Jewish Man Lured to His Death in Memphis, Hate Crime Suspected
“He was called to an empty building on a street with no surveillance cameras” where he was brutally murdered.
Late last Thursday night, Aviv Broek, a dual citizen of Israel and the United Kingdom, was shot dead in South Memphis, Tennessee. Broek, 21, had arrived in the U.S. two months earlier.
Fox 13 Memphis reported that his killer remains at large.
Broek, a locksmith, received a call late at night from someone posing as a customer who claimed to have been locked out of their car. According to a Monday morning statement from his family (posted on X by journalist Jake Novak), “he was called to an empty building on a street with no surveillance cameras,” where he was brutally murdered. The Memphis police informed Broek’s family that his British passport had been recovered, but his Israeli passport and cell phone were missing. Other than that, they have received “very little information” from the Memphis police, and they “are concerned.”
The Jewish Chronicle reported on Tuesday that “according to unverified social media posts, Broek … was reportedly offered double payment to travel late at night. … On exiting his vehicle, he was shot and robbed, and after two and a half hours, his Israeli roommate managed to track him and found his body at the scene.”
The motive for Broek’s murder is unknown, but his family suspects he was killed because he was a Jew. Given that he was lured to his death in an abandoned building late at night under false pretenses, they believe this was a hate crime. They wrote:
We are foreigners, Jews in a foreign land & we need answers & require assistance to demand justice for our son. We believe there must be an immediate hate crimes investigation. We are aware of the reality that in 2024, Jews are being hunted worldwide. The enemies of the Jewish people have called to ’globalize the Intifada’ and we are concerned that this may be the case in Memphis.
We request that the FBI investigate this as a hate crime. We request that every decent American, Jew and non-Jew, stand with the Jewish & Israeli community in ensuring a full civil-rights investigation now. Today we demand answers.
STATEMENT FROM FAMILY OF ISRAELI MAN MURDERED IN MEMPHIS
21 year old Israeli Aviv Broek was killed in Memphis Thursday. He was called to an empty building on a street with no surveillance cameras late at niight, His U.K. passport has been recovered, but his israeli passport…— Jake Novak (@jakejakeny) November 25, 2024
On Tuesday morning, the family issued a new statement demanding justice.
It’s been 5 days and we barely have any information from the police.
In Memphis there are daily calls to globalize the intifada and harm Zionists; clear calls for violence which must attract a civil rights investigation. Has anti Semitism seeped so deep into American culture that the murder of a Jewish Israeli-British 21 year old is acceptable? Why is it that in the UAE, a murderer was caught immediately but in America it’s accepted that Jews get killed?”
Novak noted that friends are disappointed that “the Memphis Jewish Federation and local ADL have yet to even issue a statement. Nor has the family heard from the British embassy.” He added, “There have also now been discussions among local city councils about whether to warn Jews against visiting Tennessee.”
NEW STATEMENT FROM THE BROEK FAMILY:
“We demand justice and to know what happened to our angelic Aviv. He was always happy he was always smiling.
It’s been 5 days and we barely have any information from the police.
In Memphis there are daily calls to globalize the intifada…
— Jake Novak (@jakejakeny) November 26, 2024
Local media outlet WREG-Memphis reached out to the Memphis Police Department for a comment on Broek’s murder. A spokesperson said, “This is an active investigation and there is no indication at this time of a hate crime. However, MPD is pursuing all leads.”
WREG also reached out to Betar USA, the North American affiliate of Betar, a Zionist group that speaks out for Jews around the world. The activist group is currently working with the Broek family to urge the FBI to open an investigation into Aviv’s death as a hate crime.
Ross Glick, the executive director of this organization, told WREG, “In this particular case, what’s happening now, we’re helping Jews out in America and throughout the world dealing with antisemitism that’s been permeating all throughout society.” He said, “In this particular case, we’re asking the FBI to step in. We’re not feeling confident about how this is being addressed by the local PD.”
As I see it, there are three possible reasons for the MPD’s reluctance to investigate Broek’s death as a hate crime – or to even investigate it at all. First, while the circumstances of his murder look very suspicious, it’s certainly possible it was “just a crime.”
Second, the officers making the call may harbor antisemitic bias.
Or third, the department may simply not have enough available resources to devote to a thorough investigation at the moment. Memphis is the world’s 10th most dangerous city. Amazing but true. In July, WREG reported that “Memphis was the only city in the U.S. to make the top ten of Numbeo’s Crime Index by City 2024 Mid-Year.”
Moreover, the Anti-Defamation League recently reported that “antisemitic incidents in the U.S. in the year since the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas terrorist attack in Israel,” topped 10,000, triple the number from the same period in the prior year.
Whatever the circumstances of his death, this family deserves justice and respect. While Broek’s murder may turn out to be “just a crime,” his loved ones need some answers from the MPD rather than the radio silence they are currently receiving.
Elizabeth writes commentary for The Washington Examiner. She is an academy fellow at The Heritage Foundation and a member of the Editorial Board at The Sixteenth Council, a London think tank. Please follow Elizabeth on X or LinkedIn.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
This is not a “hate crime”, since there is no such thing as a “hate crime”. This is just a crime. It’s murder. Which should be good enough to put the murderer to death, whether he hated the victim or who the victim was or not.
Murder is murder. That is the crime and that is enough. Let’s just punish murderers appropriately, which would be the death penalty.
I agree that the designation or classification of a homicide shouldn’t affect the punishment, which should be universally and consistently severe, in all cases. That said, I don’t have an issue with acknowledging the potential motive of the murderer in carrying out a targeted killing of the victim, because of his religion/ethnicity/nationality.
Call it whatever you want, if the phrase “hate crime” isn’t to your taste, but, there at least exists a distinction from a purely motive classification standpoint, with regard to a homicide carried out for pecuniary reasons; murders of opportunity, or what-have-you, and homicides that are carried out exclusively because of the culprit’s racial/religious/whatever animus. I don’t see any issue in classifying the killer’s motive and acknowledging it. Thus, it shouldn’t be deemed inappropriate objectionable to characterize the targeted murder of a Jew explicitly as such.
In theory, I agree with you.
In practice, until they repeal Hate crime laws we should go all Lewenski on their @sses.
If It’s AOK to per/prosecute non liberals using a questionable law, ruling, or precedent, turn that back on The Left. And most modern antisemitism is definitely a child of the rhetoric of The Left.
It reminds me of liberals who will dox and swat the heck out of non liberals, yet cry me a river if they get publicly outed. Not even threatened, just given free publicity of what they themselves post on social media.
I hope you mean Alinsky. I don’t own any blue dresses.
OK, death penalty is not on the table in far too many states.
It’s an enhancement and when the criteria are met, it’s justified to classify and use it.
No, it’s not. THere’s no justification for the idiotic “hate-crime” idea, at all.
If you care about threat to society then the psychopath with no motive is more of a threat to society than someone who has clear motivations and is, thus, easier to find and catch.
There is no such thing as a “hate-crime”. There is just “crime”.
A crime with a simple motive, such as robbery or road rage, has one victim only, and does only as much harm as that victim suffers. A crime motivated by hatred of an entire group to which the criminal (correctly or falsely) perceives the victim to belong victimizes and harms the entire group. Thus it is appropriate that the sentence reflect that greater harm.
This has always been the case, and has been applied by judges at their discretion. Hate crime laws limit the judge’s discretion, both as to whether hatred really was the motive (this must now be found by a jury based on objective evidence), and as to whether such hatred merits an enhancement.
You continue to be wrong. Hate crime laws are completely legitimate, though in cases of murder they’re often superfluous, since murder is already a very serious crime so enhancing it doesn’t usually change much. Especially in a state where the death penalty is available, and is used for murders not motivated by hatred; in such a case it’s impossible to enhance the sentence, so it becomes irrelevant why the guy did it.
Hate crime laws are slightly relevant in cases where the normal sentence would not be death, so it is possible that a hatred motivation would justify enhancing it to death.
But they are most relevant in the case of lesser crimes. The smaller the crime, the more relevant a hate crime enhancement becomes. To take the opposite extreme from murder, consider vandalism. Someone spray paints someone else’s property. It can be a simple case of a graffitist tagging a wall; in some cases the graffiti is so well done that it’s actually an enhancement, and the owner might even choose not to bring charges. In most cases the owner is not happy, and if the vandal is caught he deserves to be punished, but not very harshly. In most cases he should simply be forced to clean it up, apologize, and maybe do some community service. But suppose that rather than his tag, he paints a swastika on a home he knows to belong to a Holocaust survivor, in a neighborhood he knows to be heavily Jewish. That is a much more serious crime, and deserves a much more serious sentence. The harm done is exponentially greater, the number of victims is greater, and the sentence should reflect that. And that is what hate crime laws are for.
That’s why I oppose a federal hate crime statute, but support state ones. I think state hate crime statutes are sufficient, and there is no need for a federal one on top of them.
No one cares what you think. You are completely incorrect about pretty much everything.
It is moronic to claim that certain motivations are worse than other s for the same, exact crime. It is the crime, itself, that is punished, not the motivation behind it.
Lefties, and idiots like you, like to intentionally confuse the ideas of “intent” and “motivation”, the same way you like to call someone who just breaks into America an “immigrant”. It is idiotic and anyone with sense understands the differences that you try and slip by.
Every judge in the history of our common law has disagreed with you. So have the many legislators going back centuries who prescribed harsher penalties for the same offense depending on the motive. See for instance Thomas Jefferson’s proposed reform of Virginia’s criminal code.
Yes … thought crime is as American as apple pie!! so says Milhouse.
I’ve got news for you, hate is legal. You are allowed to hate anyone you want. You are allowed to express your hate for anyone. You are allowed to hate whole swaths of people … even for no reason other than you just like to hate them. All of that is perfectly legal. Even if you express that legal hate in the commission of a crime, the hate, itself, is still perfectly legal. It is the crime – you know the act that is disallowed – that is illegal. Not the hate.
There is no such thing as a “hate-crime”. There is just crime.
Your idiotic example of the graffiti is incorrect on every level. The same exact graffiti cannot be judged differently based on the person whose property it is. The content of the graffiti, that you ham-handedly tried to shoe in to the old “hate-crime” junk, is not about hate – it’s a question of whether it constitutes a THREAT, in addition to the graffiti, which is, itself, a separate crime and , again, one that has nothing to do with hate or the motivation for the threat.
Of course, at this point you will probably try and defend your idiotic positions by intentionally confusing motivation and justification … don’t bother. You’re wrong on that, too.
Sorry, Milhouse, but you cannot have your “thought-crime” fantasy here. You’ll have to move somewhere else to get that. There are tons of places on Earth – like everywhere else, basically – where they love that sort of retarded idiocy and tyrannical mind-control.
Of course hatred is legal. It’s constitutionally protected and no hate crime law ever punishes it. But hatred as the motive for a crime is a legitimate sentencing factor. Motive always is. Ever since we’ve had the common law, going back many centuries, judges have taken motive into account in sentencing, and that does NOT make it a “thought crime”. They are punishing the CRIME, not the motive, but the appropriate punishment for the CRIME takes the motive into account.
Again, that is how every single judge in history has always done it, so your disagreement just makes you wrong.
I find that he is right about a great deal. I have seen him downvoted for simply pointing out what the US constitution clearly says, or what SCOTUS has ruled on a given issue— apparently by people who wish the law were otherwise and deny that the law is not what they want it to be.
Why is it that people with no legal training seem to think they know more about the law than lawyers do?
Milhouse is not a lawyer.
He is a Democrat operative whose purpose here is to provide information that defends and extends Democrat and leftist ideals by using the ‘more in sorrow than in anger’ approach when explaining that the Democrats and leftists every crime is just and, sadly, something that we can do nothing about because, like it or not, the left was correct. Again.
Azathoth is a liar, a servant of the Prince of Lies, a demon from Hell, and a completely worthless person. He has never contributed anything of value, here or anywhere else. Like that communist bitch Lillian Hellman, every word Azathoth writes is a lie, including “and” and “the”.
You can think any damn thing you want….when you make a crime out of your thought, it is the problem. Greed is a thought. Robbery is a crime.
I dislike hate crime laws. as you said murder is murder.
My first thought when I saw the headline.
My first thought looking at the circumstances is just Robbery. Unless there is some proof that the perpetrator knew or cared about the rest, it’s the simplest motive for calling a service person to an isolated spot late night.
Need more evidence before I’ll sign on to an alternate theory.
Why take his Israeli passport and leave the UK passport?
Do we know he had both on him? Did the perpretrator simply not see one? What use is a stolen passport? Does it have a resale value? Does that value vary by country? Did the perpetrator mistake it for some other kind of document in the heat of the moment?
maybe the passport was taken as proof they did the job. Iran is most certainly capable of offering a bounty for random murder of Jews. As far as I am concerned, Iran should be pounded regardless.
Maybe, but that’s not very likely. There’s nothing at this stage to indicate it. But yes, it’s possible.
I am skeptical that this was a targeted murder of a Jew. Someone would have had to know he was Jewish, what company he worked for and the hours he worked to make sure he would be the one showing up. Sounds more like a plain old murder/robbery to me.
They could have known he was Jewish from his name. And it doesn’t sound like he was working for a company, so they could have targeted him. But so far that’s just speculation.
If a black man gets shot or injured by police, circumstance doesn’t matter, race of the police doesn’t matter, any violent actions of the shootee doesn’t matter, refusal to surrender to the point of Suicide By Cop doesn’t matter, the FIRST and automatic response by the press and the race hustlers is to cry “hate crime”.
Sometimes it is, but they cry wolf so many times I for one no longer give believe them by default.
Seems only fair to apply The Left’s own substandard standards of proof when it’s inconvenient or embarrassing to them.
“The press and the race hustlers” are irrelevant here. They do what they do, regardless of the facts. But they are not the authorities, and the authorities don’t jump to conclusions about the motive for a crime. They do not label a crime as having been motivated by hatred until they find evidence for it.
Exactly as in this case. For the moment there is no evidence that this crime was motivated by hatred — and at this stage the motive is irrelevant anyway. Motive only becomes relevant at sentencing, if the perpetrator is caught and convicted. If that happens in this case, then by that stage evidence of the motive will likely emerge, and if it was motivated by hatred then the charges will reflect that. Exactly as it should be.
However: he was chosen (from a “phone book” et al to be called late at night to go to an abandoned building.
Why would you go to the trouble to target a locksmith for a robbery under arranged circumstances? Are locksmiths known for carrying large amounts of cash? Do they all wear expensive watches? Do they all drive fancy cars worth stealing?
I think the answer to all these questions is “Generally not”. So, this leads us to look for a different reason for the arrangements to lure him there.
I think “to murder him” is obvious; unless there’s evidence of a jealous lover ( after 2 months in the country?) or a cheated business partner (same thing – 2 months isn’t much time for things to go to such extremes.
I think that antisemitic hate sounds like a pretty damn reasonable working premise until a better one comes out.
You overestimate the amount of money required before people are willing to kill for it. Delivery drivers and other service personnel who go to specific locations are common targets for attack because they can be drawn to isolated spots.
Also, it’s not how much money do they typically carry; it’s how much money does some ignorant thug THINK they will be carrying. The victims in the book In Cold Blood were selected because the ex-cons who murdered them were positive that all farmers had a big hoard of cash. And Jews have been targeted by people who were convinced that all Jews are rich.
It’s irrational to overlook the most probable reason for the crime, which is that someone just personally hated the SOB. A personal grudge is an order of magnitude more probable a motive than anti-semitism against a guy who’s barely been in the country for two months. “Why would you call out a locksmith” is a silly question, if the guy you hate is a locksmith.
Everyday criminals don’t elaborately lure their victims to a deserted location to rob and murder; much more likely this particular man was targeted and assassinated.
Why was he targeted? He’d only been in the country a couple months; seems unlikely that he’d made a murderous enemy in that amount of time.
Maybe a rival in love or business? Possible. But Jewhate has grown so exponentially since Oct 7 that this seems as or more likely as any other explanation.
Yes, they do. All the time. Ask pizza deliverers, taxi drivers, etc. Most of the time they don’t even call a specific person, they call a company to send someone, and then rob and murder whoever shows up.
Your flaw here Milhouse is thinking that robbers would choose a locksmith to call. There’s a presumption that taxi drivers will have cash, and pizza delivery guys will have cash AND pizza. However who presumes a locksmith is carrying enough cash to be worth robbing?
Maybe you think he carries master keys for the model of car you want to jug.
In 2023, there were 342 murders in Memphis (5th-highest murder rate in the country). How many did Memphis PD close? Less than 100 of them, an absolute embarrassment, IMO. The chances of Memphis PD solving a true stone-cold whodunit, which this appears to be if they legit don’t have any leads at all, are slim. Local police don’t have great track records of solving stranger violence, which is why serial killers can stack the bodies before being caught. Police simply don’t have the resources to throw the necessary manpower at this kind of problem.
How very sad, what a shit hole America has become
It wil take many more than 4 years to
Clean up
Let’s get started
Memphis should have a travel warning. It’s a dangerous place. High murder and violent crime rate. The Governor should order the State Police in to Memphis to investigate this crime.
What exactly do you mean by a “travel warning”, and who do you think should issue it?
The only usage I know for the term “travel warning” is for those issued by the US State Department, warning potential international travelers of dangerous conditions in this or that country. US citizens who travel the world expect that if they get into trouble the local US embassy or consulate will help them; therefore the department puts out warnings to whomever it may concern, especially when it anticipates that it might not be able to help anyone.
Obviously the State Department has no jurisdiction or expertise regarding cities and states in the USA, and I can’t think of another federal agency that would be in a similar position regarding travel to them. If you get mugged in Memphis, you don’t expect any federal agency to help you. If you wander into a hurricane you may expect help from FEMA, and indeed FEMA does issue warnings. But the Memphis crime situation is not in its jurisdiction either.
Have you ever been to Memphis? Driven a car in Memphis? Have a child whose close friend and college classmate, Andrew “Drew”, who was murdered in a random home invasion in Memphis? Maybe “travel” warning isn’t right. A blanket “Warning” would be better. Screw Memphis.
Again, a warning from whom? Who exactly do you want to be issuing such a warning, and how is it in their bailiwick to do so?
Don’t like the Hate Crime term except as motive, but to me that reason should have no difference than a robbery, a hit crime for payment. It’s still murder and the criminal needs to pay for it and to me a death sentence.
This young man was just working no different than I would going to a home to repair something.
This breaks my heart.
That’s all it ever means.
Motive has always been a factor in sentencing, for as long as the common law has existed. Before hate crime laws were invented individual judges would take such a motive into account and often use it to enhance the sentence, but they were not required to do so, and sometimes they didn’t because they shared the criminal’s bias. Also before hate crime laws were invented the judge could just infer such a motive and use it to enhance the sentence, without asking the jury. Hate crime laws do two things: They compel the judge to formally consider hatred as a motive, but they also take away from the judge the power to decide whether hatred was the motive, and give that instead to the proper finder of fact, which is the jury. A judge can’t enhance a sentence for hatred unless the jury has considered objective evidence and decided that that was indeed the motive. Which is a great advance for the civil liberties of those criminals falsely accused of such a motive.
But the going for the last decade or more somehow a hate crime motive makes it more worse than a murder.
That is not true. Hatred as a motive for a crime does make it worse that it would otherwise be. That is a moral truth. But a crime that is significantly less than murder doesn’t become greater than murder just because it was motivated by hatred, and there are no cases in the last decade that say otherwise.
LOL.
That’s retarded.
A “moral truth” … you are quite full of yourself in your idiocy, aren’t you.
According to you, punching someone because you hate them is worse than punching them the same exact way because you want to take their money or even punching them the exact same way JUST FOR FUN. Really? That is your idea of morality? So much so that you laughably claim that to be a “moral truth”?
The punch is the crime and the punch is the same no matter the motivation for it. The question is only whether the punch is intentional and whether it is justified (i.e. self defense) – that is it, not the underlying motivation to commit the crime of punching someone. We do not punish thoughts. We punish actions.
That is not what the term hate crime means, and you know it very well. You are simply being dishonest here, on purpose.
Punching someone because you hate an entire class of people to which you perceive him to belong, is worse than punching them the same exact way because you want to take their money, or even punching them the exact same way just for fun, or for any other motive. Much worse. And it deserves a much harsher penalty.
If five black Memphis police officers could kill Tyree Nichols, a black man, how much effort do you think they’ll put into finding the killer of some random Jew?
Perhaps Memphis’ allegedly Jewish Rep. Steve Cohen can help get to the bottom of the matter.
(((sestamibi)))
How exactly did they know he was a JEWISH locksmith when placing the call?
More like a lure/murder.
The name Aviv would tell them that. Or they may have known of him from before. But at this stage it seems more likely that it was just a standard lure/murder.
I am embarrassed that someone came to America to live a better life in a city of historic significance and then some scumbag killed him, most likely by a common criminal for common criminal reasons.
I have not seen any mention of whether he was here legally. It shouldn’t matter; either way the crime is just as heinous and he did not deserve it. But I wonder, if it were to come out that he did not have a proper visa, how many commenters here on LI would immediately turn on a dime and say that in that case he got what he deserved and good riddance to him.
Seems like a robbery/murder to me. The people committing the crime didn’t care who showed up as long as someone did. This type of thing happens all the time to pizza delivery etc as others have pointed out. Just so happens the guy was Jewish.
Yes, at this stage that’s the scenario that requires the fewest assumptions. But it’s entirely possible that it was targeted at him, and that antisemitism was the motive. Ockham doesn’t say the answer with the fewest assumptions is always right, just that that’s the one to bet on.
Heinous, indeed. I hope the perps get caught; and I, for one, have few qualms about applying the death penalty to murderers of any kind,
However, re “hate crimes”, could someone kindly explain to me what a “love crime” or “simple respect crime” might look like? I’m a simple guy who figures that if you love or simply respect your neighbor you won’t try to kill or rob him.
You misunderstand the term hate crime. Most crimes are not hate crimes. They are not motivated by hatred of anyone, let alone of a significant class of people. Robberies are not motivated by hatred but by greed. Murders are usually motivated by all sorts of things, but not usually because of the victim’s perceived membership of a class of people. Vandalism, assault, rape, name the crime, it’s usually got nothing to do with the victim’s race, sex, age, religion, appearance, or any other such characteristic.
But occasionally a crime is so motivated, and in that case it’s an attack not only on the immediate victim but on the entire class that shares with the victim whatever feature it was that motivated the crime. The entire class are victims, and they are all harmed, often significantly. Therefore it is only right and just that the sentence reflect that. Traditionally this was a factor that a judge could and usually would take into account, but it was up to his discretion. And he could also conclude that there was such a motive without any evidence. Hate crime laws formalize it, putting the determination of such a motive in the hands of the jury rather than the judge, and requiring him to enhance the sentence if the jury finds that it was so motivated.
That is just dumb and completely incorrect. If someone attacks someone and screams “fat pig” at them during the attack, no other fat people are harmed by that.
You like to just make up complete BS like “it’s an attack … on … the entire class” and state it as if it were true. IT IS NOT TRUE. No one else is attacked or harmed. Maybe they are offended, but that’s just tough.
Enough with your half-intellectual contortions to try and defend the thought-police in America.
You are dishonest . Any attack on a person because of his perceived membership of a larger class of people is an attack on that entire class. It is both intended to and actually does put the entire class in fear. It is morally much worse than the same crime committed for some other reason, and if you can’t see that you’re a moral cretin.
It’s rather strange that he didn’t record the name given to him by the caller before going there. A name could tell us a lot. Perhaps that name is being suppressed by the police.
Record it where? And why would he do that? He got the call, he knew where he was going, why would he write it down anywhere?
When you call a late night locksmith to come get you into your car you can’t request specific people.
You get the locksmith on call.
And it’s a crap detail. Something for the new guy.
This was a robbery.
There’s no mention that he was working for a company. You’re just making that up.