student kills self after webcam spying UPDATE: Conviction Overturned

[jjenny]

Knowing the ramifications of actions.
Parents being horrified and taking the time to talk to their kids about it.

There's a final tipping point for people that commit suicide, but it's not usually over one isolated incident. To blame Ravi and Molly completely, and to have them take the complete consequences for Tyler's actions is just as immoral as their actions.

They aren't charged with his suicide. So the law doesn't blame them for the suicide at all, let alone completely. What they are charged with is invasion of privacy, and that is completely unrelated to Tyler's reaction.
Why should they if they convicted serve no time for this whatsoever?

 

[jjenny]

IMO, where is respect? love your neighbor? courtesy? privacy?
I ask bullies out there, would you want someone to do this to you even if you are
a straight person???

I believe that some of these reality tv shows so desensitized at least some people, especially teenagers to what privacy is, maybe they don't even understand the concept.

 

[Charlie09]

They aren't charged with his suicide. So the law doesn't blame them for the suicide at all, let alone completely. What they are charged with is invasion of privacy, and that is completely unrelated to Tyler's reaction.
Why should they if they convicted serve no time for this whatsoever?

The law may not but there are plenty of posters that would like them to.

Let's rephrase it -
Why should they serve time? What does it accomplish for them to serve time? What does it prevent?

 

[Velouria]

The law may not but there are plenty of posters that would like them to.

Sure, perhaps some of us would. Doesn't change the facts at the center of this case, namely that Ravi and Wei deliberately violated Clementi's privacy by secretly recording and broadcasting him without his knowledge or consent. I may believe their conduct directly or indirectly led to this young man's suicide, but I'm fully capable of distinguishing that personal belief from my evaluation of the legal issues involved.

Why should these two serve time? Why shouldn't they? What kind of message would it send not to punish such a blatant violation of the privacy rights of another? Would we be asking whether or not the guy who secretly videotaped Erin Andrews in her hotel room should be punished?

 

[Charlie09]

Sure, perhaps some of us would. Doesn't change the facts at the center of this case, namely that Ravi and Wei deliberately violated Clementi's privacy by secretly recording and broadcasting him without his knowledge or consent. I may believe their conduct directly or indirectly led to this young man's suicide, but I'm fully capable of distinguishing that personal belief from my evaluation of the legal issues involved.

Why should these two serve time? Why shouldn't they? What kind of message would it send not to punish such a blatant violation of the privacy rights of another? Would we be asking whether or not the guy who secretly videotaped Erin Andrews in her hotel room should be punished?

Does anyone honestly believe that the two who recorded are happy he died? Does anyone think that was their intent?
If Erin Andrews and that man shared a room, it would be a different scenario completely.

What do you do when sites like this are EVERYWHERE?
http://collegeacb.com -
It would seem like voyeurism is just part of college? (Which is absurd, unless no one had ever thought to say what the consequences could be)

And should universities make sites unaccessible? http://techcrunch.com/2008/11/19/juicycampus-gets-banned-from-tsu-cries-foul/

To those of us who were in college pre-Internet days, honestly would we have thought of saying "alright, don't record anyone having sex and for crying out loud don't post anything that you wouldn't want posted about yourself"

I am not defending Ravi and Molly. I just don't think they had any idea of the ramifications of their immaturity and posting what they thought was funny.

 

[jjenny]

Does anyone honestly believe that the two who recorded are happy he died? Does anyone think that was their intent?
If Erin Andrews and that man shared a room, it would be a different scenario completely.

What do you do when sites like this are EVERYWHERE?
http://collegeacb.com -
It would seem like voyeurism is just part of college? (Which is absurd, unless no one had ever thought to say what the consequences could be)

And should universities make sites unaccessible? http://techcrunch.com/2008/11/19/juicycampus-gets-banned-from-tsu-cries-foul/

To those of us who were in college pre-Internet days, honestly would we have thought of saying "alright, don't record anyone having sex and for crying out loud don't post anything that you wouldn't want posted about yourself"

I am not defending Ravi and Molly. I just don't think they had any idea of the ramifications of their immaturity and posting what they thought was funny.

Are you really saying that if Erin Andrews shared her hotel room with a roommate, it would be perfectly fine for that roommate to hide a camera in their room, film Erin in the nude without her knowledge and then post it on-line without her consent?

 

[Charlie09]

Are you really saying that if Erin Andrews shared her hotel room with a roommate, it would be perfectly fine for that roommate to hide a camera in their room, film Erin in the nude without her knowledge and then post it on-line without her consent?

Nope, I clearly did not say that.

 

[jjenny]

Nope, I clearly did not say that.

Then what exactly did you mean by "it would be a different scenario completely?"

 

[Charlie09]

Here we have a nationally known gossip site, reporting WITH pictures (blurred) but really...don't you think people that know them will know who they are?
http://jezebel.com/5652114/college-girls-power-point-****-list-goes-viral-gallery?skyline=true&s=i

where's the outrage calling jezebel to take it down? Or is it because the guys are all "Studs" they are able to laugh at it and shrug it off?

Obviously, Tyler's death did not wake everyone up.

 

[Charlie09]

Then what exactly did you mean by "it would be a different scenario completely?"

I've already hit abuse previously at the personalization of posts.

My opinion is the two are not comparable.

 

[jjenny]

I've already hit abuse previously at the personalization of posts.

My opinion is the two are not comparable.

I asked for a clarification on a statement so I sincerely doubt this qualifies as personalization of posts.

 

[jjenny]

Here we have a nationally known gossip site, reporting WITH pictures (blurred) but really...don't you think people that know them will know who they are?
http://jezebel.com/5652114/college-girls-power-point-****-list-goes-viral-gallery?skyline=true&s=i

where's the outrage calling jezebel to take it down? Or is it because the guys are all "Studs" they are able to laugh at it and shrug it off?

Obviously, Tyler's death did not wake everyone up.

It appears she pulled those photos from Facebook. Which is not the same as taping someone during a sexual encounter without permission and broadcasting it without consent. It does not appear that what she did broke any laws. There are no laws that say she can not describe her sexual encounters assuming what she actually writes is the truth.

 

[angelmom]

Does anyone honestly believe that the two who recorded are happy he died? Does anyone think that was their intent?
If Erin Andrews and that man shared a room, it would be a different scenario completely.

What do you do when sites like this are EVERYWHERE?
http://collegeacb.com -
It would seem like voyeurism is just part of college? (Which is absurd, unless no one had ever thought to say what the consequences could be)

And should universities make sites unaccessible? http://techcrunch.com/2008/11/19/juicycampus-gets-banned-from-tsu-cries-foul/

To those of us who were in college pre-Internet days, honestly would we have thought of saying "alright, don't record anyone having sex and for crying out loud don't post anything that you wouldn't want posted about yourself"

I am not defending Ravi and Molly. I just don't think they had any idea of the ramifications of their immaturity and posting what they thought was funny.

My husband had a similar reaction. But my point is that these kids have grown up with the internet. They have no memory of a time before websites, email, and message boards. They have probably had cell phones since their early teens, and myspace/fb all of high school.

I know several kids who went off to college this year, and none of them are perfect human beings but I can honestly say that NONE of them would do something this malicious. They are fully aware of the permanence and viral nature of the web. There have been many talks at their high school (and our local middle school, and even some 4-5th grades) about sexting, posting on fb, and putting pictures or videos on the web. These talks have been going on regularly for at least 5 years in our community. I remember reading a flier about one in 2003 or 4 that was teaching parents about fb and myspace and being shocked at some of the things people were posting, but the younger women I worked with were not shocked, nor did they think it was rare.

If a kid is smart enough to go to Rutgers and tech savvy enough to set up a webcam stream that others can access online, then that kid is smart enough to know the sheer numbers of people who may view the stream and that it can be recorded, downloaded, and shared forever.

No, we would never have thought of it because when I was in school (not sure how old you are) cell phones were what rich people had installed in their cars and the web was what a spider made overnight in the doorway. But my 10th grader (only 3 years younger than these kids) has already had to sign away his life on an honor code that contains an entire section about technology - every year since 6th grade. And we've had to read and sign it too.

There is no way they didn't know it was wrong. There is no way they didn't know it was permanent. There was no way they didn't know it was widespread. The only thing they didn't know was that they'd get caught.

Jail time would give them some time to think about the harm they've done, as well as sending a clear message to other bullies about taking this kind of harassment seriously. It would also keep them from preying on anyone else for at least a little while. All valid reasons for them to be charged and imprisoned.

Seriously. It sounds to me like these kids never learned that there are consequences for their actions. It's high time they figured it out.

 

[arielilane]

I think anyone that post something like Ravi did, on the Internet, etc. without someone's knowledge is the making of a serial murderer/dangerous evil person. I think Ravi may have deeper issues, than what is being addressed here. However, I haven't read the whole thread. There is more going on than what we "see". His actions are a huge red flag. The beginning of a life of crime for Ravi. The girl, Wei, doesn't get a free pass, either.

 

[MoonFlwr]

If a kid is smart enough to go to Rutgers and tech savvy enough to set up a webcam stream that others can access online, then that kid is smart enough to know the sheer numbers of people who may view the stream and that it can be recorded, downloaded, and shared forever.



There is no way they didn't know it was wrong. There is no way they didn't know it was permanent. There was no way they didn't know it was widespread. The only thing they didn't know was that they'd get caught.

Jail time would give them some time to think about the harm they've done, as well as sending a clear message to other bullies about taking this kind of harassment seriously. It would also keep them from preying on anyone else for at least a little while. All valid reasons for them to be charged and imprisoned.

Seriously. It sounds to me like these kids never learned that there are consequences for their actions. It's high time they figured it out.

...respectfully snipped for space...

I totally agree with your whole post, but snipped it to save space. I couldn't find the 'thanks' icon, so had to comment on it this way!

If they're smart enough to be at university, the idea that some posters are proposing such as .."they didn't realise the consequences"... is quite laughable!

 

[Charlie09]

My husband had a similar reaction. But my point is that these kids have grown up with the internet. They have no memory of a time before websites, email, and message boards. They have probably had cell phones since their early teens, and myspace/fb all of high school.

I know several kids who went off to college this year, and none of them are perfect human beings but I can honestly say that NONE of them would do something this malicious. They are fully aware of the permanence and viral nature of the web. There have been many talks at their high school (and our local middle school, and even some 4-5th grades) about sexting, posting on fb, and putting pictures or videos on the web. These talks have been going on regularly for at least 5 years in our community. I remember reading a flier about one in 2003 or 4 that was teaching parents about fb and myspace and being shocked at some of the things people were posting, but the younger women I worked with were not shocked, nor did they think it was rare.

If a kid is smart enough to go to Rutgers and tech savvy enough to set up a webcam stream that others can access online, then that kid is smart enough to know the sheer numbers of people who may view the stream and that it can be recorded, downloaded, and shared forever.

No, we would never have thought of it because when I was in school (not sure how old you are) cell phones were what rich people had installed in their cars and the web was what a spider made overnight in the doorway. But my 10th grader (only 3 years younger than these kids) has already had to sign away his life on an honor code that contains an entire section about technology - every year since 6th grade. And we've had to read and sign it too.

There is no way they didn't know it was wrong. There is no way they didn't know it was permanent. There was no way they didn't know it was widespread. The only thing they didn't know was that they'd get caught.

Jail time would give them some time to think about the harm they've done, as well as sending a clear message to other bullies about taking this kind of harassment seriously. It would also keep them from preying on anyone else for at least a little while. All valid reasons for them to be charged and imprisoned.

Seriously. It sounds to me like these kids never learned that there are consequences for their actions. It's high time they figured it out.

College for me was dial up BBS era...and my child is home schooled and grade school age...so I don't know what is or is not taught in general. I know I'm always surprised at how little my friends pay attention to their kid's online activities.

I agree that they didn't learn there are consequences, but I still think in their wildest thoughts, someone killing himself never entered their mind...and what a heavy burden they must carry the rest of their lives - I just don't see that jail is the right thing for them.

 

[germaine]

If a kid is smart enough to go to Rutgers and tech savvy enough to set up a webcam stream that others can access online, then that kid is smart enough to know the sheer numbers of people who may view the stream and that it can be recorded, downloaded, and shared forever.

sbm~

Just sayin', my tween can do this...easily, and does it every day. With the knowledge and participation of her friends, so far. But she could easily do it without. My messy powder room and unmade bed are in more on-line feeds than I'd like to think about. The things her friends do on-line for all the world to see are truly shocking to me. Their standards of what is fair game for public consumption are just so different than ours that it's really impossible to get inside their heads. Not to say that it's right, but just to say that it is. I'm sure that by the time my middle schooler gets to college she will be so enured to having every aspect of her and her friends' lives on the internet, that she'll have a webcam trained on herself at all times, and won't be able to comprehend why others don't feel that way. If she had her way, she already would, no matter how many times I've explained to her why it's not a good thing. I have to monitor her constantly, and shut her down completely sometimes. And when she's in college, I won't be able to do that so easily. I can easily see how a non-tech savvy parent would be completely oblivious and would never have had discussions about this kind of boundary and consequences with their teenager. And if they had, whether it fell on deaf ears -- partly due to the acceptance of it among their peers.

I have a feeling there are quite a few college students quaking in their boots right now praying that the victim of one of their on-line invasions of privacy is not gay and doesn't commit suicide. Which is a good thing, I suppose. But my point is that I can say with absolute certainty that Ravi isn't the only one whose ever done something like this. He's more like the drunk driver who blows a 1.0 who happens to take out the famiy of four in the mini-van, while the dude he was drinking with would have blown a 2.0, but didn't happen to kill anyone by sheer dumb luck. Who is more morally culpable? jmoo.

 

[Charlie09]

It appears she pulled those photos from Facebook. Which is not the same as taping someone during a sexual encounter without permission and broadcasting it without consent. It does not appear that what she did broke any laws. There are no laws that say she can not describe her sexual encounters assuming what she actually writes is the truth.

I'm not certain I'm seeing a difference. Ravi and Molly apparently are charged (and it's uncertain if it will stick) with invasion of privacy. I don't see how the stories are really different? Ravi was just showing the truth of what was happening in his room. Neither party had the consent of the other (s)....to tell their "truth" about someone else.

 

[jjenny]

I'm not certain I'm seeing a difference. Ravi and Molly apparently are charged (and it's uncertain if it will stick) with invasion of privacy. I don't see how the stories are really different? Ravi was just showing the truth of what was happening in his room. Neither party had the consent of the other (s)....to tell their "truth" about someone else.

The difference is clear and obvious to me: it's not legal to tape and broadcast someone's sexual encounter when that someone has a reasonable expectation of privacy. There is no law that says someone can not brag about her or his sexual encounters.

 

[Paintr]

http://news.spreadit.org/dharun-ravi-molly-wei-group-pushes-murder-charges-in-tyler-clementi-death/


The group alleges that because the taping was premeditated, they should face charges hat are similar to that of a drunk driving death. Conversely, other individuals are fighting for the charges to remain the way that they are. It is a case that will divide many people, and has already caused quite a bit of controversy around the nation. The question is not whether or not the two of them should be charged, but rather what they should be charged with.