This is a zeitgeist in Barrington, and other places, where people want to smoke out and eradicate racism wherever it lives … but that can’t be allowed to morph disputes that had nothing to do with racism.”

Robert Flanders, Jr., attorney for Dr. Richard Gordon

It has been the position of this office that, as is the case in other states with similar laws, criminal misconduct that is motivated, at least in part, by racial or other animus subjects a defendant to this enhancement.”

Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha

On Tuesday morning, Feb. 9, Sixth Division District Court Judge Stephen Isherwood ruled that the Hate Crime Sentencing Enhancement should not be applied to Barrington resident Dr. Richard Gordon.

A week earlier, Judge Isherwood ruled Dr. Gordon was guilty of assaulting his neighbor, Bahram Pahlavi, during a property line dispute on Aug. 3, 2020. A video of the incident shows Dr. Gordon yelling racial slurs at Mr. Pahlavi, who is Iranian.

During the sentencing hearing, Judge Isherwood was very critical of Dr. Gordon’s actions, but chose not to apply the the state’s Hate Crimes Sentencing Act to the 71-year-old Barrington man.

Instead, Judge Isherwood ordered Dr. Gordon to serve 18 months of probation, have no contact with the Pahlavi family, contribute 40 hours of community service, and undergo mental health evaluation and sensitivity counseling directed toward racial animus.

 Not surprised

Robert G. Flanders, Jr., the attorney for Dr. Gordon, was likely not surprised by the judge’s decision at sentencing. Prior to the Hate Crime hearing, Mr. Flanders said the judge had indicated that the incident involving Dr. Gordon and Mr. Pahlavi was centered around a property dispute — an argument over the location of a property stake.

Prosecutors for the state had tried to prove that the offense had been motivated by the individual’s “hatred or animus toward the actual or perceived disability, religion, color, race, national origin or ancestry, sexual orientation, or gender of that person.”

But Mr. Flanders said that was not applicable.

“This is not a situation that fell within the hate crimes statute,” Mr. Flanders said during a recent interview. “This was an emotional property dispute.”

The August 2020 incident was met with rallies against racism held outside Barrington Town Hall and marches down Rumstick Drive led by members of Black Lives Matter, Rhode Island.

A number of groups, including the Anti-Defamation League, New England; the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), Providence Branch; and Black Lives Matter, Rhode Island, submitted community impact statements to the court in support of the sentencing enhancement.

But at the hearing, the judge ruled that the sentencing enhancement should not be applied.

In a written statement, Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha said he was grateful that his office was able to “obtain some measure of justice” for Mr. Pahlavi and his wife, Dr. Ali.

“Although we are disappointed that the Court did not impose an enhanced sentence under the Hate Crimes Sentencing Act, I respect the Court’s decision,” Mr. Neronha said. “It has been the position of this office that, as is the case in other states with similar laws, criminal misconduct that is motivated, at least in part, by racial or other animus subjects a defendant to this enhancement.

“Criminal misconduct that is motivated in any way by bigotry merits the strongest possible response.”

Mr. Flanders said the judge was correct in not applying the hate crime sentence enhancement.

“This is a zeitgeist in Barrington, and other places, where people want to smoke out and eradicate racism wherever it lives … but that can’t be allowed to morph disputes that had nothing to do with racism,” he said.

 Two versions of the story

During the proceedings, the prosecutors, police and the defendant’s lawyers offered varying accounts of what took place on Aug. 3.

Mr. Flanders said the Pahlavis had planned to have some work done at their home on Rumstick Drive a while back, adding that the Gordons had no objection to the project.

He said the Pahlavis hired David Gardner to complete a survey of the property. The surveyor placed boundary stakes marking what he believed were the edges of the Pahlavi family’s property, but, Mr. Flanders said, Mr. Gardner made a mistake.

In the early 1980s, residents in that area agreed to cede portions of their properties to the town to create Rumstick Drive, Mr. Flanders said. Working without that information, however, Mr. Gardner placed a stake across Rumstick Drive on Dr. Gordon’s front lawn, believing it was the edge of the Pahlavi family’s yard, Mr. Flanders said. 

The Gordons let the stake stand there for a few days, but eventually removed it, Mr. Flanders said.

On Aug. 3, Mr. Pahlavi went on to Dr. Gordon’s front yard to replace the boundary stake, Mr. Flanders said.

“Dr. Gordon walked over and asked him several times what are you doing? He wouldn’t answer,” Mr. Flanders said.

According to a press release from the Attorney General’s office, Dr. Gordon began yelling racial slurs at Mr. Pahlavi.

“He then escalated the encounter into a physical assault with his neighbor …” stated the AG’s press release.

Video from the incident shows Dr. Gordon, with blood on one of his arms, yelling racial slurs at Mr. Pahlavi.

Mr. Flanders offered a different description of the incident — he said Mr. Pahlavi was the aggressor, striking Dr. Gordon with the hammer.

“Pahlavi admits he was never injured,” Mr. Flanders said. “Dr. Gordon had to be stitched up.”

Mr. Flanders said that only after being hit with a hammer and being called “rude,” did Dr. Gordon begin to yell at Mr. Pahlavi.

“That enraged Dr. Gordon … he unleashed a tirade,” Mr. Flanders said. “He wasn’t going to take him on physically” so he started to “bad-mouth” Mr. Pahlavi.

After both sides presented their arguments, Judge Isherwood ruled with the prosecution, and found Dr. Gordon guilty of assault and disorderly conduct.

In September, about a month after the initial incident, the property marker was moved off of Dr. Gordon’s front lawn and to the correct location, Mr. Flanders said.

“This was an emotional property dispute,” Mr. Flanders said. “And while his (Dr. Gordon’s) conduct was reprehensible because of the language, the victim was not selected because of his Iranian background.”