On Wednesday, Jan. 14, officers responded to a hit-and-run where they found a badly hurt 25-year-old pedestrian, Lance Andreas Jesus Sotelo.
Before they could take Sotelo to a hospital, he passed away, leaving a grieved family, male partner, and community in his wake.
The perpetrator, Q’Laundra Kadri Hood, 28, allegedly struck Sotelo as she was speeding through a red light in Charlotte, North Carolina. She immediately fled the scene, later turned herself in, and on Sept. 22 pleaded guilty to felony hit-and-run causing serious injury or death and misdemeanor death by vehicle.
The sentence? Just 30 days in jail and $765 in restitution.
A healthy, ambitious, likable young man was robbed of his life by a reckless driver, and all she receives is a slap on the wrist. This is ridiculous.
Is Sotelo’s life worth only $765 and four weeks in prison?
“When taking a human life through such reckless behavior, fleeing and leaving that person in the road results in only 28 days behind bars, something is deeply wrong with our justice system,” James Holt, Sotelo’s romantic partner, said.
Which is more likely to result in more consistently just outcomes – judging people by their appearance or sexuality, or judging them by the law?
Appearance/sexuality: 60% (3 Votes)
The law: 40% (2 Votes)
“Shame on Judge Reggie McKnight. We elect judges with the expectation that they will protect this community and treat the loss of a human life with the seriousness it deserves. In my opinion, this sentence did neither.”
But why on earth would Judge McKnight refuse to fully prosecute such an act of recklessness?
It doesn’t hurt to look at McKnight’s background.
McKnight, a Democrat, has been a Mecklenburg County Superior Court judge since 2021. Beyond titles, McKnight has been involved with several community organizations, including the 100 Black Men of Charlotte and the National Black MBA Association.
While it’s impossible to say that Hood, a black woman, got off easy because of McKnight’s involvement in race-based organizations, it definitely prompts a second look.
The past two decades have seen a dramatic increase in intersectionality — the idea that your separate minority or oppressed statuses can compound. This idea leads to mildly entertaining examples of progressives struggling with what has been dubbed the “oppression Olympics.”
Just a few weeks ago, learning that the Lindsay Clancy holdout juror was a man (oppressor) caused no serious reaction. But when they learned that he was black (oppressed), many Dems spiraled into a hilarious state of confusion.
McKnight faced a significantly less humorous situation, yet the intersectional question remains. Hood was a black woman, but Sotelo identified as a homosexual. In this situation, Hood, being both a woman and African-American, has two claims to oppression in comparison to Sotelo’s only one.
Imagine if the perpetrator had been a straight, “cisgender,” Anglo-Saxon Protestant man. Do you think the sentence would have been different?
To be clear: We can’t know for sure that McKnight valued Sotelo’s life less because he only had one minority credit — homosexuality. This, however, is where the idea of intersectionality naturally leads.
According to progressive sociologists, our so-called “racist” society discriminates against certain minorities. Those in power should therefore use their influence to adjust the scales of justice.
At the end of the day, we all know that’s not right.
There is a reason that Lady Justice is depicted wearing a blindfold. The scales of justice should never be adjusted because of your appearance or sexual orientation.
Lance Sotelo deserved equal protection under the law — not a verdict shaped by intersectional ideology.
Advertise with The Western Journal and reach millions of highly engaged readers, while supporting our work. Advertise Today.
