student kills self after webcam spying UPDATE: Conviction Overturned

New Posts

~n/t~ said:
The big question is would Ravi have done the same thing if it was a heteorsexual encounter
Click to expand...

Its been a longtime, but my recollection of university residence life was that that sort of thing happened all the time. Being homosexual or heterosexual makes no difference, if your room mate doesnt like you and is just out of high school, it is pretty common.
 
Anyone watching the trial know how it is going? Talking heads on TruTV make it sound like the pros. have or may have a hard time w/ this case.
 
Tugela said:
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.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I agree with you on this. It is an unpopular position. I feel like Dharun Ravi should be punished for invasion of privacy - but that the charges brought against him are rather extreme.

Things like this, I'm sure, happen all the time. I think that there are many questions unanswered about Tyler Clementi. Based on his internet posts and ichats with his friends, he was not devestated by what had happened. Anyone can say that he was filtering his posts and putting on a different front, but how do they know for sure that he was not? How do I know for sure he wasn't completely devestated? I can't be sure. But I can be sure that there was definitely something else going on with Tyler and that many of the media reports are wrong...

There was no sex ever witnessed - it was not broadcast to crowds of people - Tyler Clementi was not a closeted gay who was outed by these kids (he came out to his parents and brought his lover into the dorm where he was seen by others - he was no longer in the closet or didn't want people to know) - it was not recorded - he was not "bullied" in my opinion... as a victim of bullying myself.

What those kids did was wrong - definitely - when I was in college, similar things happened quite often. Not out of malice... just out of immaturity. Doubtful these kids thought too far about what impact it may have. You could say something the wrong way to anyone you come in contact with that could push them over the edge.

Just my two cents though. I think it's very tragic and could have been prevented, but that prevention needed to take place long before Ravi ever saw him on webcam. I also think that Molly Wei's plea deal (the counseling, community service etc) would have sufficed for Ravi as well. They will both have to deal with this for the rest of their lives.
 
Sounds like Ravi has a rather paranoid personality. I wonder if Ravi was himself a target of bullying. Same goes with Wei.
 
HMSHood said:
Sounds like Ravi has a rather paranoid personality. I wonder if Ravi was himself a target of bullying. Same goes with Wei.
Click to expand...

Ravi's friends have also stated that they do not recall him ever having a girlfriend.
 
zippitydoda said:
Ravi's friends have also stated that they do not recall him ever having a girlfriend.
Click to expand...

That's not unusual for the Indian culture, because a lot of Indians practice arranged marriages.
 
Calhoun said:
I have to say that I agree with you on this. It is an unpopular position. I feel like Dharun Ravi should be punished for invasion of privacy - but that the charges brought against him are rather extreme.

Things like this, I'm sure, happen all the time. I think that there are many questions unanswered about Tyler Clementi. Based on his internet posts and ichats with his friends, he was not devestated by what had happened. Anyone can say that he was filtering his posts and putting on a different front, but how do they know for sure that he was not? How do I know for sure he wasn't completely devestated? I can't be sure. But I can be sure that there was definitely something else going on with Tyler and that many of the media reports are wrong...

There was no sex ever witnessed - it was not broadcast to crowds of people - Tyler Clementi was not a closeted gay who was outed by these kids (he came out to his parents and brought his lover into the dorm where he was seen by others - he was no longer in the closet or didn't want people to know) - it was not recorded - he was not "bullied" in my opinion... as a victim of bullying myself.

What those kids did was wrong - definitely - when I was in college, similar things happened quite often. Not out of malice... just out of immaturity. Doubtful these kids thought too far about what impact it may have. You could say something the wrong way to anyone you come in contact with that could push them over the edge.

Just my two cents though. I think it's very tragic and could have been prevented, but that prevention needed to take place long before Ravi ever saw him on webcam. I also think that Molly Wei's plea deal (the counseling, community service etc) would have sufficed for Ravi as well. They will both have to deal with this for the rest of their lives.
Click to expand...

He refused the plea deal. I think that says a lot about him, imo.
 
My prosecutor friend says that the defendant's refusal of the plea deal says more about the state's case than the accused...that it's probably a really weak case. When you offer a plea for community service, you have a loser of a case apparently and Ravi would rather not have that on his record.
 
Ravi could be deported if he accepted the plea...Can you ask your friend if that might have also been a consideration on his decision refuse the plea?


Ravi could also face deportation if he is convicted because he was born in India. Altman said Ravi has a green card and "is here legally," but "deportation could be an issue."

The plea bargain from the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office included an offer to cooperate and assist him in avoiding any possible immigration or deportation consequences as a result of his pleading guilty. Immigration authorities treat guilty pleas the same as convictions.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/12/do_not_publish_--_dharun_ravi.html
 
I just asked him that. I looked up the New Jersey jury instructions for bias intimidation. Regardless of what happened to TC the jury has to decide on the evidence presented whether or not these elements were met beyond a reasonable doubt. Think about it.

NJ CR JI 2C:16-1a(2)

2C:16-1a(2) BIAS INTIMIDATION [KNOWING INTIMIDATION]



Revised 5/16/11

(Defendant) is charged by this indictment with bias intimidation.

[READ INDICTMENT]

Bias intimidation is a crime according to the following statute:
A person is guilty of the crime of bias intimidation if he [CHOOSE APPLICABLE] commits, attempts to commit, conspires with another to commit, or threatens the immediate commission of [SPECIFY OFFENSE] 1 knowing that the conduct constituting the [SPECIFY OFFENSE] would cause an individual or group of individuals to be intimidated because of [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY] race, color, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, or ethnicity.


For you to find (defendant) guilty of bias intimidation, the State must prove each of the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. That (defendant) [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]: committed, attempted to commit, conspired with another to commit, or threatened the immediate commission of the crime [offense] of .

2. That (defendant) [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]: committed, attempted to commit, conspired with another to commit, or threatened the immediate commission of the crime [offense] of knowing that his/her conduct constituting the crime [offense] would cause an individual or group of individuals to be intimidated because of [CHOOSE APPROPRIATE CATEGORY]: race, color, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, or ethnicity.


The first element that the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is that (defendant) [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]: committed, attempted to commit, conspired with another to commit, or threatened the immediate commission of . Here, (defendant) is charged with [CHOOSE AS APPROPRIATE]: committing, attempting to commit, conspiring with another to commit, or threatening the immediate commission of [SPECIFY OFFENSE]. The elements of that offense are [SUMMARIZE ELEMENTS]. 2
 
zippitydoda said:
Ravi's friends have also stated that they do not recall him ever having a girlfriend.
Click to expand...

I think it might be possible he is/was questioning his own sexuality and was curious and the joking about it etc. was to make it 'okay' to whatever part of his brain was having trouble grappling with it.

Not that it makes it okay. It doesn't.
 
~n/t~ said:
He refused the plea deal. I think that says a lot about him, imo.
Click to expand...

Does it say a lot about HIM, or a lot about what his lawyers believe/what his family wanted him to do? After all, mom and pops are probably footing the bill. I don't think he immediately said 'no thanks' and that was it. How do you know that he didn't WANT to accept the plea deal but was convinced by others that it wasn't the best route to go? Just saying. Not as clear cut as you'd like to believe, and not necessarily a tribute to his character.

Not that I'm saying he's a good guy. Being arrogant/rude/mean etc. isn't against the law. He did break laws, but I think the extra charges are overreaching...
 
Calhoun said:
I think it might be possible he is/was questioning his own sexuality and was curious and the joking about it etc. was to make it 'okay' to whatever part of his brain was having trouble grappling with it.

Not that it makes it okay. It doesn't.
Click to expand...

I am thinking he is struggling with his own sexuality. He has issues of self-hatred. I know in India, homosexuality is a no-no.
 
I don't see anything to suggest he was struggling with anything. In Indian culture, arranged marriages are widely practiced, so just because he might have not been dating any females means absolutely nothing. He might be expecting for his parents to find him a wife.
 
I just noticed the title of this thread alleges the content of the webcam was "placed on he internet." It's easy to assume that means it was uploaded as a video. It was a live stream on the internet for a very short period of time...minutes if that.

Ravi would surely have been deported if he took the plea deal. I can't attach any judgment to his character for refusing the plea deal as there are a lot of variables to consider that have nothing to do with his character.

I am very skeptical of this case. I think the prosecutor is a bit overzealous because of the public belief that Ravi's actions indirectly caused Tyler's death. But I don't believe that. Not at all. Sure, your actions can be criminal even if you don't intend them to be. I hope the jury uses their logic and not their emotion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 61 more.
Total: 1,168 (members: 62, guests: 1,106)

Online statistics

Members online
62
Guests online
1,106
Total visitors
1,168
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,784
Messages
17,958,861
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top