student kills self after webcam spying UPDATE: Conviction Overturned

[thumbtack]

Ravi and Wei believed that they were entitled to watch someone having sex with someone else. wth That was a sophomoric action, driven by ignorance; to film him was malicious, it proves intent. It is time for these two to pull up their big people panties and take the punishment for their actions. Ignorance is no excuse in a court of law.

Once again, an excellent post! There's nothing to add. You state it perfectly.

 

[HMSHood]

My impression about Dharun Ravi is that he is a pathological liar with deep seated anger issues and has disregards for social norms. He likely has issues of self-hatred. He is most likely resembles Seung-Hui Cho, Michael Crook, or Lori Drew.

As for Molly Wei, she is very dependent in nature and is a follower. She does not think for herself and is easily influenced Wei likes to be around people and is sensitive what people think of her. She is most likely to resemble Susan Smith, Ashley Grills, Ashley Longe, and Dylan Klebold.

 

[Brassband]

I think the charges are excessive. I would like to see them do some community service. Like hospice work for aids patients. I think these kids are just very immature. These kids are exposed to voyeurism, sex tapes, and the like via Kim Kardashian, Paris Hilton, Pamela Anderson, and who know who else. I think they thought they'd be big shots on campus with this stunt.

 

[UCAKID]

Did anyone else notice that the camera showed 2 of the jurors as they took that first break after the PT's opening? When the case resumed from break, the judge apologized for stating some of the jurors' names, but I never heard a word about the camera gaffe?!

 

[~n/t~]

In her half-hour opening statement, McClure did not mention Clementi's suicide.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rivate-sexual-activity.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Why didn't the prosecution mention the suicide?

 

[~n/t~]

"It's scandalous because the guy (with Clementi) was older, not because it was a guy," said Alvin Artha, a friend of Ravi's from the dormitory. "He was older, not a Rutger's student. That's why Dahrun was acting the way he was."

Cicco also noted the older appearance of the man, known only as M.B. in court documents, who was with Clementi.

"He had dark hair and a goatee and was solid looking, maybe 5'9, and looked to be older than a college student,. But not obscenely old," she testified, drawing laughs from the courtroom.

bbm.....the courtroom laughed? Really? There is nothing funny about this.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/rutgers-students-tyler-clementi-webcam-peeking-big-deal/story?id=15776275

 

[~n/t~]

Get a box of tissues. :cry:


Letters to My Brother

http://www.out.com/news-commentary/2012/02/01/tyler-clementi-james-letters-my-brother

 

[thumbtack]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rivate-sexual-activity.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Why didn't the prosecution mention the suicide?

Ruled too prejudicial? (guessing)

 

[~n/t~]

Ruled too prejudicial? (guessing)

Maybe. But isn't it what this case is all about?

 

[daisy7]

Maybe. But isn't it what this case is all about?

Ravi has not been charged with the death of Tyler.

Ravi, 19, was eventually charged with bias intimidation as a hate crime along with invasion of privacy and hindering apprehension

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/dharun_ravi_trial_clementis_re.html

 

[daisy7]

This article has a lot of details I had never heard about before, including texts between the two.

A timeline of events could be crucial to determining if Dharun Ravi is guilty of bullying and snooping on Tyler Clementi in the so-called "Roommate Webcam Spying" trial. Ravi was hit with a 15-count indictment, including bias intimidation and invasion of privacy, following Clementi's suicide in Sept. 2010.

Though not charged in Clementi's death, Ravi's case hinges on the roommates' interactions before Clementi jumped from the George Washington Bridge. Ravi used a computer camera to watch Clementi in a romantic encounter with a man, then wrote about it on Twitter. Clementi apparently experienced a range of emotions after he found out about Ravi's voyeurism. Was it a bad prank, as Ravi's defense claims, or was it hate crime against a gay roommate, as the prosecution alleges?

(snip)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/dharun-ravi-tyler-clementi-timeline_n_1297056.html

 

[Tugela]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rivate-sexual-activity.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Why didn't the prosecution mention the suicide?

Because it is not relevant to the charges.

 

[Tugela]

This article has a lot of details I had never heard about before, including texts between the two.

A timeline of events could be crucial to determining if Dharun Ravi is guilty of bullying and snooping on Tyler Clementi in the so-called "Roommate Webcam Spying" trial. Ravi was hit with a 15-count indictment, including bias intimidation and invasion of privacy, following Clementi's suicide in Sept. 2010.

Though not charged in Clementi's death, Ravi's case hinges on the roommates' interactions before Clementi jumped from the George Washington Bridge. Ravi used a computer camera to watch Clementi in a romantic encounter with a man, then wrote about it on Twitter. Clementi apparently experienced a range of emotions after he found out about Ravi's voyeurism. Was it a bad prank, as Ravi's defense claims, or was it hate crime against a gay roommate, as the prosecution alleges?

(snip)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/24/dharun-ravi-tyler-clementi-timeline_n_1297056.html

Reading that account it seems pretty clear that Clementi was setting the situation up. He knew that Ravi wasn't gay, and as a homosexual himself he would know that most straight young males would not be so accepting of the situation going on in what was their bedroom as well. He also knew that Ravi had used the computer to look in on him, but then the very next day he sets up exactly the same situation, after making a complaint about it. He obviously knew what would happen, and made no effort to prevent it (such as finding an alternate venue to meet his friend) or simply disconnecting/covering the computer. Computers are not magic. Then, when it happened again, as he knew it would, he made a formal compaint and then killed himself, advertising that he was going to do so.

I would say that he had psychological issues that predate his room mate drama, and the whole suicide thing was going to happen on one pretext or another no matter what.

 

[daisy7]

Reading that account it seems pretty clear that Clementi was setting the situation up. He knew that Ravi wasn't gay, and as a homosexual himself he would know that most straight young males would not be so accepting of the situation going on in what was their bedroom as well. He also knew that Ravi had used the computer to look in on him, but then the very next day he sets up exactly the same situation, after making a complaint about it. He obviously knew what would happen, and made no effort to prevent it (such as finding an alternate venue to meet his friend) or simply disconnecting/covering the computer. Computers are not magic. Then, when it happened again, as he knew it would, he made a formal compaint and then killed himself, advertising that he was going to do so.

I would say that he had psychological issues that predate his room mate drama, and the whole suicide thing was going to happen on one pretext or another no matter what.

I read your whole post, but didn't understand the bolded sentence. Can you clarify? TIA!

 

[Tugela]

There were two incidents, days apart. Clementi was aware of the first incident but chose to replay it pretty much exactly. He obviously knew what the outcome would be and consequently was setting Ravi up.

That is not a rational thing for a person to do, if they were caught in a compromising position only a fool then goes and does it again the next day, unless they intended to be caught.

When I first heard about this case I thought that it was appalling, but reading that timeline it is clear that Clementi had much deeper issues going on, and the Ravi thing was a case of those playing out for dramatic effect.

 

[Jacie Estes]

There were two incidents, days apart. Clementi was aware of the first incident but chose to replay it pretty much exactly. He obviously knew what the outcome would be and consequently was setting Ravi up.

That is not a rational thing for a person to do, if they were caught in a compromising position only a fool then goes and does it again the next day, unless they intended to be caught.

When I first heard about this case I thought that it was appalling, but reading that timeline it is clear that Clementi had much deeper issues going on, and the Ravi thing was a case of those playing out for dramatic effect.

It is not rational for Ravi to decide that he would use a webcam to video his roommate having sex, not once but we don't know how many other times. He then chose to tweet about this. Ravi's actions were despicable; not only is he the roommate from he!!, he is a lowlife for his actions. IMHO. There is no equating having sex with someone with Ravi's perverse act of videoing it and then disseminating it. Ravi is in no way to be commended or his actions trivialized; he is sitting in a court of law as a defendant for a reason. Deport him; his actions have shown him not to be a desirable prospective citizen. He so easily broke the law. IMHO

A suicide is a tragic occurence and should never be minimized or dismissed as inevitable. IMHO

 

[zippitydoda]

There were two incidents, days apart. Clementi was aware of the first incident but chose to replay it pretty much exactly. He obviously knew what the outcome would be and consequently was setting Ravi up.

That is not a rational thing for a person to do, if they were caught in a compromising position only a fool then goes and does it again the next day, unless they intended to be caught.

When I first heard about this case I thought that it was appalling, but reading that timeline it is clear that Clementi had much deeper issues going on, and the Ravi thing was a case of those playing out for dramatic effect.

I don't understand your position at all. Tyler asked for private time in the room they shared, to which Ravi said yes. As for being caught in a compromising position. Tyler was not "caught" he was stealthy spied on, in his own private room. IMO, "caught in a compromising position" is more like "the boss was caught doodling his secretary in the copier room during the company holiday party".

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/02/06/120206fa_fact_parker#ixzz1nYiwutLN

At around eight-thirty, Ravi left Davidson C for Ultimate Frisbee practice. Clementi read Ravi’s “happening again” tweet sometime before mid-evening—and this seems to have ended his doubts about taking action. Just before M.B. was due to arrive, Clementi went to see Raahi Grover, a resident adviser. Grover took him seriously, and asked him to repeat his story in an e-mail. He also offered him a spare bed in his own room for that night. Clementi declined, and returned to his room.

He unplugged Ravi’s computer. In a text sent at 9:41 P.M., he told Yang, “I was afraid he might have hidden another webcam so I also shut down and turned off the power strip.” Prosecutors, pursuing a bias charge, have claimed that “afraid,” in this context, constitutes evidence of fear.

I think this part of the article is important to the charges:

Perhaps Ravi expected Clementi to read his tweet; or perhaps he didn’t bother to consider that he might. This issue may become important to a jury, given the seeming conflict between a charge of invasion of privacy and a charge of bias intimidation, both charges that Ravi faces. Spying is secret, and intimidation is not.

 

[Tugela]

I don't understand your position at all. Tyler asked for private time in the room they shared, to which Ravi said yes. As for being caught in a compromising position. Tyler was not "caught" he was stealthy spied on, in his own private room. IMO, "caught in a compromising position" is more like "the boss was caught doodling his secretary in the copier room during the company holiday party".

It was NOT his private room, it was a room he shared with Ravi, he had no expectation of privacy. On the first encounter he misled Ravi regarding the duration of the encounter, and on the second there does not appear to be any indication that Ravi agreed to give him privacy.

According to the timeline in that article, he asked Ravi for private time, but when Ravi returned at 9PM he found out that "private time" was for the entire night. Ravi was expected to find somewhere else to sleep, not his own bedroom. It is not surprising for him to have been pretty POed at that point. Wouldn't you be?

Then, two days later he does the same thing, but only AFTER he has been posting online about it and requesting a room change. There is no way he would not have been aware that Ravi was very annoyed by the previous days events, so it was a provocative act. Clementi knew what Ravi's reaction was going to be, but went ahead and did it anyway. The only reasonable reason would be to elicit the obvious response he knew he was going to get. It is pretty clear that he was looking for drama/fight and was prepared, setting up a paper trail. If he was not being provocative the logical thing would have been to request a room change and not entertain guests until he moved, to maintain the peace. He didn't do that.

And then the next day he jumps off the bridge, even as Ravi is texting him to defuse the situation.

It is quite clear IMO that he was unstable, and there are probably other things going on in his life to precipitate this.

 

[~n/t~]

The big question is would Ravi have done the same thing if it was a heteorsexual encounter or did he do this because Tyler was homosexual and wanted to intimidate him?

His so called apology means nothing. The only reason he did was to save his own ***.

 

[zippitydoda]

It was NOT his private room, it was a room he shared with Ravi, he had no expectation of privacy. On the first encounter he misled Ravi regarding the duration of the encounter, and on the second there does not appear to be any indication that Ravi agreed to give him privacy.

According to the timeline in that article, he asked Ravi for private time, but when Ravi returned at 9PM he found out that "private time" was for the entire night. Ravi was expected to find somewhere else to sleep, not his own bedroom. It is not surprising for him to have been pretty POed at that point. Wouldn't you be?

Then, two days later he does the same thing, but only AFTER he has been posting online about it and requesting a room change. There is no way he would not have been aware that Ravi was very annoyed by the previous days events, so it was a provocative act. Clementi knew what Ravi's reaction was going to be, but went ahead and did it anyway. The only reasonable reason would be to elicit the obvious response he knew he was going to get. It is pretty clear that he was looking for drama/fight and was prepared, setting up a paper trail. If he was not being provocative the logical thing would have been to request a room change and not entertain guests until he moved, to maintain the peace. He didn't do that.

And then the next day he jumps off the bridge, even as Ravi is texting him to defuse the situation.

It is quite clear IMO that he was unstable, and there are probably other things going on in his life to precipitate this.

Yes, clearly there were things that precipitated this. Sadly, Tyler was assigned a roommate who has now been shown to be a voyering bully named Dharun Ravi.