Rutgers Student uses webcam to view roommate's sexual encounter

[lsbskins1]

He was victimized in that he was bullied. He was not victimized in that he was killed.
What was done to him was of course wrong, but is not at all uncommon. Bullying happens to thousands upon thousands of students... likely on a daily basis. He chose to respond with suicide.

I will not call him weak for that choice, but I will acknowledge that it was indeed a choice. The bully is not guilty of "involuntary manslaughter". He is guilty of being a bully... and his particular manner of bullying was indeed illegal and he should suffer the appropriate repercussions.
I am just saying it is not more than that. He did not kill anyone. He did not show any more "hatred" than any other bully... if anything perhaps less than average.

You have no legal grounds for greater charges than that which he is obviously guilty of: the unknowing recording of his private life.

The fact that is possible to charge him shows that there ARE legal grounds for charging him. Enough people wanted these kind of laws that they are on the books in many jurisdictions. Sad to say, it took a while for the masses of people to move to that reasoned position, but move they did and assholes can no longer absolutely and completely avoid consequence for the results of their "assholery".

And I think I shall petition the folks at Oxford to recognize "assholery" as a real word.

[LetThereBe]

The fact that is possible to charge him shows that there ARE legal grounds for charging him. Enough people wanted these kind of laws that they are on the books in many jurisdictions. Sad to say, it took a while for the masses of people to move to that reasoned position, but move they did and assholes can no longer absolutely and completely avoid consequence for the results of their "assholery".

And I think I shall petition the folks at Oxford to recognize "assholery" as a real word.

It is nonsense. I doubt there has ever been a suicide that doesn't qualify as "involuntary manslaughter" against at least half a dozen parties by that reasoning. This also means that you can only get serious about the charges after the fact. If you bully someone and they get past it you get no or trivial repercussions. If someone else does the exact same bullying for the exact same reasons and somewhere along the line that victim kills his/herself (presumably due in part to that bullying) then only now can we get serious... when it is well too late.

How about instead of being inconsistent and ineffective with our judgements we actually treat bullying like the crime it is? We consider drunk driving a serious crime. You get punished for a DUI whether or not you actually got someone killed.

If we think the psychological damage of hazing, bullying, and pranking is such that suicide is a very likely outcome then we should be serious about it BEFORE that outcome occurs.

No matter the case, it is folly to charge someone for manslaughter when the victim voluntarily killed themselves. I support stricter punishments for bullies, but calling them killers due to the conscious decisions of the victims is just plain dishonest.

[Trojan_Ripper]

If I’m on the jury I would first question the fact that Clementi knew about the prior web cam set up…. “and did not go out a commit suicide at that time” Why not? Instead he then asked to use the room again in which he knew his roommate had tried to cam him before… he then just unplugs the computer knowing what was happening. Why didn’t he go to his dean, move out, etc… “he had many options” and time to think about it, before committing suicide. Dorm life is what you make of it.

Also this Ravi guy (the supposed bad guy) was offered a plea agreement (no jail time, minor probation) and declined…. wanting a trial to prove his innocence and clear his name. Pretty ballsy, when he might be looking at any amount of time, and could have just walked.

What is Ravi guilty of? Bad judgement….yes. How many college students can say that? Hate crime….that’s a joke. So far….if anything, this is just a case of invasion of privacy for the first incident (a 2-3 second kissing clip) in which Clementi “did nothing” but asked to use the room alone again. So then the second incident he did not walk blindly into (and it did not transpire) because he unplugged the comp knowing what was going on.

Nobody pushed him off the bridge, “he jumped” and took the reason with him. Jurors aren’t charged to “guess” in their verdict but go on evidence.

[Apeman81]

The fact that is possible to charge him shows that there ARE legal grounds for charging him. Enough people wanted these kind of laws that they are on the books in many jurisdictions. Sad to say, it took a while for the masses of people to move to that reasoned position, but move they did and assholes can no longer absolutely and completely avoid consequence for the results of their "assholery".

And I think I shall petition the folks at Oxford to recognize "assholery" as a real word.

Fantasy!

Clementi committed suicide. What was his reason for doing so? Oh yes, he gave none.

Obviously it was Ravi's fault.

[lsbskins1]

Fantasy!

Clementi committed suicide. What was his reason for doing so? Oh yes, he gave none.

Obviously it was Ravi's fault.

Reasonably, given the facts known, we can conclude that absent Ravi's actions, Clementi would still be alive. Given the fact that there is rarely absolute evidence of guilt for any crime, we have to rely on reason. This is not a matter of fantasy, it is a matter of realistic expectation and is how punishment usually gets decided. Unless, of course, you are claiming that convictions in our system are always based on some form of absolute evidence.

[Dieval]

Reasonably, given the facts known, we can conclude that absent Ravi's actions, Clementi would still be alive.

How is that reasonable to conclude?

[Trojan_Ripper]

Reasonably, given the facts known, we can conclude that absent Ravi's actions, Clementi would still be alive. Given the fact that there is rarely absolute evidence of guilt for any crime, we have to rely on reason. This is not a matter of fantasy, it is a matter of realistic expectation and is how punishment usually gets decided. Unless, of course, you are claiming that convictions in our system are always based on some form of absolute evidence.

How could you logically come to that conclusion? Why not accuse one of his college professors for a bad grade, the mailman for not delivering his mail on time, the ex-boyfriend for any number of reasons, or a pissed off cab driver screaming at him to “get the hell out of the way and go fucking jump off a bridge”?

If you have evidence to “reasonably conclude” that he would NOT HAVE committed suicide except for Ravi’s actions then you need to get on the horn and present them.

Let’s try getting “real” in life.

[Zeebadee]

How is that reasonable to conclude?

Uh, because he was alive up until that point??

[lsbskins1]

How could you logically come to that conclusion? Why not accuse one of his college professors for a bad grade, the mailman for not delivering his mail on time, the ex-boyfriend for any number of reasons, or a pissed off cab driver screaming at him to “get the hell out of the way and go fucking jump off a bridge”?

If you have evidence to “reasonably conclude” that he would NOT HAVE committed suicide except for Ravi’s actions then you need to get on the horn and present them.

Let’s try getting “real” in life.

Dharun Ravi Guilty Of Invasion Of Privacy In Webcam Spy Trial

Guilty of Invasion of Privacy, Guilty of Bias Intimidation, Guilty of Witness Tampering and Guilty of Hindering Apprehension. Seems 12 good folks felt I was pretty right and not very "unreal" in my view.

[The Decider]

Good verdict. The state presented a compelling case and the jury obviously agreed. It was a high hurdle to jump--the hate crime charge--but thankfully it stuck. This ruling is landmark. Watch out cyber-bullies; your day in court may come sooner than you think.

[el ايمان]

I agree with the decision to not charge Ravi as a factor of his roommate's death. Even though the intent was to humiliate the roommate, I think that anyone would be surprised that this whole debacle lead to a suicide.

[lsbskins1]

I agree with the decision to not charge Ravi as a factor of his roommate's death. Even though the intent was to humiliate the roommate, I think that anyone would be surprised that this whole debacle lead to a suicide.

I think dude was convicted because not one person on the jury was surprised that this whole debacle lead to suicide. Do you honestly think that he would be facing one minute of jail time absent the death? Let's say that he had filmed him doing his homework and Clementi found out and reported him to the police. Would they have arrested him for the crime of invasion of privacy? He would have still been filming him without permission and would still be, legally, guilty of that count of the indictment.