Under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, people cannot be prosecuted simply for their beliefs. People may be offended or upset about beliefs that are untrue or based upon false stereotypes, but it is not a crime to express offensive beliefs, or to join with others who share such views. However, the First Amendment does not protect against committing a crime, just because the conduct is rooted in philosophical beliefs.
Using this rather dry definition, we can safely conclude that the 2013 murder of Reginald Baker, known to his friends and family as Reggie or Mr. B, was a hate crime.
Reggie Baker’s body was discovered in the early Sunday morning hours of June 22, 2013 in an alley near Halsted Street, the epicenter of Chicago’s gay gathering spots, referred to by locals as Boystown. Baker’s body was discovered by two men, Kirk Nizer and Tommy DeSarro, who were on their way home from a local leather bar a couple of blocks north, the Cell Block.
DeSarro had wandered into the alley off Cornelia Street to relieve himself around three o’clock in the morning. When his companion, Kirk Nizer, heard him scream, he rushed into the alley. There, they found Reggie Baker lying near a dumpster in a pool of blood.
Baker had been stabbed more than twenty times. The media called the murder “a crime of passion” and surmised that thedepth, number, and savagery of the wounds indicated a “great rage” on the perpetrator’s part.
This was personal.
But was it a hate crime?
At first, that particular classification, despite the homicide taking place in an area well-known for its same-sex establishments and residents, was not even considered. That was a reasonable conclusion because the crime, in spite of its colorings of hate and rage, could have been a simple robbery gone wrong. Or it may have been the work of a psychopath who chose his target for any number of reasons, including the very simple—and terrifying—idea that Baker was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Or it may have been a crime of passion.
Predators don’t need a logical reason to kill.
It wasn’t until the Chicago Police Department began investigating the homicide that the hate crime label became more likely.
And the reason for that was because the person who became the CPD’s prime suspect was not someone known for hating Baker, but ironically, for loving him.
We’ll introduce you to that suspect after these messages.
(Music outro and ads)
Announcer: Welcome back toMeat Locker. Here’s Bailey Anderson.
Bailey Anderson: The wisdom among homicide investigators often goes that you look at the person closest to the victim to either rule them out as a suspect or examine the possibility of their being involved more closely.
The wife did it.
The husband did it.
The girlfriend or boyfriend did it.
You hear it over and over and for those of us with a finger on the pulse of things like murder, the supposition often is borne out as true. It aligns with the principle of Occam’s Razor, which says:Other things being equal, explanations that propose fewer entities, or fewer kinds of entities, are to be preferred to explanations that propose more. In other words, usually the culprit is most often the one who looks the most likely.
And the person closest to elementary school teacher Reginald Baker was his boyfriend, Joshua Kade. The couple had been together for a little over a year.
Chapter 2
Ted
Summer 2024
We’d only been seeing each other for a couple of months when Josh dropped a bombshell.
“You might get wind of something about me that’s not good. But I wanted you to hear it from me first.” He paused and stared down at the grass. From the rigid way he held himself, I already surmised this wouldn’t be good news.
What? Don’t tell me.
You’re married.
You have a boyfriend.
You have an “issue” with coke, meth, alcohol.
