Clementi trial starts today

[option]

Jury selection begins Tuesday in a New Brunswick, N.J., courtroom for the trial of Dahrun Ravi, the Rutgers University student who with a silent flip of his laptop webcam secretly watched his roommate in a moment of gay intimacy, and unwittingly set in motion a series of events that would make him a national symbol of cyber-bullying.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/tyler-clementi-bullying-trial-begins-today/story?id=15752236&singlePage=true

[TrevorTime]

I really hope that this Ravi character gets locked up, but I have a sinking feeling that he will skate. Mainly because of Tyler's age, as he was an adult when he took his own life.

[MJ85]

I'm far from a legal expert, but it seems like the one charge that really should stick no matter what is the invasion of privacy. Whether he gets labelled as only a prankster or as homophobic, it seems pretty obvious that privacy WAS violated here. Get that one to stick and the witness tampering and hindering prosecution might too.

 

Would it matter if he wasn't labelled homophobic? ...if only because it seems like whether or not he was, what he did definitely was. I reckon our resident legal expert ought to weigh in (that means you, Andy ).

[Benji]

........Tragic case on both sides, a stupid prankster and a stupid gay kid that offed himself. But the prankster violated the others privacy.. and for that he should be held accountable as it is against the law. As far as a hate crime, nope, don't agree here, he may have been a bit homophobic but his actions did not seem to warrent that of said crime.His juvneille antics are middle school ones, he learned nothing from his higher grade before entering college, a case in point to teach the younger generation of bullying effects.

[MJ85]

........Tragic case on both sides, a stupid prankster and a stupid gay kid that offed himself. But the prankster violated the others privacy.. and for that he should be held accountable as it is against the law. As far as a hate crime, nope, don't agree here, he may have been a bit homophobic but his actions did not seem to warrent that of said crime.His juvneille antics are middle school ones, he learned nothing from his higher grade before entering college, a case in point to teach the younger generation of bullying effects.

 

I dunno...I'll agree that he didn't quite have "hate criminal" motivation, I think he would've done things differently if he did. But...I can't shake the feeling that he was at least partly motivated by using the fact that Tyler was gay, and having intimate same-sex encounters, against him. I'm just not quite convinced that his only motive was to invade his privacy, prank-style. Why go to the length of having a "viewing party" if he's just pranking him?

[Rilbur]

Why go to the length of having a "viewing party" if he's just pranking him?

Because he was pranking him?

[methodwriter85]

I've been kind of hesitant to put the "hate crime" label on this as well- yes, it was a horrible and thoughtless prank, but to put this and what happened to Matthew Shepherd in the same category...doesn't quite work for me.

[TetRefine]

This would have never been labeled a hate crime had it not been for it's high profile media status. I smell a prosecutor trying to score big with a high profile case for future political gain. This was a prank that went horribly wrong, and now the idiots who thought it would be funny are having their life ruined for it. Call me crazy, but I actually feel bad for the moron Ravi. His life is ruined over a dumb prank.

[paya]

Well actually I don't think he can be found guilty of a hate crime... he should certainly be convinced for breaking his privacy and be punished accordingly. But this is not a hate crime in my view.

[MJ85]

Because he was pranking him?

 

Sorry, but this doesn't seem like just a prank to me.

 

This would have never been labeled a hate crime had it not been for it's high profile media status. I smell a prosecutor trying to score big with a high profile case for future political gain. This was a prank that went horribly wrong, and now the idiots who thought it would be funny are having their life ruined for it. Call me crazy, but I actually feel bad for the moron Ravi. His life is ruined over a dumb prank.

 

OK, since you asked .... you crazy, man!

 

But really, Ravi didn't have to do what he did, but he did. And either way, he's going to pay a price for it - and deservedly so. There's plenty of pranks that don't involve breaking the law.

 

----------

 

I think this could be a great example of why I sometimes don't like the "hate crime" label. "Bias crime" makes much more sense. Maybe I'm getting hung up on semantics here, but I am thinking that "hate crime" might be too severe a label for what happened here, whereas "bias intimidation"...does seem more appropriate. The latter seems more appropriate for crimes that are, by themselves, less severe in nature, whereas "hate crime" seems almost tailor-made for crimes at the Matthew Shepard level of severity. (Personally, I think "hate crime" is an ill-fitting name - I agree with the rationale behind charging crimes this way, but the government could have come up with a name that doesn't also seem very fitting for crimes not motivated by race, religion, sexual orientation, etc. But, that's another discussion entirely.)

 

Nonetheless, let me pose this question. If Tyler was straight, and was hooking up with a girl, but his personality was otherwise exactly the same...do you think Ravi would have chosen to stream what Tyler was doing anyway? Take Tyler's later suicide, and for that matter anything else that happened after the night Ravi streamed what Tyler was doing, completely off the table for a moment, and let's go back to the exact weekend in September. Do you still think Ravi would have streamed Tyler's intimate encounter if it were heterosexual rather than homosexual in nature?

[Hecate]

I agree with others here that have deemed it a cruel prank, but not a hate crime. I know similar things that have happened to straight girls at my campus (though it's a different circumstance, given the propensity for fallout), so I doubt homophobia was the sole motivator.

 

I do hope they at least get him with invasion of privacy (though I'm also one of those people that dislikes ongoing cases being in the public eye).

[Andrew Q Gordon]

This would have never been labeled a hate crime had it not been for it's high profile media status. I smell a prosecutor trying to score big with a high profile case for future political gain. This was a prank that went horribly wrong, and now the idiots who thought it would be funny are having their life ruined for it. Call me crazy, but I actually feel bad for the moron Ravi. His life is ruined over a dumb prank.

 

Aw Matt, there you go stirring things up again

 

Actually I find this hard to label a hate crime, but probably not for the reasons expressed here. Basically the viewing party, the video taping what was criminal and he deserves to be punished, and yeah, his life might be messed up for a dumb prank, but guess what, he still has his life, Tyler doesn't.

 

But calling this a hate crime sort of flies in the face of things for me. The connection between the two is he committed a criminal act that had at it's root a bias issue - Tyler being gay. But when we look at these things, you also have to intend the consequences, that is what we call general vs specific intent. Did Ravi intend for the harm that happened. So, sure he intended for people to see two dudes making out or whatever, and yeah he intended or had to know it would happen that Tyler would be embarrassed by it, but did he intend those consequences because Tyler was gay. It was very American Pie and there they filmed a straight couple.

 

My take and of course I didn't/haven't heard all the evidence, is that this was a prank as others have said, but it was a crime of opportunity, not bias/hate. Ravi's only roommate was gay, who else was he going to do this to? If it had been a straight roommate, he probably would have done the same thing cause he's a dumbass and thought it would make him seem cooler. Basically he did this to his roommate and his roommate was gay, but the that alone doesn't make it a hate crime.

 

As for an out of control prosecutor, Matt this was indicted by the Grand Jury, not a direct file by the prosecutor. he put this before the jurors and made his argument. Yes I know the saying is you can indict Ice for melting in the summer before a grand jury, but I suspect that isn't the case here. Yes this is high profile, but he could also lose and then what? Not really a good thing to lose the only big case you have had in a decade or more. My guess is he used the grand jury to vet his idea. If the G.J. bought it and returned an indictment, he went forward.

 

Yes there is a bit of grand standing here, but if he was SOO good at getting what he wanted from the G.J. why not charge him with murder or manslaughter or complicit in the death of Tyler. My point being, it had to pass the smell test and the Jurors bought it. But let's also not lose sight of the fact that this incident DID have an impact on Tyler's decision. Maybe not the only reason, but there was a connection. Sweeping it under the rug would be a disserve as well. At least that would be my take if I were the D.A.

[TetRefine]

Aw Matt, there you go stirring things up again

 

Actually I find this hard to label a hate crime, but probably not for the reasons expressed here. Basically the viewing party, the video taping what was criminal and he deserves to be punished, and yeah, his life might be messed up for a dumb prank, but guess what, he still has his life, Tyler doesn't.

 

But calling this a hate crime sort of flies in the face of things for me. The connection between the two is he committed a criminal act that had at it's root a bias issue - Tyler being gay. But when we look at these things, you also have to intend the consequences, that is what we call general vs specific intent. Did Ravi intend for the harm that happened. So, sure he intended for people to see two dudes making out or whatever, and yeah he intended or had to know it would happen that Tyler would be embarrassed by it, but did he intend those consequences because Tyler was gay. It was very American Pie and there they filmed a straight couple.

 

My take and of course I didn't/haven't heard all the evidence, is that this was a prank as others have said, but it was a crime of opportunity, not bias/hate. Ravi's only roommate was gay, who else was he going to do this to? If it had been a straight roommate, he probably would have done the same thing cause he's a dumbass and thought it would make him seem cooler. Basically he did this to his roommate and his roommate was gay, but the that alone doesn't make it a hate crime.

 

As for an out of control prosecutor, Matt this was indicted by the Grand Jury, not a direct file by the prosecutor. he put this before the jurors and made his argument. Yes I know the saying is you can indict Ice for melting in the summer before a grand jury, but I suspect that isn't the case here. Yes this is high profile, but he could also lose and then what? Not really a good thing to lose the only big case you have had in a decade or more. My guess is he used the grand jury to vet his idea. If the G.J. bought it and returned an indictment, he went forward.

 

Yes there is a bit of grand standing here, but if he was SOO good at getting what he wanted from the G.J. why not charge him with murder or manslaughter or complicit in the death of Tyler. My point being, it had to pass the smell test and the Jurors bought it. But let's also not lose sight of the fact that this incident DID have an impact on Tyler's decision. Maybe not the only reason, but there was a connection. Sweeping it under the rug would be a disserve as well. At least that would be my take if I were the D.A.

 

I doubt even a very politically ambitious prosecutor going to score points could have gotten charges of murder, or even manslaughter. I don't believe in hate crimes anyway so I'm against it to begin with. I could go on, but this isn't the Soapbox so I'll shut my mouth now (as it tends to get me in trouble).

[Rilbur]

Sorry, but this doesn't seem like just a prank to me.

 

Hence the trial.

 

Maybe he intended it as a prank, but it goes way beyond the scope any prank should have had.

 

I'll also chip in with those that say you can't label this a hate crime (or even a bias crime). No evidence points that this was about filming gay men having sex, it was about catching his roommate having (gay) sex. Big difference there.

[MJ85]

Hence the trial.

 

Maybe he intended it as a prank, but it goes way beyond the scope any prank should have had.

 

I'll also chip in with those that say you can't label this a hate crime (or even a bias crime). No evidence points that this was about filming gay men having sex, it was about catching his roommate having (gay) sex. Big difference there.

 

That still puts the act in a separate area, because it begs the question, "why should catching him having (gay) sex - as opposed to just having sex - make any difference?"

 

If you had said the evidence was about catching Tyler having sex, without a distinction as to straight/gay sex, I'd say "prove it" in response, and if you can, you'd have me convinced. But, I don't think Ravi should get a pass if it was the "gay" part of it that motivated him.

[Rilbur]

That still puts the act in a separate area, because it begs the question, "why should catching him having (gay) sex - as opposed to just having sex - make any difference?"

Actually, what I'm saying is that the fact that it was gay sex was accidental to the actual act -- catching his roommate having sex. That's why I put the parenthesis in; 'gay' wasn't a part of the motivation, it was simply part of the situation.

 

Furthermore, as far as proof... please show me something that proves that it was a bias act, something more than 'oh, look at my roommate having sex -- with a man!'. That's not enough to show bias, either.

[MJ85]

Actually, what I'm saying is that the fact that it was gay sex was accidental to the actual act -- catching his roommate having sex. That's why I put the parenthesis in; 'gay' wasn't a part of the motivation, it was simply part of the situation.

 

Furthermore, as far as proof... please show me something that proves that it was a bias act, something more than 'oh, look at my roommate having sex -- with a man!'. That's not enough to show bias, either.

 

Well, he already knew that Tyler was gay, so he had a reasonable expectation that when he streamed him having sex, that he'd be streaming him having gay sex. Since he already knew Tyler was gay, he didn't have to say so at any time later on (though he did Tweet about finding out Tyler was gay).

 

Will that be enough to convict based on the motive, in addition to invading Tyler's privacy? I guess we'll see...but as you alluded to, that's why there's the trial.

[Andrew Q Gordon]

Well, he already knew that Tyler was gay, so he had a reasonable expectation that when he streamed him having sex, that he'd be streaming him having gay sex. Since he already knew Tyler was gay, he didn't have to say so at any time later on (though he did Tweet about finding out Tyler was gay).

 

Will that be enough to convict based on the motive, in addition to invading Tyler's privacy? I guess we'll see...but as you alluded to, that's why there's the trial.

 

I'm with Rilbur on this. Ravi seems like a douche, who thinks he needs to 'prove' he's cool - that was my take reading an indepth article on both him and Tyler - but I don't think he was being malicious, I think he was doing this to prove how 'fun' or 'cool' or 'smart' or whatever in being ableto catch his roommate having sex on film, ala American Pie - "Look at me. See, I recreated that funny shit from American Pie with my roommate." That's what I see from this. That Tyler was gay, was just what he was working with. Even though he made tweets and posts etc about Tyler being gay, there wasn't anything presented that shows he was hating on him.

 

I still believe this was just a college prank motivated by a need to draw attention to himself, not to attack Tyler for being gay. Maybe the fact that Ravi was going to be showing 'two dudes' kissing might have made the footage more unique or interesting to others, but that wasn't a product of hate as much as drumming up interest in the prank he was doing. IDK, maybe I'm totally off base on this, wouldn't be the first time, that's for sure.

[hh5]

here is a reporter tweeting the trial https://twitter.com/#!/mckoenigs

 

The 30yo man who is the date ... will take the stand

 

Wei ... only getting 300hrs community service ... where?

 

whats the price of someone's life

 

300 x 7.67 = 2,301 dollars ... that not enough

[hh5]

the mb guy date not testify today but later will

* Rutgers Trial Witness Admits He Lied

http://abcnews.go.co...44#.T087FfEgenZ

* Analysis: Burden Remains for the Prosecution in Tyler Clementi Case

http://abcnews.go.co...74#.T088gvEgenZ

* Four cameras in court capturing the RA's testimony in Rutgers trial at

 

http://abcnews.go.co...ve-news-6046305

 

 

Prosecution also expected to call M.B., the 30-year-old man whom Clementi kissed in his dorm room the night Ravi activated the webcam

 

 

 

Lawyer: "[Ravi] never said anything bad about Tyler?" Witness: "Never"

 

 

In reference to the webcam: "I helped him...I helped him set it up."

Witness #9 admits that he lied to police because "I was scared"

 

the RA is not american ... so perhaps that adds to the red tape of being insensitive in an explosive situation

[methodwriter85]

I'm with Rilbur on this. Ravi seems like a douche, who thinks he needs to 'prove' he's cool - that was my take reading an indepth article on both him and Tyler - but I don't think he was being malicious, I think he was doing this to prove how 'fun' or 'cool' or 'smart' or whatever in being ableto catch his roommate having sex on film, ala American Pie - "Look at me. See, I recreated that funny shit from American Pie with my roommate." That's what I see from this. That Tyler was gay, was just what he was working with. Even though he made tweets and posts etc about Tyler being gay, there wasn't anything presented that shows he was hating on him.

 

I pretty much thought he was trying to pull an American Pie, too.

[hh5]

Well, if Ravi never gets on the witness stand ... you won't know what kind of person he really is ... its a question if trial turns up ppl that will reveal who Ravi is deep down ...

Remember there are people who are trained to not to be blatantly hateful in public ... but all actions done ... judge by silent actions ... and rarely shared thoughts ... there is some form of hate ... or stupid fixation or fetish ... lol ... perhaps Ravi is gay or BI ... and thus if that could be truth on trial ... it would change the trial ... but he is being tried as a straight person ...

as for molley ... she had to bargain .. rather than offer testimony ... so I don't think much of her character .. it be nice if her true character is revealed.

 

Post trail thoughts ... if ravi is not a uSA citizen ... will he be deported? Is India watching his trial? Will his own country feel the shame?

The other thing is ... the public will forget what the people have done ... but question will ravi and Molly criminal record show they have some judgement or involvement ... I bet somewhere down the line for Molly when she applys for a job .. there is no charge to show on her record and thus no employer will be discriminate ... but for Ravi ... if found guilty ... will that judgement permanently stay on his record when employers check?

 

Thus this be a call for either a Name Change or moving to India ... or to the UK or Canada with a new identity??

[Rilbur]

here is a reporter tweeting the trial https://twitter.com/#!/mckoenigs

 

The 30yo man who is the date ... will take the stand

 

Wei ... only getting 300hrs community service ... where?

 

whats the price of someone's life

 

300 x 7.67 = 2,301 dollars ... that not enough

 

hh5, however you spin it Clementi choose to jump off that bridge himself.

 

Not murder. You'd have a hard time making a case for manslaughter, even.

 

Without a hell of a lot more evidence to show some kind of persistent or ongoing psychological assault, the suicide is something that is firmly Clementi's own doing. It sucks, but I'm not going to blame it on the others in this situation.

 

What they did was out of line, sure, but Clementi, ultimately, took that final leap.

[hh5]

Thanks for your rilber response ...

 

I wasn't spinning anything ... making a manslaughter case ... only the Molly 300hrs.

It doesn't matter what Clementi chose ... but surely the trial will open up things we didn't know about.

I just said her plea bargain and 300hr .. doesn't pay for involvement ...

the stiffer it is ... perhaps people with think twice in doing something like this in case of something bad happens after a prank.

It's her mistake for letting ravi use her computer for the crime ... if she refused ... then ravi would have to find another way or forget about it. Perhaps Clementi would be alive.

Somehow Clementi and Ravi didn't like each other ... everyone is new to each other ... so its too early for pranks ...

 

If this was Ravi's prank is so funny ... why isn't every one including Clementi coming out laughing at the JOKE

where tensions are released in a team-building manner

rather than it was a lit the fuse to a bomb that blew up in their faces

hence this wasn't a joke,

but it's merely an extreme insensitivity against Bullying n invasion of privacy.

 

300hrs is like two-month full-time work ... doing What is the question?

How she spent is a good one? How she learns from her involvement?

Sure ravi deserves all he can be charged with.

 

Look if Molly's involvement was just observing .. then 300hrs would be fine ...

but she furnished the hardware and the internet connection ... she's a partner in crime

even though maybe she didn't realize what she agreed to.

 

It led to someone's death ... not much different if Clementi had died of a heart attack.

This is an interesting case as to how to spell kiss your career good-bye.

Will this trial teach Ravi to grow up quickly??

 

That's certainly after Ravi's character is determined. The good question is if the Ravi parents and legal team did any bribing or calling in of favors. The thing in his favor much like the MJ trial is that people tend to forget what happen. Everything is rehearsed.

In the BULLYING arena ... we hope this is the TITANIC ... the smashing reality that things need to change

which people coin "The perfect Storm"

 

but the judicial or gov't doesn't want to put BULLYING laws to the test ...

 

maybe it will soon if there was a moving public force for change

perhaps it will take a judge or a senator to lose their own child, this way or another way of bullying

 

its like charge them with something and let time punish the victims not to continue the fight beyond this trial

let Molly n ravi get charged with slaps on their wrist

 

if Ravi cared ... he should have shown he does by now ...

he didn't ... (i am not going to try to quantify his after acts)

his parents didn't bring him up proper nor did his culture.

 

We don't know if this is one trial or the beginning of many ...

but it sure sounds like they want to get it all done ...

the question is will this be an eight-week trial?

 

It will be interesting if the Judge and jury learn to hate Ravi and Molly.

Gosh your response makes it sound like this is a sporting event ...

It's like we should have a score board ... ravi goes free or not?

Nothing cut n dry ... lots of interesting things are being said ...

 

If the case is very simple and things are cut n dry .. then it be over in two weeks ...

But if there is a very good case ... jury will be wishing they weren't on the case after 6 to 8 weeks.

 

Perhaps if they can prove clementi was out of his mind like from taking prescription drugs that weaken his mind? That might reduce ravi sentence ...

 

Sure it be great to find out what drove or cause him to jump ... its not an easy rational choice to make

unless he figured his career is over ... then to get back at ravi ... and end ravi n Molly career with his death? That be an interesting thing to prove ...

 

but you cannot deny that this is the most severe way of being outed!!

 

Has anyone ever been outed at college like this?

 

Perhaps this was what been going through Tyler mind?

 

He didn't really know far he's been outed.

 

Now he's dead that he doesn't have to deal with it anymore.

I guess your beer is getting warm, and you want to get back to this sporting event.

... 50 yd penalty on ravi n Molly ... get back to your lives ...

 

hh5, however you spin it Clementi choose to jump off that bridge himself.

Not murder. You'd have a hard time making a case for manslaughter, even.

Without a hell of a lot more evidence to show some kind of persistent or ongoing psychological assault, the suicide is something that is firmly Clementi's own doing. It sucks, but I'm not going to blame it on the others in this situation.

What they did was out of line, sure, but Clementi, ultimately, took that final leap.

[hh5]

MB answers the questions ... perhaps this spectacle of interest ... perhaps this is the overriding factor to ravi sense of right and wrong.

Reading the twitter, It seems that Tyler fell madly in love with MB, and he wanted things to be perfect ...

... he didn't realize they were a spectacle ... or he tries to tune it out ...

 

How do you think being in love for the first-time means ... I think it certainly means his judgement is impaired, and hormones are a gushing?

 

He still is a teen ... and he wanted his relationship kept to a low profile .. until he is ready to come out ... he doesn't know where his love life is headed u ravi ... uncovered ... rather than respecting privacy ...

 

This behavior is probably what Tyler's notice about ravi ... being curious and nosy ... a we are noticing how much Tyler wanted privacy ... gosh, he must have been extremely nervous ...

 

I guess this trail going to unveil a number of awkward signs that people ignored.

 

http://abcnews.go.co...95#.T1LOEvEgenZ

 

http://abcnews.go.co...48#.T1LEMfEgenZ

 

"I felt uncomfortable...but I walked past them and brushed them off...there was a group of people sitting there, staring at me"

 

 

"it just seemed kind of odd the way they were looking at me...it just seemed out of place" says MB of Rutgers students in the hall Sept 19

 

"I wasn't shaved so maybe I looked older...so maybe that's why they were looking" says MB, who's 10 year older than most freshman