan, I kind of get the impression that you are living in the 1860s :P

  • CoralSea

    T. Ruthisbest —

    While some crimes are committed as part of a spree, other criminals (including groups of criminals), may commit their crimes serially — or they may commit a particular crime once, decide that it didn’t quite float their boat as much as they hoped it would, and do something else instead.

    Your highly (un)penetrating logic is, ah, highly silly.