Dharun Ravu Guilty of Invasion of Privacy in Rutgers Webcam Spy Trail

[citylaw1]

His lack of remorse is appalling...I tend to agree with Max, although I am throughly disgusted with the sentencing, I believe that this process that he was forced to go through will have lasting repercussions on his life....hopefully!!

 

It's tough to judge remorse, facial expressions, etc. on a 20 year old, or anyone for that matter, when faced with Worldwide attention on television, online and print media.

[maxwellissmart]

It's tough to judge remorse, facial expressions, etc. on a 20 year old, or anyone for that matter, when faced with Worldwide attention on television, online and print media.

 

Really? I usually don't have much problem telling remorse from someone's body language, tears, low voice that cracks, inability to look directly at you because they are ashamed, and repeatedly saying "I'm SO sorry for what I did."

 

Of course, when they say prepared statements like: "I can understand your pain..." or "I apologize if you felt..." or "My son has suffered enough...", it might be harder to discern.

[citylaw1]

I agree. I'm also not convinced that Ravi would gave behaved differently if Tyler had hooked up with an older woman from off-campus.

 

This is the heart of the issue. Young people (as well as older) are operating in a very hi-tech environment. Bullying, immaturity and regrettable stuff hasn't changed; the means of delivery, however, are much more advanced. If Tyler had been banging a fat chick, MILF, ugly girl, etc., I suspect that Ravi's unfortunate and illegal actions would have been the same.

 

It is unclear as to whether or not Tyler and Ravi's relationship went awry due to homophobia or other reasons. In a bias charge, it's hard to hold an 18 year old accountable in a society where presidential nominees, congressman and priests are allowed to denigrate and outlaw same sex related benefits and rights so freely.

[citylaw1]

Really? I usually don't have much problem telling remorse from someone's body language, tears, low voice that cracks, inability to look directly at you because they are ashamed, and repeatedly saying "I'm SO sorry for what I did."

 

Of course, when they say prepared statements like: "I can understand your pain..." or "I apologize if you felt..." or "My son has suffered enough...", it might be harder to discern.

 

How you or I would behave PUBLICLY in a similar situation is impossible to tell without having been through it. Ravi is faced with the maturity of his years, panic, media outcry, guilt, fear, and the presence of cameras in his face at every turn. Making light of delivering a prepared statement is foolish. If you were forced to read your short post here aloud, in front of cameras, media and an audience of millions, I bet you would shake, sweat, and perhaps vomit. Most of us would. Add to your presentation a possible jail or prison term attached to how your message is perceived by strangers, and imagine the stress. My sister never cried at the funeral of our Grandmother, yet she balled uncontrollably when we drove past her house.

[citylaw1]

Really? I usually don't have much problem telling remorse from someone's body language, tears, low voice that cracks, inability to look directly at you because they are ashamed, and repeatedly saying "I'm SO sorry for what I did."

 

Of course, when they say prepared statements like: "I can understand your pain..." or "I apologize if you felt..." or "My son has suffered enough...", it might be harder to discern.

 

When you finally see the victim or perpetrator of a high profile crime, they have often spent hours, weeks or months absorbing the situation and reacting to it. Ravi had already dealt with the situation. When you met Ravi publicly, via a camera lens, his thoughts are of self preservation, as advised by counsel.

[citylaw1]

I thought his statement yesterday showed remorse. What would you have him do? It's the crybaby judge I fault, who whined today that the prosecutor "smirked" when he sentenced Ravi. Oh, boo hoo. You're a judge, get over it. Then he explained that he could not find it in himself to do his job as a judge and sentence Ravi to state prison. He would be with rapists, the judge said, begging the question of whom the judge thought he would be with in county jail. And, if county jail was the appropriate place for him, the judge did not well explain why only 20 days (30 before good time) were appropriate for a guy who he said had showed no remorse.

My thinking is that if the judge cannot bring himself to do his job, he should resign.

 

Judges almost always react when a prosecutor or defense counsel makes a facial expression or verbal comment at sentencing:

 

1. It pisses them off.

2. The reaction then survives as part of the court record.

3. Preserves grounds for Contempt of Court.

 

Then he explained that he could not find it in himself to do his job as a judge and sentence Ravi to state prison. This isn't how he explained it:

 

No matter how “unconscionable” Mr. Ravi’s conduct, Judge Glenn Berman said in a court hearing, “I can’t find it in me to remand him to state prison that houses people convicted of offenses such as murder, armed robbery and rape.”

 

“I don’t believe that that fits this case,” he continued. “I believe that he has to be punished, and he will be.”

 

And, if county jail was the appropriate place for him, the judge did not well explain why only 20 days (30 before good time) were appropriate for a guy who he said had showed no remorse. I think he did here:

 

In addition, the judge said, because Mr. Ravi had been convicted of tampering with a witness (trying to get Ms. Wei to lie to the police) and with evidence (trying to cover up his Twitter and text messages), he sentenced him to 30 days in jail.

 

Under state law, Mr. Ravi could serve as little as 20 days, if he earns work credits and rewards for good behavior in jail.

 

Over all, Judge Berman said the sentence “was fair, it was appropriate, and most of all, it was consistent.”

 

He argued that the Legislature intended prison terms to be attached to bias crimes that were “assaultive or violent in nature,” not invasion of privacy.

 

“I also know his age,” Judge Berman added, calling it a mitigating factor.

 

“I believe justice compels me to deviate from the guidelines,” he said.

[citylaw1]

A well thought out article explaining how the judge defends his sentencing:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/31/nyregion/judge-defends-sentence-imposed-on-dharun-ravi.html?pagewanted=all

[citylaw1]

Good, at least THIS jury got it right !

 

I'm not sure that they did. Bias crimes, in my opinion (and the judge's ruling) were drafted for violent crimes.

 

He argued that the Legislature intended prison terms to be attached to bias crimes that were “assaultive or violent in nature,” not invasion of privacy.

[citylaw1]

Well, I'll probably get slammed for this, but after reading a pretty detailed piece in the New Yorker, I felt that the defendant was more guilty of immaturity and teen-age stupidity than hate.

 

Does anyone know if the suicide note was ever made public? Nothing I've read would have made me expect suicide - not that the means anything.

 

What Dharun Ravu did was definitely a tragedy, but it did seem to me that everyone jumped on the bullying bandwagon in Pavlovian fashion.

 

The New Yorker did a great job in this article. Most people, however, won't read it because it's not written on a fifth grade level (see USA Today cited repeatedly.)

[citylaw1]

Wow. What an amazing opinion. Of course, no one is saying that Dharun Ravi suspected Clementi was going to kill himself. He was not convicted of involuntary manslaughter. While Ravi was 19 at the time, making him technically a teenager, he is certainly considered an adult, and probably a fairly intelligent one at that if he was attending Rutgers. He was convicted on a number of other charges, however:

"The jury considered Ravi's fate on 35 separate questions regarding 15 counts, making for complex deliberations over three days. He was found guilty of 24 charges including invasion of privacy, bias intimidation, attempted invasion of privacy, tampering with physical evidence, hindering apprehension or prosecution, witness tampering and tampering with physical evidence" (from USA Today)

I do agree that the suicide was probably not something Ravi could have predicted, but he had to know that the things he did were not only illegal, but designed to humiliate and psychologically traumatize the victim. According to what I have read in internet articles, the judge is required by law to sentence Ravi, as a first-time offender, to a minimum of 3-5 years (maximum of 10 years). Although the fact that the victim killed himself (or if he didn't) does not alter the fact that Ravi's actions were illegal, the suicide highlights the importance of Ravi having to suffer the consequences of his actions. To merely deport Ravi would send a terrible message, especially given the outcome.

I'm not going to "slam you" myself, but the first thing that popped into my head when I read your post was something Dan Aykroyd used to say to Jane Curtin when I truly was a teenager before the age of majority:

 

The problem with using USA Today and internet articles as a reference is that they are often incorrect.

[maxwellissmart]

I think that the underlying problem here in this case (and which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy. I don't believe anyone can justify Ravi's actions as being a mere joke—because the intent was to embarrass and humiliate someone. Someone who was young, obviously fragile and just coming out.

 

I doubt there's a single person on this board who—if they had been in Tyler's shoes—would have found anything funny about having an audience at your furtive attempts at first sexual encounters with another man. This "blame-the-victim" mentality surrounding this case baffles me, and reminds me of all the "well he shouldn't have come onto another man, I woulda done killt him too" chatter after the Matthew Shepard case.

[citylaw1]

I agree what the kid did was wrong and that he is guilty as charged. I don't believe that bias and hate crime legislation was ever drafted with the intent of including privacy rights.

 

Nonetheless, I think he either had the world WORST legal team..... Actually both lead attorneys are highly regarded and enjoy a high success rate and retainer to match.

 

they put up his father’s business associates as character witnesses? Yes, to show that he's from a successful family with traditional values. These associates would have only (and this would be verified prior to presenting a witness list) limited "personal" knowledge of a co-workers son, and, therefore, only were privy to the "nice to meet you sir" side. You can NEVER subpoena this young man's friends in this case. ANY time he may have uttered "Fag," "******," "Towel Head," etc. would be open game. This has a huge potential for disaster.

and he didn't take the stand in his own defense? Jesus no! If his counsel had advised that he testify, it would be grounds for appeal. This would have been one of the larger legal blunders in trial history.

 

and he didn’t take the plea deal with no prison time? Really? You have no idea what his lawyers recommended. I suspect that they advised that he take the plea. If they were looking to cash in only, they would have advised that he appeal the verdict rather than start serving his sentence. The appeals process offers as much or more billable hours.

 

…..or……

 

Crappy legal team and the kid is a jerk.

 

Either way, justice was served.

Ravi was facing 10 years plus, as well as countless other sentencing options. I don't think you have a "crappy legal team" at play here. Ravi may be a jerk, and I believe that "justice was served."

[citylaw1]

I think that the underlying problem here in this case (and which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy. I don't believe anyone can justify Ravi's actions as being a mere joke—because the intent was to embarrass and humiliate someone. Someone who was young, obviously fragile and just coming out.

 

I doubt there's a single person on this board who—if they had been in Tyler's shoes—would have found anything funny about having an audience at your furtive attempts at first sexual encounters with another man. This "blame-the-victim" mentality surrounding this case baffles me, and reminds me of all the "well he shouldn't have come onto another man, I woulda done killt him too" chatter after the Matthew Shepard case.

 

I think that you see quite a bit of empathy for Tyler. I feel terrible for Tyler, his family and all kids facing similar issues. I also feel empathy towards Ravi's family. Separately, you must look at the law. In a legal sense, Ravi is not guilty of Bias Intimidation. To apply this law here would water down the effectiveness of future prosecutions. This legislation was not meant to be applied in a case where an asshole 18 year old does a cruel thing. This legislation was drafted to impose strict punishments on violent acts that lead to physical injury.

[seeker630]

I think that the underlying problem here in this case (and which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy. I don't believe anyone can justify Ravi's actions as being a mere joke—because the intent was to embarrass and humiliate someone. Someone who was young, obviously fragile and just coming out. .

 

I resent this statment. I certainly have empathy for Tyler, though I don't really know why he chose to end his life - nor do you or anyone else. And his suicide note has never been made public - and I suspect that if it had linked his death to Ravi's crime, it WOULD have been made public.

 

 

I doubt there's a single person on this board who—if they had been in Tyler's shoes—would have found anything funny about having an audience at your furtive attempts at first sexual encounters with another man. This "blame-the-victim" mentality surrounding this case baffles me, and reminds me of all the "well he shouldn't have come onto another man, I woulda done killt him too" chatter after the Matthew Shepard case.

 

I haven't seen anyone blame Tyler. There may be some lack of understanding as to why he chose to end his life, but that's natural, I think - especially when the suicide note is withheld. I think lots of people have trouble separating his death from the 'outing', but this trial was not about his death. I see NO parallels with the Shepard case.

[RockHard]

I think...the...problem here (...which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy.

 

My god, how blind can someone be? Please name one gay man on this board who has a "complete lack of empathy" when a young gay man commits suicide.

 

Whatever happened to rational thinking? Just because someone understands the law, understands the facts of this case (at least the ones we know), accepts the verdict and punishment, and disagrees with the Ravi haters does not mean they suffer from a "complete lack of empathy." Your argument is utterly flaccid and laced with hysteria.

 

This case brings out a lot of irrational thinkers, hysterical writing. And then there are the gays who won't be satisfied until they see Ravi bludgeoned to death by Lady Bunny. I call it misplaced anger: Ravi has to pay for every bully sin ever committed in this world. Ravi has to be the dart-enduring poster-boy for every anti-gay slur hurled at a homo.

 

I wonder how many Ravi-haters have ever stepped foot on the George Washington Bridge, without a car, and then looked down to consider going for a swim?

 

I don't believe anyone can justify Ravi's actions as being a mere joke

 

I haven't read anything from any gay writer suggesting Ravi's actions were funny. But I have a feeling, among Ravi's generation, turning a web cam on a roomie during a private moment might sound like a fun prank. I'm too old to think like an 18-year-old these days but I do know their sense of humor is different than mine.

 

Someone who was young, obviously fragile and just coming out.

 

How do you know that Clementi was "just coming out?" Did you live inside his body? Did you know him personally? Do you have proof?

 

first sexual encounters with another man.

 

How do you know that this was Clementi's "first sexual encounter with another man?" Did you live inside his body? Did you know him personally? Do you have proof?

 

Just because you say something, just because you repeat something that's already been said doesn't make it a fact.

 

This "blame-the-victim" mentality surrounding this case baffles me

 

Interesting. Because I don't see any "blame-the-victim" among rational thinkers. Ravi got convicted and he got sentenced. IMO, justice is served.

 

I do see a lot of hysteria and misplaced anger among the gay Ravi-haters. This doesn't baffle me because I personally know about the pain and suffering that we homos go through as we develop and mature. Some gays handle pain and suffering better than others. Some gays hate their mothers while other gays love their mothers. I understand that no two gays are the same.

 

reminds me of all the "well he shouldn't have come onto another man, I woulda done killt him too" chatter after the Matthew Shepard case.

 

I don't see any comparison to the Matthew Shepard case. But I can understand why some gays think Ravi should pay for that tragedy, too.

[maxwellissmart]

I resent this statment. I certainly have empathy for Tyler, though I don't really know why he chose to end his life - nor do you or anyone else. And his suicide note has never been made public - and I suspect that if it had linked his death to Ravi's crime, it WOULD have been made public.

 

 

 

 

I haven't seen anyone blame Tyler. There may be some lack of understanding as to why he chose to end his life, but that's natural, I think - especially when the suicide note is withheld. I think lots of people have trouble separating his death from the 'outing', but this trial was not about his death. I see NO parallels with the Shepard case.

 

I never said you didn't have empathy for Tyler, so your resentment is unfounded. I also never said anyone in particular blamed Tyler for his actions—which indeed, are his own. However, go on any message board in the country that discusses this case, and you'll find plenty of comments ranging from "stupid fag deserved what he got" to "he did it all to himself and he is the only one to blame."

 

No, he's not the only one to blame in the bigger picture. If that were so, we wouldn't have an epidemic of gay children and teens taking their own lives. All Ravi did was to bring the point home that "what you're doing is FUNNY, and by FUNNY, I mean STRANGE and NOT RIGHT."

 

My comments and opinions reflect the disconnect that I see between this case and some of the adults on this board who represent a spectrum of men processing what it is to be gay. You have board members who are just coming out, like Tyler. You have board members who have been gay for a long time and should understand how coming out isn't always the easiest process. I find it strange that anyone would think Ravi's sentence is reflective of the crime and that he doesn't deserve a much stiffer punishment—but that's just my opinion.

[maxwellissmart]

My god, how blind can someone be? Please name one gay man on this board who has a "complete lack of empathy" when a young gay man commits suicide.

 

Whatever happened to rational thinking? Just because someone understands the law, understands the facts of this case (at least the ones we know), accepts the verdict and punishment, and disagrees with the Ravi haters does not mean they suffer from a "complete lack of empathy." Your argument is utterly flaccid and laced with hysteria.

 

This case brings out a lot of irrational thinkers, hysterical writing. And then there are the gays who won't be satisfied until they see Ravi bludgeoned to death by Lady Bunny. I call it misplaced anger: Ravi has to pay for every bully sin ever committed in this world. Ravi has to be the dart-enduring poster-boy for every anti-gay slur hurled at a homo.

 

I wonder how many Ravi-haters have ever stepped foot on the George Washington Bridge, without a car, and then looked down to consider going for a swim?

 

 

 

I haven't read anything from any gay writer suggesting Ravi's actions were funny. But I have a feeling, among Ravi's generation, turning a web cam on a roomie during a private moment might sound like a fun prank. I'm too old to think like an 18-year-old these days but I do know their sense of humor is different than mine.

 

 

 

How do you know that Clementi was "just coming out?" Did you live inside his body? Did you know him personally? Do you have proof?

 

 

 

How do you know that this was Clementi's "first sexual encounter with another man?" Did you live inside his body? Did you know him personally? Do you have proof?

 

Just because you say something, just because you repeat something that's already been said doesn't make it a fact.

 

 

 

Interesting. Because I don't see any "blame-the-victim" among rational thinkers. Ravi got convicted and he got sentenced. IMO, justice is served.

 

I do see a lot of hysteria and misplaced anger among the gay Ravi-haters. This doesn't baffle me because I personally know about the pain and suffering that we homos go through as we develop and mature. Some gays handle pain and suffering better than others. Some gays hate their mothers while other gays love their mothers. I understand that no two gays are the same.

 

 

 

I don't see any comparison to the Matthew Shepard case. But I can understand why some gays think Ravi should pay for that tragedy, too.

 

Umm, I never said anything about "hating" Ravi. If you want to go off on some hysterical tangent, I'll see you when you get back. Have fun.

[seeker630]

I never said you didn't have empathy for Tyler, so your resentment is unfounded. I also never said anyone in particular blamed Tyler for his actions—which indeed, are his own. However, go on any message board in the country that discusses this case, and you'll find plenty of comments ranging from "stupid fag deserved what he got" to "he did it all to himself and he is the only one to blame."

 

No, he's not the only one to blame in the bigger picture. If that were so, we wouldn't have an epidemic of gay children and teens taking their own lives. All Ravi did was to bring the point home that "what you're doing is FUNNY, and by FUNNY, I mean STRANGE and NOT RIGHT."

 

My comments and opinions reflect the disconnect that I see between this case and some of the adults on this board who represent a spectrum of men processing what it is to be gay. You have board members who are just coming out, like Tyler. You have board members who have been gay for a long time and should understand how coming out isn't always the easiest process. I find it strange that anyone would think Ravi's sentence is reflective of the crime and that he doesn't deserve a much stiffer punishment—but that's just my opinion.

 

You said "I think that the underlying problem here in this case (and which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy", which to me reads as pretty much a blanket condemnation of posters here.

 

But, regardless, thank you for a reasoned and civil response. As you say - you have your opinion and I have mine.

[maxwellissmart]

You said "I think that the underlying problem here in this case (and which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy", which to me reads as pretty much a blanket condemnation of posters here.

 

But, regardless, thank you for a reasoned response. As you say - you have your opinion and I have mine.

 

Fair enough, I should have said that I find it reflected in SOME of the responses and not all. Obviously there's a difference of opinion on the board about this case, and what I said originally could be construed as a blanket condemnation—which isn't the case.

 

People are always going to differ in opinions when something like this comes along—personally, I would like to smack the shit out of him for jumping off a bridge, when he might have ended up having a lot of fun and being a healthy and happy gay man. It's likely we've all said "I wish I were dead" at some point or another—and it's true that we don't absolutely know why he killed himself.

[citylaw1]

You said "I think that the underlying problem here in this case (and which is reflected on the board) is a complete lack of empathy", which to me reads as pretty much a blanket condemnation of posters here.

 

But, regardless, thank you for a reasoned response. As you say - you have your opinion and I have mine.

 

I see this as you do.

[RockHard]

Umm, I never said anything about "hating" Ravi.

 

I think it's quite obvious that I used the term "Ravi-haters" to describe those who fall in the anti-verdict camp. If it pleases you, replace Ravi with verdict and take a Xanax and write me in the morning.

[citylaw1]

Fair enough, I should have said that I find it reflected in SOME of the responses and not all. Obviously there's a difference of opinion on the board about this case, and what I said originally could be construed as a blanket condemnation—which isn't the case.

 

People are always going to differ in opinions when something like this comes along—personally, I would like to smack the shit out of him for jumping off a bridge, when he might have ended up having a lot of fun and being a healthy and happy gay man. It's likely we've all said "I wish I were dead" at some point or another—and it's true that we don't absolutely know why he killed himself.

 

Which opinions, specifically, lead you to believe that a poster lacks empathy?

[citylaw1]

My god, how blind can someone be? Please name one gay man on this board who has a "complete lack of empathy" when a young gay man commits suicide.

 

Whatever happened to rational thinking? Just because someone understands the law, understands the facts of this case (at least the ones we know), accepts the verdict and punishment, and disagrees with the Ravi haters does not mean they suffer from a "complete lack of empathy." Your argument is utterly flaccid and laced with hysteria.

 

This case brings out a lot of irrational thinkers, hysterical writing. And then there are the gays who won't be satisfied until they see Ravi bludgeoned to death by Lady Bunny. I call it misplaced anger: Ravi has to pay for every bully sin ever committed in this world. Ravi has to be the dart-enduring poster-boy for every anti-gay slur hurled at a homo.

 

I wonder how many Ravi-haters have ever stepped foot on the George Washington Bridge, without a car, and then looked down to consider going for a swim?

 

 

 

I haven't read anything from any gay writer suggesting Ravi's actions were funny. But I have a feeling, among Ravi's generation, turning a web cam on a roomie during a private moment might sound like a fun prank. I'm too old to think like an 18-year-old these days but I do know their sense of humor is different than mine.

 

 

 

How do you know that Clementi was "just coming out?" Did you live inside his body? Did you know him personally? Do you have proof?

 

 

 

How do you know that this was Clementi's "first sexual encounter with another man?" Did you live inside his body? Did you know him personally? Do you have proof?

 

Just because you say something, just because you repeat something that's already been said doesn't make it a fact.

 

 

 

Interesting. Because I don't see any "blame-the-victim" among rational thinkers. Ravi got convicted and he got sentenced. IMO, justice is served.

 

I do see a lot of hysteria and misplaced anger among the gay Ravi-haters. This doesn't baffle me because I personally know about the pain and suffering that we homos go through as we develop and mature. Some gays handle pain and suffering better than others. Some gays hate their mothers while other gays love their mothers. I understand that no two gays are the same.

 

 

 

I don't see any comparison to the Matthew Shepard case. But I can understand why some gays think Ravi should pay for that tragedy, too.

 

RockHard, hats off to you! I doubt that anyone can state the case and circumstances better than you have here.

[maxwellissmart]

Which opinions, specifically, lead you to believe that a poster lacks empathy?

 

I'm done with the topic. Move on.

[Guest]

Also, movies like American Pie portray stunts similar to Ravi;s as hilarious pranks

 

I don't see that as a mitigating factor at all. I think we all need to recognize that when we watch movies or even TV series, there's a willing suspension of disbelief--that the actions we see in video or on film couldn't really happen in real life. Many of the actions shown in movies like American Pie would result in jail terms or expulsion from school. We recognize them as outrageously funny just because we know these actions are outrageous and couldn't happen in real life. I even get annoyed at Glee sometimes, because they go completely overboard in showing actions which would get people fired, expelled, and jailed. Many times Sue Sylvester did things which would get a real person not only canned but sent to the state penn. And there's no way schools would tolerate having students subjected to having slushies thrown in their faces (let alone with rock salt), thrown in dumpsters, etc. Yet the series survives by showing the outrageous (yeah, like music/dance productions with five-figure budgets in public schools). No one should get a break from the law just because he can't separate silver screen fantasy from real life. And, no, Ravi was not on trial for assisting suicide or for involuntary manslaughter, nor should he have been. But I do believe he should have had some more serious jail time for the laws he was convicted of breaking.