On May 2nd, the Brooklyn Criminal Court issued a judgment on the escalated violence incident that occurred two years ago at Public School 201. 26-year-old Middle Eastern man, Hassan Saab, was sentenced to three years of probation for attacking Chinese student Brian Lei and his family. The verdict sparked strong dissatisfaction among over ten Chinese parents who were present in the courtroom.
The incident took place on September 28, 2023 when Saab’s nephew got into an argument with 13-year-old Brian Lei. Saab arrived at the school and instead of trying to diffuse the situation, he physically assaulted Brian and his friend Jack outside the school. Two days later, Saab went to Brian’s house and attacked Brian’s father, causing him injuries that prevented him from working for six months.
On the day of the sentencing, a representative of the victim’s family, Chen Jialing, delivered a Victim Impact Statement in court, stating, “Saab, as an adult, attacking two 13-year-old children and entering the victim’s home to commit violence was driven by bias against Chinese people. His lack of willingness to take responsibility for his actions shows a lack of remorse. Forgiving such behavior in court would only embolden others to repeat the same actions without fear of consequences, discouraging future victims from reporting crimes.”
The prosecutor pointed out that Saab was convicted of “endangering the welfare of a child,” “assault with a blunt weapon resulting in injury,” and “threats,” and requested the court to impose a sentence of two to three years of imprisonment, emphasizing that “Saab’s actions caused physical and mental harm to multiple individuals, and probation is not sufficient to reflect the consequences of his actions.”
Saab’s defense lawyer argued that at the time of the incident, Saab was only 24 years old with no prior criminal record. His actions were a result of losing control of his emotions. At the age of 26 now, he has learned from his mistake and requested leniency. Saab himself briefly stated, “I am deeply sorry for what happened, I have changed for the better now, thank you, Your Honor.”
Judge John Hecht, during the sentencing, acknowledged the accusations and warning against racial prejudice expressed by the victim’s representative, Chen Jialing. Although condemning Saab’s actions harshly, the judge ultimately decided against imprisonment. He explained, “This is not to excuse his behavior. However, in my view, while his actions were serious, they do not warrant a prison sentence. He did not cause permanent harm and did not demonstrate a long-term threat to society.”
The judge stated that prisons are for those who deliberately commit heinous acts. Although Saab made a mistake, there is still a possibility for him to reform. He does not pose a long-term social threat.
Based on this, the judge sentenced Saab to three years of probation, requiring him to complete two special programs, including an “Anger Management Course” and a “Hate Crime Education Course.” The prosecution was advised to coordinate with suitable Chinese community organizations to have Saab perform 10 days of community service, but the judge also understood that the Chinese community might not be willing to accept him. A protection order was issued, prohibiting Saab from approaching Mr. Lei for 8 years and Brian, his cousin Joseph, and friend Jack for 5 years.
The sentencing outcome left Chinese parents and community leaders feeling angry and unable to accept it, with many commenting, “At the very least, there should have been some jail time. The current judiciary is too lenient.”
Mr. Lei and his wife expressed their “dismay,” while Zang Donghui, a representative of the New York City Residents Alliance, criticized, “Justice has not been served. This is a case of an adult resorting to violence against underage children, armed and seeking revenge, yet not being sentenced to serve time. How can the community trust the judicial system?”
Several parents expressed bewilderment at the discrepancy between being accused of abuse and facing serious consequences for disciplining their own children slightly, compared to a situation where an adult voluntarily took two teenage nephews to commit violence at a victim’s home, causing injuries to minors and their father, only to receive a “probation” as punishment. This stark contrast in the treatment of “committing a crime against others’ children versus one’s own children being abuse” made it unacceptable for them. They couldn’t help but ask, “Why can’t we discipline our children, while others can harm our children and walk away scot-free?”
State Senator Chen Xueli’s communications director Lin Fei, who attended the trial, stated, “The judge completely overlooked that this was a deliberate and persistent act of violence, instead treating Saab as if he were a minor. Beating children, assaulting parents, and then ordered to perform community service in the Chinese community? This is an insult to our community.”
He urged the Chinese community to actively engage with the legal and judicial system, advocating for voices that represent traditional values to enter the judge and prosecution systems, stating, “The younger generation should not only pursue high-paying professions but also aspire to be lawyers and judges; otherwise, justice will not automatically prevail.”
State Senator Chen Xueli himself commented, “A three-year probation is not justice. He should have been imprisoned for some time at least to learn from his actions. He called on voters to bravely confront bullies, protect themselves, report to authorities when necessary, and emphasized that the community will continue to seek justice to ensure similar events do not occur again.”