Clementi trial starts today

Benji · March 16, 2012

I think you and I are interpreting what he said differently, Benji - I thought he said that he thought Ravi was guilty of a hate crime, but just wasn't sure that the jury would see it that way.

................Nope, I really don't see it as a hate crime, I see it as an invasion of privacy, and that evasiveness led to Clementi's death.

MJ85 · March 16, 2012

I know you're thinking that way, but you said you agreed with WL - when his last post said he thought it was a hate crime.

TrevorTime · March 16, 2012

Dharun Ravi is found guilty on most counts. I hope they deport this idiot.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/03/ravi_webcam_trial_verdict.html

TetRefine · March 16, 2012

Its truly wrong that he was found guilty of bias intimidation, aka hate crime.

MJ85 · March 16, 2012

Its truly wrong that he was found guilty of bias intimidation, aka hate crime.

That would be true if he hadn't planned to spy on Tyler specifically when Tyler was hooking up with M.B (on the 21st). If he had just planned to spy on him and found that happening by complete accident (as with on the 19th), I'd be more inclined to agree with you. In fact, he was acquitted of more of the bias charges from the 19th than he was from the 21st.

But, he spied on him on purpose. Therefore, he got the verdict that he deserved.

Daddydavek · March 16, 2012

3-16-12 ABC News is reporting:

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 legal discussions I read, said that the NJ law is a little different and that the jury could convict under a broad interpretation. I think the jury did so because it wanted to send a message. Deportation back to India doesn't sound like too hard a punishment.

hh5 · March 16, 2012

And in December, he rejected a deal that would have allowed him to avoid jail altogether, and instead be put on probation and be required to perform 600 hours of community service and receive counseling. The state would have also helped him try to stave off any attempt by the federal government to deport him.

he could have prevented his deportation n conviction if he took the deal

Does deportation means he won't ever be allowed back to the usa?

Its a good question will the family go back or be ok that their bad son is permanently in india.

He can get a job outside the usa ... the uk ... qatar ... singapore ... work for MS\India

Its not like its important he becomes an american citizen ... he could have family n friends he prefers back in india

in addition to arranged marriages

Any idea what the india gov't will do about the conviction?

Will they honor any of the conviction?

Or think of him as nothing had happen?

Any chance ravi had this motive of being sent back to india?

( if not the TC\MB incident occurred )

if you look at his face ... nothing changed in his mood

its the same throughout the trial

its like its about playing with law ... not having any feeling about anything he has done

would it matter on the day of sentencing?

3-16-12 ABC News is reporting:

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 legal discussions I read, said that the NJ law is a little different and that the jury could convict under a broad interpretation. I think the jury did so because it wanted to send a message. Deportation back to India doesn't sound like too hard a punishment.

Daddydavek · March 17, 2012

Interesting article in NYT discussing the jurors thinking.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/nyregion/jurors-say-digital-evidence-convinced-them-of-dharun-ravis-guilt.html

hh5 · March 20, 2012

Interesting article on "why the verdict is just"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michelangelo-signorile/tyler-clementi-dharun-ravi_b_1362562.html

But the bottom line is that Ravi was offered a plea deal in which he would have avoided jail time as well as deportation. Instead, he and his legal team put faith in what they thought was a homophobic judicial system, one that would slough off hate crimes against gays

I guess the legal team didn't look at the Mathew Sheppard trial and all the laws the Sheppard family been trying to get passed ...

I wonder how much they paid their legal team for gambling on the judicial system

I also wonder if ravi parents are screaming at them?

Benji · March 20, 2012

Interesting article on "why the verdict is just"

http://www.huffingto..._b_1362562.html

I guess the legal team didn't look at the Mathew Sheppard trial and all the laws the Sheppard family been trying to get passed ...

I wonder how much they paid their legal team for gambling on the judicial system

I also wonder if ravi parents are screaming at them?

............... I have to got to agree, why Ravi didn't take the plea agreement is beyond me, either his defense team was incredibly dense or thought they could get him off by a 90% chance and he took that advice. I see Ravi serving some time and getting deported, maybe a year, maybe two and then booted out.

hh5 · March 20, 2012

Yeah, there are two points in the article that sure does make some good points.

Interesting article in NYT discussing the jurors thinking.

http://www.nytimes.c...avis-guilt.html

hh5 · March 20, 2012

They gonna appeal http://video.msnbc.m...bc-tv/46768871/

Isn't there gonna be some kind of protest from India where his parents get some political unrest to happen?

Not sure if an American has been in India court ... with something similar happening?

I love the judge to rule no appeal ...

The news makes a point that we used the computer without really thinking of the consequences ...

so we'll see if this is the message that the judge n jury will finally decide.

Even the news people say ravi should have taken the plea deal.

http://www.cbsnews.c...gers-bias-case/

Here are the lame excuses for an appeal ... that u can't tell context from emails or tweets

well I hope any judge will say ... you had your chance to take a plea or take the stand and give the jury something to go on.

He's made the choice not to fight the case and have his rich daddy fight for him

lets hope the parents get angry at the lawyer and go for another one.

I doubt because Tyler took pictures of the bridge to make it mean he was going to jump .. 30 to 90 days later

or will they use as part to the appeal like .. Tyler mama rejected him ... his bro John is gay too

Tyler too sensitive ... so what he's been outed, humiliated by mouth, twitter, webcam, etc

whats wrong if the trial was trying to return the favor ..

but anyone noticed ,, Ravi didn't care ... during the trial ...

It's too easy for twenty\20 hindsight ... I hope a judge sees's that??

Do u think ravi attorney need to get a shrink to support all this appealing?

It will drag justice to the end of the year.

Is this just trying to dodge the verdict? By calling the law muddled?

Well lets have a bully trial ... n a murder trial ...

well think about this ... if one was at the bar n the bartender didn't stop the drunk ... he gets in trouble

ravi ... waited too long to smooth things out ... he let the situation go ... n so did the college dropping the ball.

So when do see the school get sued ... or did the school's refund the tuition n pay off the student-loan fees?

It be funny if the school sent a bill n demanded payment ...

Will the last resort is when ravi takes pierce Morgan interview?

i noticed in the video ... how much papa ravi ... holds on to his son ...

do you think ravi ... wants to be held like this?

one wonder's if ravi was acting this way as to rebel his father??

no one knows the true rich boy household is like

how much respect does ravi have ... esp when he drives a bmw in high school

was his real ploy to make his roommate uncomfortable so he would get another roommate?

maybe ravi wanted to goto a rich boy college like Princeton ... not a cheap state school

isn't tyler is the one spending a lot of money to go to Rutgers?

............... I have to get to agree, why Ravi didn't take the plea agreement is beyond me, either his defense team was incredibly dense or thought they could get him off by a 90% chance, and he took that advice. I see Ravi serving some time and getting deported, maybe a year, maybe two and then booted out.

RobV · March 20, 2012

I agree with everything Rilbur said earlier in the thread. I can't believe Ravi was convicted of a hate crime. I actually think he would've done the same thing if Tyler had been with a woman. Because the guy he was with wasn't just any guy, it was an older 30+ year old guy who Tyler had found online. If you're an 18 year old student and your roommate allows someone like that to invade your own space, I also would be annoyed and worried, and when you're an immature college kid it's only a short leap to seeing the opportunity to prank. Reading the in depth article from the New Yorker, my conclusion was that Ravi was even less homophobic than the average American. He and Tyler just did not get along at all because they were complete opposites, in far bigger ways than sexual orientation. And still Ravi never bullied him or made his life miserable in any way. In fact he gave Tyler lots of privacy and "alone time", which the latter really appreciated. Yes, Ravi eventually invaded that privacy, tampered with witnesses and evidence (as apparently deleting tweets counts as such). So convict him based on that. But bias intimidation? Was Ravi motivated by anti-gay bias? Did Tyler feel intimidated, was he mistreated solely because of his sexual orientation? I still don't understand how anyone can answer yes to both questions.

Rilbur · March 21, 2012

I still don't understand how anyone can answer yes to both questions.

Well, the article HH5 linked earlier has some suggestive pieces. Suggestive, and frightening.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/nyregion/jurors-say-digital-evidence-convinced-them-of-dharun-ravis-guilt.html?_r=1

An important component of the bias intimidation charges was whether Mr. Clementi felt bullied. Jurors said he left ample evidence that he did: he complained to his resident assistant, he went online to request a room change, he saved screen shots of Mr. Ravi’s more offensive online posts, and he viewed his roommate’s Twitter feed 38 times in the two days before he killed himself by jumping off the George Washington Bridge.

Frankly, I suspect this one is going to be fought straight up to the supreme court -- and with good reason. I didn't even realize it, but as another news article pointed out, this is the first time bias laws have been directed at non-violent crimes. The fact that the evidence on bias is so incredibly shaky makes that doubly scary to me, especially since apparently the only aspect on which they were able to label it a hate crime is that CLementi felt bullied. I don't know about anyone else, but I definitely think that 'feeling' that someone is biased towards you shouldn't count towards any type of bias charge -- too many people have persecution complexes already to go around handing them that kind of loaded weapon.

Benji · March 21, 2012

.... My take of it is that it wasn't a hate crime, more like lets make fun of my gay roommate, because I'm a practical joker and a jerk, and I don't see the consequences for my actions because it all fun and games to me. Why Clemente did what he did in such short of a timeline will be ever left up to speculation, could he have felt the student body smirking at him, could he have felt an ostracized by his fellow students after the first encounter that led him to believe 'it would not get better'? This shy young (gifted) kid JUST came out and definitely needed to join or talk to the local GLBT club for guidance. The real tragedy is that he did not seek it out, other then a room transfer that he requested, he did not seek guidance. It is unfortunate that this young man that struggled all his life to conform, barely made his feelings known before collage had it crash down on him before he could have made an impact on us all!

I am disgusted with Ravi for sure, was intent hate? I don't really think so, I do believe he did most of the other crimes, invasion, witness tampering, etc. And he needs to pay for that.

Graeme · March 21, 2012

Just as an aside, here in Australia we had a very similar incident about a year ago, where ADFA cadets broadcast a consensual sexual act on Skype. In that case it was a woman cadet who was the victim - her male partner was in on the broadcasting. It resulted in a major scandal in the Australian Defence Forces that resurfaced recently because that's when the investigations and reviews finished.

So, I'm inclined to start from a position that this was a stupid malicious prank (like with the ADFA cadets), but probably not a case of bias intimidation. However, I haven't seen the evidence presented in court, so I'm in no position to make a judgement call on the matter. I'm just stating where I would start from. That someone died as a result is a tragedy, and that's where I will stop with my opinions.

hh5 · March 21, 2012

What if a someone had died in the military? and was gay?

Sure it be a scandal ... but would you bet it be a cover up?

by the prankster and the military ... sure would be

but something like this would be left to the JAG drama tv shows ... right

as a country we're slow to growing up ...

we still haven't move forward with the meaning of our constitution

The declaration ... called the question of equality

that was almost two hundred years ahead of its time

it took another 50 years ... to see the first president

so ... hey ... I don't know how many cases involved a straight and a gay

I only know two ... Sheppard and Ravi ...

Mr Sheppard took it hard to spare the killers the death penalty

well not all of them made it to trial ... one I guess we would like to have made it to trial

Mathew and his killer was in the same hospital ... the same room

both died ...

so here ... if the jury n the judge wish to send the tough message on this unusual case

then so be it ... we do forget ... about how many gays were hurt or killed during the past couple of hundred years

perhaps Ravi needs to seriously look at gay history ... india history ...

Do we wish for Mr Clementi to take the same penance for Ravi as Mr Sheppard did for his son killers?

If Ravi wants to have a career and life ... he may have to go find it outside the USA and start over ...

We don't know how lenient the judge will be.

Look at how malicious pranks are handled in military court ...

I presume they come down real hard ...

Perhaps Ravi needs the wake up call

let him pay penance to gay equality ... the world needs to change

there isn't enough justice ... when you really open your eyes

to see how much injustice we have out in the world

not just about gays but all other crimes and misdemeanors

we also forget that ravi was against poor people

we really forget a lot of facts about ravi n tyler

when we're focused only about the judgement

we really forget this is still ravi and molly lesson

so if the judge rules ten years community service instead of prison

that may sound like the best deal to ever have

or until such time he can prove to the world he's reformed himself

the question is ... where is the risk ... that ravi can potential present a risk again?

Just as an aside, here in Australia we had a very similar incident about a year ago, where ADFA cadets broadcast a consensual sexual act on Skype. In that case it was a woman cadet who was the victim - her male partner was in on the broadcasting. It resulted in a major scandal in the Australian Defence Forces that resurfaced recently because that's when the investigations and reviews finished.

So, I'm inclined to start from a position that this was a stupid malicious prank (like with the ADFA cadets), but probably not a case of bias intimidation. However, I haven't seen the evidence presented in court, so I'm in no position to make a judgement call on the matter. I'm just stating where I would start from. That someone died as a result is a tragedy, and that's where I will stop with my opinions.

Graeme · March 21, 2012

What if a someone had died in the military? and was gay?

Then the perpetrators would probably be on trial for manslaughter.

I think the real question for the Australian case is whether there would have been the same outcome (enquiries and the issue going all the way up the tree to the Minister for Defence) if the cadet who was the victim was gay. The answer to that is obviously unknowable, but while I'd like to say it would be, I suspect that the media spin would've been slightly different, and the community reaction would have been more mixed (with some sectors saying that that was typical homosexual behaviour and that's why they shouldn't be in the military). Overall, however, I think the same result would have happened.

hh5 · March 22, 2012

In other countries it could be kept hush hush ... as gay presence doesn't exist .. a gay history that doesn't exist ...

Then the perpetrators would probably be on trial for manslaughter.

I think the real question for the Australian case is whether there would have been the same outcome (enquiries and the issue going all the way up the tree to the Minister for Defence) if the cadet who was the victim was gay. The answer to that is obviously unknowable, but while I'd like to say it would be, I suspect that the media spin would've been slightly different, and the community reaction would have been more mixed (with some sectors saying that that was typical homosexual behaviour and that's why they shouldn't be in the military). Overall, however, I think the same result would have happened.

hh5 · March 22, 2012

http://www.northjers...vi_verdict.html

oh the reactions of the community ...

remember its different than the reactions of clementi ... they don't have an entire community attending the trial

this is how diff american's are than foreign communities

in some ways ... its more of bullying ...

they say they come here for the american dream ... and then poof ... shame on them

there is a subtext ... a cultural one ... one that's unsaid in public but more know in the community

this trial has a lot of subtext ... more than if it were composed of citizens

hh5 · March 22, 2012

oh ... who says if u take the plea ... you have to take the stand or go to court??

I think what he says ... is just sorry too late

http://www.cbsnews.c...d-against-gays/

"I didn't act out of hate and I wasn't uncomfortable with Tyler being gay," Ravi told

Before the case came to trial, prosecutors offered Ravi a plea deal that would have called for no jail time.

"I'm never going to regret not taking the plea," he said. "If I took the plea, I would have had to testify that I did what I did to intimidate Tyler and that would be a lie. I won't ever get up there and tell the world I hated Tyler because he was gay, or tell the world I was trying to hurt or intimidate him because it's not true."

"I'm very sorry about Tyler," he said. "I have parents and a little brother, and I can only try to imagine how they feel. But I want the Clementis to know I had no problem with their son. I didn't hate Tyler and I knew he was OK with me. I wanted to talk to his parents, but I was afraid. I didn't know what to say."

really, you have to plea ... to purger(sp) yourself ... other than to tell the truth on the stand?

I think he should have gone n face tyler parents ... then things can be settle better ...

sure its hard to tell why he did what he did ... but that's part of growing up

he had almost two years to do it

so ... I really wonder about the twist of facts here he says

and what evidence was presented

but it sounds like a plea for public support ... an indirect way of saying sorry

well he has a lifetime to say sorry personally ... otherwise ... its what it is

hh5 · March 22, 2012

"What do you think of the Rutger's trial verdict and Dharun Ravi's conviction?"

http://www.pridesour...l?article=52357

yaa more of the same responses we have here ...

Its a pity we not have a form of religious opinion? meaning ethics and morals

hh5 · March 22, 2012

does all tragic deaths lead to setting up a foundation??

http://www.towleroad...ti-parents.html

Well if Ravi could join it ... and goes about speaking on behalf of it

perhaps that would do some good than to rot in jail?

Rilbur · March 22, 2012

really, you have to plea ... to purger(sp) yourself ... other than to tell the truth on the stand?

Taking a plea means pleading guilty. Which means you have to say what you did. You're pleading guilty in exchange for a reduced sentence. Which doesn't mean you take the stand as a witness, but you do stand up in court under penalty of perjury and say 'yes, I did these things'.

hh5 · March 23, 2012

ahh Ravi first talking interview ... that 96 secs he could have given testimony ...

http://news.yahoo.co...im-to-jump.html

Does any one really believe him?

Question did the experts prove that at least one person connected to the webcam feed?

But any way the investigator interviewed pretty much everyone ... and there is violations n charges he has to answer for

"The more and more I found out, it would be kind of obnoxious of me to think that I could have this profound effect on him," Ravi said.

At another point he added, "After all this time and reading his conversations and how and what he was doing before, I really don't think he cared at all. I feel like I was an insignificant part to his life. That's giving me comfort now."

What do your take of this and the evidence of the trial?

If he believe his innocence he should have taken the stand rather than 96 sec interview.

Two of his words obnoxious n insignificant ... i think he belittles it ... they didn't get to introduce JustUsBoys forum messages where tyler is talking about ravi because defense was against it ... oh yeah there is profound affect ... ravi does search the web about tyler online life. He know tyler online name. So he knows more than the interviewer did his homework.

more of interview in words

http://blog.nj.com/n...dharun_rav.html

perhaps ravi parents aren't going to allow a dig in deep interview ... this was so light hearted ...

perhaps this will be on 20\20 on friday night

i wonder if MB was investigated??

Since ravi had misgivings?

there was a ...

Ravi also pointed out that Clementi left behind a note, and that its contents have never been made public.

pity no other leads to tyler death .. i guess its a cold case

its a pitty he didn't take the stand ... it would have made some difference

one would think if u not going to take the plea ... then at least set the record straight

he gave a clue to what motivated him to webcam n perhaps it chimes well with his msg to tyler

gosh shoty defense work ...

it could have help give a better picture if ravi took the stand to tell about what happen

the video of police interrogation always makes one look like the criminal

giving testimony would have change those juror feelings

does giving interview makes what he say not admissible in future court trials?

ppl are left at trying to figure out what the judge will say in may?

and what the other judge will say about deportation?

no wonder for the interviews

Clementi trial starts today

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Andrew Q Gordon

paya

MJ85

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Similar Content