Dharun Ravi Found Guilty in Rutgers Trial

[JEDIYoda]

So was he guilty of something?? IMO Yes...but a hate crime???




http://news.yahoo.com/dharun-ravi-found-guilty-rutgers-trial-212458885--abc-news.html

A New Jersey jury today found former Rutgers student Dharun Ravi guilty on all counts for using a webcam to spy on his roommate, Tyler Clementi, having a gay sexual encounter in 2010.

Ravi, 20, was convicted of invasion of privacy, bias intimidation, witness tampering and hindering arrest, stemming from his role in activating the webcam to peek at Clementi's date with a man in the dorm room on Sept. 19, 2010. Ravi was also convicted of encouraging others to spy during a second date, on Sept. 21, 2010, and intimidating Clementi for being gay.

Ravi was found not guilty of some subparts of the 15 counts of bias intimidation, attempted invasion of privacy, and attempted bias intimidation, but needed only to be found guilty of one part of each count to be convicted.

The convictions carry a possible sentence of five to 10 years in prison. Because Ravi is a citizen of India, and is in the US on a green card, he could be deported following his sentencing. The US deports most criminals convicted of felonies, with the exception of thefts of amounts under $10,000.

Clementi's mother, who sat with her husband and sons in the front row for the duration of the three-week trial, broke down in tears as the first "guilty" verdicts were read. Clementi's father took notes throughout the reading of the verdicts.

Ravi's attorney, Steven Altman, put his arm around Ravi's shoulder shortly before the verdict. Ravi showed little reaction as the jury read out the verdicts to his crimes.

Clementi's case gained national attention when he committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge Sept. 22, 2010. Ravi is not charged in connection with Clementi's death.

Throughout the trial, Middlesex County Prosecutor Julie McClure tried to build a case that Ravi spied on Clementi's date because his roommate was gay, and told his friends and Twitter followers to also spy on Clementi, describing his actions as an anti-gay hate crime.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Scapegoat

 

[JEDIYoda]

How so....

 

[Baasha]

Was just about to post this but you beat me to it.

I am appalled at the outcome of this trial.

What Ravi did was reprehensible in terms of humiliating his roommate. However, it in no way constitutes a 'hate crime'. This guy was made an example of; just like Rajaratnam was made an example of 'insider trading'.

I hate to think of it this way but I can't help but feel that since Ravi was a brown guy, the jury, as well as public opinion, was almost completely unsympathetic towards him.

What he did was utterly stupid and uncouth. Yet, ten years in (ass-pounding) prison? Holy fucking shit! That is just so extreme. It harkens back to a time when a black would kiss a white girl and get lynched for it not too long ago in this 'great' country.

Too bad his life is destroyed and more importantly, the peace of mind of his family. I really feel for his parents and the embarrassment they must be undergoing.

 

[zsdersw]

I don't believe there are such things as "hate crimes" anyway, so no.

 

[Kadarin]

I tend to agree with Baasha on this one.. What he did was wrong, but it wasn't wrong enough to destroy his life over. Tyler Clementi chose to commit suicide, and the decision to do so rests wholly on him, not anyone else.

 

[SirStev0]

I tend to think "hate crimes" are kinda bullshit.. but this one kind of makes sense with what they were trying to do by putting those laws on the books.

These kids purposefully tried to humiliate a homosexual in a pretty horrible reprehensible way and that act was directly responsible for that person's suicide.

If the purpose of hate crimes is to make punishments more severe and there fore to discourage the activity in the future, than this fits. Bullshit law or not.

 

[senseamp]

10 years for what he did is insane. The real hate crime here is the prosecution.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

First off, I don't support "hate crime" designations. I think that motive is obviously important to consider when judging a criminal action, but I think that making distinctions for crimes based around bigotry is the wrong tack to take as a way to combat that bigotry; you aren't going to end bigotry through punitive action, you're going to end it through education.

Second, what this guy did was despicable. Someone is dead because of his bullshit; that's pretty bad. The article makes it sound as though he won't serve his sentence, he'll merely be deported. What the fuck is that nonsense? He can come into our country legally, take actions that result in the death of someone, and his punishment is being sent home? That doesn't seem right. Granted, he'll never be allowed back in the US, but that's a pretty small price to pay for what he did.

 

[ch33zw1z]

Guilty, dunno about the "hate crime" part though...

 

[Thump553]

I haven't been paying much attention to this since it happened. What's the witness tampering and hindering charges about? Witness tampering is pretty heavy and goes well beyond videoing his roommate.

 

[Capt Caveman]

I tend to think "hate crimes" are kinda bullshit.. but this one kind of makes sense with what they were trying to do by putting those laws on the books.

These kids purposefully tried to humiliate a homosexual in a pretty horrible reprehensible way and that act was directly responsible for that person's suicide.

If the purpose of hate crimes is to make punishments more severe and there fore to discourage the activity in the future, than this fits. Bullshit law or not.

I concur.

 

[SirStev0]

First off, I don't support "hate crime" designations. I think that motive is obviously important to consider when judging a criminal action, but I think that making distinctions for crimes based around bigotry is the wrong tack to take as a way to combat that bigotry; you aren't going to end bigotry through punitive action, you're going to end it through education.

Second, what this guy did was despicable. Someone is dead because of his bullshit; that's pretty bad. The article makes it sound as though he won't serve his sentence, he'll merely be deported. What the fuck is that nonsense? He can come into our country legally, take actions that result in the death of someone, and his punishment is being sent home? That doesn't seem right. Granted, he'll never be allowed back in the US, but that's a pretty small price to pay for what he did.

The law doesn't think like that... If it did, we wouldn't have marijuana laws still on the books.

If you speed, you get a ticket. If you speed to a ridiculous speed, say 110 mph, you get reckless endangerment or driving or whatever your state calls it. In most states this has the same punishment as DUI. Big fine, criminal record, jail time possible.

It is because, if you speed, they want money. If you speed to the point it is very dangerous, they want you punished.

"Hate Crime" laws are on this same philosophy. If you assault someone because you are drunk and whatever you get your fine and jail time or whatever. If you assault someone because they like dudes, or have yellow skin, or insert anything, you get a more severe punishment... in hopes that it will discourage assholes from using it as excuses to target people.

EDIT:
The bullshit part of "hate crime" laws are when they are applied to any crime when "one person belonging to some distinguishable group" attack "another person of any other group" just so the DA can look tough on crime and sensitive to minorities, when race or creed or sexuality have nothing to do with the crime in question. That is bullshit. In this case, his sexuality was the purpose for the attempt at humiliation.

 

[Hugo Drax]

Fuck him, That smug douchebag will set an example for the rest. I shed no tear. This ruling will deter future Twitholes from trying something similar in the future.

 

[bradley]

Seemed like a progressive witch hunt and circus all rolled into one.

 

[surfsatwerk]

Seemed like a progressive witch hunt and circus all rolled into one.

Bingo, there always has to be a victim and always someone to blame.

 

[woolfe9999]

He isn't going to get 10 years. The article says a possible 5-10. He'll likely get 3-5 at most, and serve 2-3. He also may get concurrent sentences and be out in less time than that.

Be wary of news articles which mention statutory maximum penalties before sentencing. The defendants almost never get anywhere near that.

 

[piasabird]

This will teach people to keep the webcam covered up when not in use.

 

[woolfe9999]

My overall opinion on the issue is that secretly taping someone having sex is, and should be, a serious crime. There were numerous things he was accused of besides "bias intimidation" here and I can't see any real debate that these other things are crimes. I also doubt the intimidation charges will be a major component of the sentencing. His most serious act was the videotaping.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

The law doesn't think like that... If it did, we wouldn't have marijuana laws still on the books.

If you speed, you get a ticket. If you speed to a ridiculous speed, say 110 mph, you get reckless endangerment or driving or whatever your state calls it. In most states this has the same punishment as DUI. Big fine, criminal record, jail time possible.

It is because, if you speed, they want money. If you speed to the point it is very dangerous, they want you punished.

"Hate Crime" laws are on this same philosophy. If you assault someone because you are drunk and whatever you get your fine and jail time or whatever. If you assault someone because they like dudes, or have yellow skin, or insert anything, you get a more severe punishment... in hopes that it will discourage assholes from using it as excuses to target people.

EDIT:
The bullshit part of "hate crime" laws are when they are applied to any crime when "one person belonging to some distinguishable group" attack "another person of any other group" just so the DA can look tough on crime and sensitive to minorities, when race or creed or sexuality have nothing to do with the crime in question. That is bullshit. In this case, his sexuality was the purpose for the attempt at humiliation.

Motivation isn't considered in the crime you mentioned (speeding). If I get caught speeding, it doesn't matter if I was doing it because I was late for work, or because I was wrong about the speed limit or just cause I wanted to race. I broke the law, and regardless of my reason for doing it, I am punished. If I'm doing a certain value over the speed limit, I get a ticket; higher, potentially jail time. The point is, my rationale for speeding is ignored, it is merely the fact that I was speeding which is considered.

In criminal cases it's slightly different; manslaughter and murder are different crimes based around the circumstances of the crime. Pre-meditated killings are basically always murder, while accidental killings usually aren't. But that's still a more objective criteria than bigotry, and easier to prove. Also, if someone commits a crime specifically because of someone's race, you could make the case that pre-meditation was involved, since their bigotry made them decide they were specifically going to target someone. You don't need special legislation for that; it's already part of the law.

 

[Hugo Drax]

My overall opinion on the issue is that secretly taping someone having sex is, and should be, a serious crime. There were numerous things he was accused of besides "bias intimidation" here and I can't see any real debate that these other things are crimes. I also doubt the intimidation charges will be a major component of the sentencing. His most serious act was the videotaping.

His big miscalculation is thinking he was gonna get away with it and chose not to take the plea. BIG MISTAKE. There was more than just the Videotaping. I think this will set a precedent for future douchebags, it will make the think twice before trying to pull such a stunt in the future.

Ravi shows no empathy or remorse.

 

[piasabird]

Videotaping with sound in many states is considered illegal wiretapping. Then there is the tampering with a jury. I could see how someone might be upset that their roommate was having gay sex in their shared dorm room if they were not gay themselves. Dare I suggest that they get a hotel room? I think if you reside in a dorm with one or more roommates that there is no real expectation of privacy.

Most dorms have some kind of an acceptable use policy. Dare I say it may be time to rewrite the policy. Maybe they should not allow webcams in dorm rooms.

 

[cliftonite]

This IDIOT was offered a deal where he would face NO jail time and they would help him avoid deportation. Should have taken it.

 

[Throckmorton]

edit: wrong thread

 

[SirStev0]

This IDIOT was offered a deal where he would face NO jail time and they would help him avoid deportation. Should have taken it.

Oh. Double fuck him then. He had his chance.