• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

What would be the fate/kismet of Dharun Ravi? An Excellent Portrait in The New Yorker

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hello ALL:

Please visit blog.nj.com and read an article by Din Ionno on why Dharun & Family rejected the Plea Deal. The parents have spoken for the first time.

They believe that their son did not commit a "Hate Crime", hence they rejected even the very generous Plea Offer.

Now, they lost the Gamble. Jury unanimously found Dharun guilty of FOUR Bias Intimidation Offenses which will by law fetch him years of State Prison.

Judge will listen to what the Prosecutors want as a way of Just Punishment... As per the first Plea Deal, Prosecutors asked for FIVE years in jail... they may insist on that term now, after the Trial.

People should think hard about Criminal Justice System, and the Doctrine of Justice and Punishment.

Whether people realize or not, this Case was about Gay Bashing and Intimidation from Sep 19, 2010.. and the death of Tyler Clementi, although the Prosecution never asked for "Involuntary Manslaughter" or connecting this Case to Tyler's Death.

But his Death was the 800 lb Gorilla everybody saw, except Steve Altman and Ravis.

Ravis took enormous RISK, and they will pay very dearly for it.

It appears that Altman is going to go for Appeal. I think he is very Selfish: he wants to be a very rich man at the expense of Dharun & his family...

I believe this Verdict will stand on any Appeal.

US Supreme Court will never take this case, if it reaches them.

More later...
 
Hello ALL:

Please visit blog.nj.com and read an article by Din Ionno on why Dharun & Family rejected the Plea Deal. The parents have spoken for the first time.

They believe that their son did not commit a "Hate Crime", hence they rejected even the very generous Plea Offer.

Now, they lost the Gamble. ..


Di Ionno: In wake of conviction, Ravi family stands behind rejecting 'hate crime' plea deals | NJ.com

errr.. i remember the my grandma's story about the convict son biting the ears of mama, minutes before being hanged.
 
....Maybe, you take the position that son went against parents' advice.

[...]

Sorry, if that bothers you.
Sorry Y, you have missed my point. This is not about me, or for that matter you or what you consider good parenting is.

The two main points I raised were (i) you have no rational basis to comment about the upbringing, and (ii) Dharun is being made a scapegoat and being made to pay for the sins of the society.

The second point is the most insidious one. Even Gay groups acknowledge this.

6. As I said before on this topic, if any parent glorifies a son who has a GPA of 2.88 in High School (and an alleged SAT score of 1100 out of 1600) I call them out as "irresponsible and out of touch with real world competition".
With some rational reflection I am sure you also will agree that children deserve to be loved unconditionally. Predicating love for one's own children on GPA or SAT score is neither rational nor wise. There are many other intangeible things that are at least as valuable as those that get defined as "success" by competitive "real world".

I firmly believe it is irrationally elitist to call the parents of Dharun out as irresponsible for celebrating his graduation from High School -- which is part of the right of passage to adulthood in the U.S. -- because his GPA was relatively low or he did not score high enough in SAT.

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
weighted average and opinion always slip towards the low score students, some times back benches as, brat boys in school. no school topper has done any shooting spree inside the campus.

here are few lines picked from the newyorker article, which could give some supportive feel, that ravi would have been spoiled at home.

Ravi drove a BMW in high school; (his father should have put in a star hotel nearby rutgers, than in a dorm.)


“He’s poor,” Ravi wrote, adding a frowning emoticon

Dharun’s idea that his father would want to throw his gay roommate out the window.


At the time of his high-school graduation, in 2010, his parents bought space in the West Windsor and Plainsboro High School North yearbook




Uncles Yams, would your children ever want not to be next to a poor?. Have you bought them a BMW in school, when they were coming home with top ranking score cards? would your children ever use your name to sell their point to scare some?

 
Sorry Y, you have missed my point. This is not about me, or for that matter you or what you consider good parenting is.

The two main points I raised were (i) you have no rational basis to comment about the upbringing, and (ii) Dharun is being made a scapegoat and being made to pay for the sins of the society.

The second point is the most insidious one. Even Gay groups acknowledge this.

With some rational reflection I am sure you also will agree that children deserve to be loved unconditionally. Predicating love for one's own children on GPA or SAT score is neither rational nor wise. There are many other intangeible things that are at least as valuable as those that get defined as "success" by competitive "real world".

I firmly believe it is irrationally elitist to call the parents of Dharun out as irresponsible for celebrating his graduation from High School -- which is part of the right of passage to adulthood in the U.S. -- because his GPA was relatively low or he did not score high enough in SAT.

Cheers!

Dear N:

1. As per New Yorker article,

Dharun was raised in a family where "Class" is very important.

Dharun has voiced opinion on "Poor Gays". Tyler was a "Poor Gay".

Dharun has the habit of smoking "weeds". And, he got a GPA of 2.88

In spite of all this, Dharun's parents were praising him sky high!

I call them "poor parents".

Yesterday I learned that the parents were the ones who refused to take the generous Plea Deal (600 h of community service Vs Jail time).

Didn't they take enormous RISK? They were Gamblers, IMO. They were gambling on the life of their son.

I call them "poor parents". You have the right to disagree.

2. Dharun Ravi did act on Sep 19 and 21, 2010 because of an "uncomfortable feeling of the Poor Gay" Roommate Tyler Clementi!.

His attitude towards Gay was the sole reason he started videotaping Tyler - a fact.

Thus, Dharun violated the intent and spirit of the NJ criminal law.

That's why the 12 Jurors found him guilty unanimously. He was not scapegoated here. It's your faulty interpretation that he was caught! I say that it is his behavior that put him in this very bad situation.

Actions have consequences. Tyler is dead. Dharun is convicted of bias intimidation.

3. Yes, kids must be loved. I am not sure of "unconditional love", though.

Parents have the responsibility to teach them "good enduring values". If they smoke "weeds", they must be disciplined. If they goof around in schools, they must be disciplined. If they go around and insult people because they are "poor", they must be disciplined etc. etc.

Dharun Ravi failed in so many ways... and the parents were praising him sky high!

I don't like it... I said so. You may disagree. That's your right, dear N.

Dharun Ravi got into this mess because he was not disciplined properly at home at the appropriate time.

Now he is reaping the consequences!

Cheers.

:)
 
Last edited:
Uncles Yams, would your children ever want not to be next to a poor?. Have you bought them a BMW in school, when they were coming home with top ranking score cards? would your children ever use your name to sell their point to scare some?


Hi Shiv:

1. We liked our kids going to Public Schools. Although many of our close friends opted for private, parochial (Christian) schools, we always said, "Only in Public schools, our kids will learn about the whole Society".

2. For us, good academic achievement was very important. Our kids understood it from Day One. We did not yell at them on that issue - they understood it by our "body language". You may say we were crazy!

3. Yes, I allowed my daughter to drive my Red BMW 325i to go to school (about 8 miles away from home; school bus did not cover our residence) when she promised me that she will focus and keep high ranking in the Class - she was aiming for No.1, Valedictorian. Finally, she kept her words though she could get No. 2, Salutatorian.

I must confess I did not offer the same to my son! Because the school bus covered our area.

4. I can visualize Pazhani Ravis household. There are many people like them around me - all from India. Pampering their kids and spoil them!

Cheers.

:)
 
uncle yams, by any chance ravi tried to earn sympathy of being a brown boy?, unlike the famous OJ Simpson trial where color issue indeed tilted the verdict.

even steven altman, who tried to project him as a naughty kiddo, but never expressed any points about supposed indian conservative upbringing. prosecution also never touched upon any such topic like that. even a brown boy lokesh testified against ravi and broke down in the court.

also, i have gone through various articles about the trial and judgement. not even a tint of this colour issue came up.

was wondering from where this brown boy and scape goat issue is popping up.. atleast, do indians out there feel that way?
 
uncle yams, by any chance ravi tried to earn sympathy of being a brown boy?, unlike the famous OJ Simpson trial where color issue indeed tilted the verdict.

even steven altman, who tried to project him as a naughty kiddo, but never expressed any points about supposed indian conservative upbringing. prosecution also never touched upon any such topic like that. even a brown boy lokesh testified against ravi and broke down in the court.

also, i have gone through various articles about the trial and judgement. not even a tint of this colour issue came up.

was wondering from where this brown boy and scape goat issue is popping up.. atleast, do indians out there feel that way?

Hi Shiv:

1. I don't know from where this "Brown Boy" argument comes! In my reading and my circle of friends I don't find it.

2. OJ Simpson case was quite different. All along I felt that Prosecution did not prove that in a very short time how OJ could have committed TWO murders. And, they should never have allowed OJ trying those gloves in the Court room during the Murder Trial.

"If it didn't fit, then acquit him" came from that legendary Defense lawyer Cochran, and the Jury acquitted him.

But most people thought that OJ did the crime, but walked because of poor performance of the Prosecutors.

3. Dharun Ravi case is a seminal case in Crime & Punishment in the US. The Society is going thru massive Social Change.

Cyber bullying is rampant, and "vulnerable people" need protection. NJ law addressed it.

I don't see any issue of scapegoating here at all.

We don't know how much Jail Time that Dharun will get... If it is 3-5 years of Jail, then the punishment will fit the crime. More than that will create problems of "excessive punishment". We need to wait till May 21 to comment on it.

This is a typical case to address the issue, and unfortunately a Tamil family got involved in it.

I really wished that Ravis took the Plea Deal for 600 h community service and closed the matter several months ago.

Now, they made the history in a very wrong and a pathetic way.

Very sad.
 
Hello ALL: This is an Editorial from Star-Ledger of NJ:

Dharun Ravi doesn't deserve prison in Rutgers spying case


Published: Sunday, March 18, 2012, 6:00 AM Updated: Sunday, March 18, 2012, 8:01 AM

By Star-Ledger Editorial Board
Follow





Share Email Print


10650470-large.jpg
Dharun Ravi listens to testimony during his trial at the Middlesex County Courthouse in New Brunswick. Ravi, a former Rutgers University student, is charged with invasion of the privacy of his roommate--Tyler Clementi in September 2010. 3/6/12 John O'Boyle/The Star-Ledger


What Dharun Ravi did was creepy and childish. He used a webcam to spy on his roommate, Tyler Clementi, kissing another man in their dorm at Rutgers. He invited other students to watch, and wrote about it on his Twitter feed. He was a geeky freshman trying to show off.
But that’s not enough to put him behind bars, in the company of rapists, muggers and killers — as allowed under the state’s sloppy hate crimes law. We hope the judge makes the exceptional call not to give him jail time — a decision that’s within his power.
Ravi wasn’t charged in Clementi’s death, though the gay student’s suicide was what poured gasoline on this fire. We’ll never know why Clementi jumped off the George Washington Bridge, so it’s unfair to pin that on Ravi.
He deserves the same type of punishment as Molly Wei, the other student charged with spying on Clementi: counseling and community service. Chances are, Ravi didn’t take a plea deal like she did because he was afraid he’d be deported to India. He’s here on a student visa.
Now, he’s looking at possible deportation and a state prison sentence. He’s certain to appeal, and the appellate judges should find this vague, confusing bias law unconstitutional. It’s a huge overreach in this case. What Ravi and Wei did was beyond mean. But it’s not clear they did it specifically because Clementi was gay.
Yes, they treated him like a sideshow curiosity. But lascivious pranks aren’t uncommon in a freshman dorm, and you get the impression the same might have happened if the shy violinist had brought home an extremely obese or particularly unattractive woman he met online. How uncool — easy target.
Remember, while Ravi made fun of Clementi for being gay, Clementi made fun of Ravi for his Indian heritage. Both accused the other of being poor. These were two roommates who didn’t know how to talk to each other, so they wrote petty jibes online. They were immature, not trying to instill fear. As Star-Ledger columnist Kathleen O’Brien pointed out, the other kids in the dorm, who said nothing and did nothing to stop Ravi’s scheme, are culpable, too.
Having a bias law is a legitimate way to highlight the threat of hate crimes, which are an attempt to instill fear in an entire community. If someone goes around burning crosses on lawns, it would seem odd to charge him simply with trespassing or damaging private property.
But here, there was no evidence that Ravi was trying to instill fear. None of the students who testified said they saw any evidence that he was bigoted toward gay people.
This case shows the danger of having such a broad statute. Legislators need to rethink this law, and tailor the punishments to fit the severity of the crime and the clarity of the threat.
We searched for proof of homophobia in Ravi, but we should focus that scrutiny on ourselves. Do we tell our kids it’s okay to be gay? Why don’t we accept soldiers and teachers and athletes who are openly gay? Or allow gay people to marry whom they love, like everyone else?
What kind of despair prompted Clementi to step off that bridge? Maybe it’s something he internalized, that we as a society have taught. "
____________________________________________
I agree that Judge Berman has the right to give "Suspended Jail Time" for Dharun.

The question is should he do it?

The Jurors have spoken and their "opinion" or the verdict must be honored at all costs by this Judge.

The Prosecutors bent over backwards to accommodate the "just 18 year old kid" behavior by giving him a very generous Plea Deal.

Why did Dharun & family refuse it take it? They wanted a Trial and asked the Jurors to give their Verdict.

Jurors got the case, saw the evidences presented, deliberated it and gave their Verdict... Where's the problem now?

"Poor Gay", "Keep the Gays Away" etc pointed clearly to the mind set of Dharun.

Hence, it is the "bias against a poor gay" only prompted Dharun to behave this way, which is against NJ law.

Maybe, the legislators must rewrite the law, excluding 18 year college freshmen!

Let's wait for the Punishment phase of this, before we jump our guns!

Wait & watch.
 
i think parenting could have prevented such happening. read below this interesting blog..

Dharun and Ravi: Two Different Worlds | orinam


few clips.

Dharun wrote the following to his friend Tam, about his roommate’s sexuality “I still don’t really care, except what my parents are going to say. My dad is going to throw him out the window.” Is this likely to have been true? Was Dharun’s father, Ravi, indeed homophobic? If so, was it because of his ignorance and that he thought homosexuality was a bad Western influence? How much of Dharun’s perceptions of homosexuality arose from needing to conform to his family and cultural expectations, compared to what he actually felt about gay people?


Forget about homosexuality: even heterosexuality is never discussed in living rooms or at dinner tables. Until puberty, Indian kids are told the “god drops baby into mummy’s tummy”
 
Hello ALL:

Now, Editorials are written in major newspapers like NY Times. They all say, "Let the Punishment Fit the Crime".

I agree.

Certain facts are crystal clear:

1. Dharun was at least mildly homophobic, perhaps learned from his "traditional Indian household", which is very obsessed with "Class". Perhaps, he would have put up with Tyler if he had been a "Rich Gay"! Lol.

2. Dharun's aim from the beginning was to "keep the gays away", which he mentioned to his friends.

3. Dharun, in his deposition to Investigators, has conceded that he violated Tyler's Privacy.

NJ Criminal Code was designed to punish such activities.

4. Dharun & Family was given a very generous Plea Deal II (600 h of community service, no jail time) by the Prosecution, which was foolishly rejected by the defendant. They took it to the Jury.

5. Jury has spoken. He was found guilty of homophobia and the resultant Invasion of Privacy. The punishment can be up to 10 years per offense.

I plead with Judge Berman to give Dharun 3 years in jail:

But suspend part of it in lieu of hefty fines (like $30,000) and 3000 hours of community service and a order of deportation to India.

Let the Punishment Fit the Crime.


:)
 
Hello ALL:

Now, Editorials are written in major newspapers like NY Times. They all say, "Let the Punishment Fit the Crime".

I agree.

Certain facts are crystal clear:

1. Dharun was at least mildly homophobic, perhaps learned from his "traditional Indian household", which is very obsessed with "Class". Perhaps, he would have put up with Tyler if he had been a "Rich Gay"! Lol.

2. Dharun's aim from the beginning was to "keep the gays away", which he mentioned to his friends.

3. Dharun, in his deposition to Investigators, has conceded that he violated Tyler's Privacy.

NJ Criminal Code was designed to punish such activities.

4. Dharun & Family was given a very generous Plea Deal II (600 h of community service, no jail time) by the Prosecution, which was foolishly rejected by the defendant. They took it to the Jury.

5. Jury has spoken. He was found guilty of homophobia and the resultant Invasion of Privacy. The punishment can be up to 10 years per offense.

I plead with Judge Berman to give Dharun 3 years in jail:

But suspend part of it in lieu of hefty fines (like $30,000) and 3000 hours of community service and a order of deportation to India.

Let the Punishment Fit the Crime.

Hi Yamaka,

Sorry have to disagree here. Dharun did not kill Tyler, did not drive him to suicide deliberately. These are not disputed by any one.

yes, he played a prank on his friend, called him names, did not like gays, & put a webcam etc., but these are NOT criminal actions, are distasteful, hateful.

In the US, freedom of speech is etched in the constitution to the extent that people can make racial hate speech & get way like the KKK, but it is shocking to know that just because Tyler was Gay, Dharun has to pay a price.

However you look at this, he does NOT deserve a jail term. I am surprised at the lack of check & balance in the american judicial system !!, clearly in this case the jury gave a verdict to appease the Gays !!

Cheers,
JK
 
Just becos he is homophobic does not mean he should be punished. All the conservatives are "strongly" anti LGBT & openly talk about it in all US channels. so should they all be punished.

Also if he did not take the plea deal, does not mean he should be punished for 5 yrs or 10 yrs Jail term. this is a very bizzare process in the US judicial system, where the prosecution agrees for 600 hrs plea deal & then argues for 10 yrs in Jail during the trail. !!
 
Just becos he is homophobic does not mean he should be punished. All the conservatives are "strongly" anti LGBT & openly talk about it in all US channels. so should they all be punished.

Also if he did not take the plea deal, does not mean he should be punished for 5 yrs or 10 yrs Jail term. this is a very bizzare process in the US judicial system, where the prosecution agrees for 600 hrs plea deal & then argues for 10 yrs in Jail during the trail. !!

Hi JK:

Please read the NJ Criminal Code as written by the Legislature, and read the Verdict given by the unanimous Jury.

You may disagree with the law, and ask for rewriting etc. which is a long political process here as well as in India.

If homophobia is the prime reason for an underlying crime, it is called "a hate crime" for which the punishment is very punitive, as per the law.

The court and Jurors just follow the law as written.

Ravis were given a chance to take the Plea Deal. They gambled. And lost big time, IMO.

Now, it's up to the Judge. He CAN give up to 10 years in Jail per offense (there are FOUR offenses committed by Dharun as per the Jury).

In American Jurisprudence the Verdict of a Jury is sacred. No one should take it lightly.

But legally, the Verdict can be appealed, then taken to NJ Supreme Court, and if allowed to the US Supreme Court.

I wish that Ravis don't appeal and prolong this agony.. because there is nothing wrong in the Verdict per se.

Wait & watch.

:)

ps. Why did the Prosecution give a very generous Plea Deal II? Because of the tender age of Dharun.. 18 years, barely 3 weeks away from home, and he is a First Time Offender. And to save some money to the State of NJ: the Trial consumes lots of resources of the State, which they wanted to avoid, if possible.

Ravis misunderstood it as "Weakness of the Prosecution". A huge blunder, a big gamble, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Hi JK:

Please read the NJ Criminal Code as written by the Legislature, and read the Verdict given by the unanimous Jury.

You may disagree with the law, and ask for rewriting etc. which is a long political process here as well as in India.

If homophobia is the prime reason for an underlying crime, it is called "a hate crime" for which the punishment is very punitive, as per the law.

The court and Jurors just follow the law as written.

Ravis were given a chance to take the Plea Deal. They gambled. And lost big time, IMO.

Now, it's up to the Judge. He CAN give up to 10 years in Jail per offense (there are FOUR offenses committed by Dharun as per the Jury).

In American Jurisprudence the Verdict of a Jury is sacred. No one should take it lightly.

But legally, the Verdict can be appealed, then taken to NJ Supreme Court, and if allowed to the US Supreme Court.

I wish that Ravis don't appeal and prolong this agony.. because there is nothing wrong in the Verdict per se.

Wait & watch.



ps. Why did the Prosecution give a very generous Plea Deal II? Because of the tender age of Dharun.. 18 years, barely 3 weeks away from home, and he is a First Time Offender. And to save some money to the State of NJ: the Trial consumes lots of resources of the State, which they wanted to avoid, if possible.

Ravis misunderstood it as "Weakness of the Prosecution". A huge blunder, a big gamble, IMO.

first of all you are assuming there was/is a crime here ?. thats what I am questioning here. The law is wrong at many levels is another matter.

Dharun did not kill Tyler & deliberately did not drive him to suicide. if there is NO dispute on these 2 points, there was NO crime committed.

Rest of the actions are distasteful, hateful, bad & to be condemned. But NO way this justifies putting him in Jail.

Also just becos Ravis missed out on the plea deal, miscalulated, were stupid etc.. does not mean they should be made to suffer. so what if the trail cost so much etc.

Justice must be done whatever the costs are !!. here clearly it is a "injustice" to Dharun.
 
first of all you are assuming there was/is a crime here ?. thats what I am questioning here. The law is wrong at many levels is another matter.

Dharun did not kill Tyler & deliberately did not drive him to suicide. if there is NO dispute on these 2 points, there was NO crime committed.

Rest of the actions are distasteful, hateful, bad & to be condemned. But NO way this justifies putting him in Jail.

Also just becos Ravis missed out on the plea deal, miscalulated, were stupid etc.. does not mean they should be made to suffer. so what if the trail cost so much etc.

Justice must be done whatever the costs are !!. here clearly it is a "injustice" to Dharun.

Hi JK:

Somewhere in this Thread I have posted the Verdict in detail.

There were 35 detailed counts for which Dharun Ravi was indicted by Grand Jury and the Prosecutors sued him in the Court.

Jurors unanimously found Dharun guilty of 24 counts (FOUR of which relates to "homophobia") and acquitted him of the rest.

Please remember Prosecution did not sue him for "Involuntary Manslaughter" because they need to bring more evidence to the Court, including the Suicide Note etc. I believe that whatever Dharun did in those two days contributed towards Tyler's death.

Probably, the Jurors also felt that way.... but that was not the point they were considering: Invasion Privacy was there, solely because of Tyler being "a poor gay" and Dharun wanted to "keep the Gays away". That's the KEY element here.

Granted the whole issue of Tyler's Death came to National Focus because of Dharun's Actions on Sep 19 and 21, 2010, and Tyler died on Sep 22, 2010.

And, the case relates to Homophobia and the underlying crime of Violation of Privacy.

In the US, because of historical precedence, women, African Americans, Gay/Lesbians/Transexuals/Bisexuals are considered "vulnerable people" in the Eyes of the Law.

And the NJ Law worked to protect them.

I don't know whether this is true in India or elsewhere.

Cheers.

:)
 
Last edited:
Hi Yamaka,

Agree with you - that the actions of Dharun contributed to Tyler's death. but he did not do it deliberately, as you highlighted, the prosecutors did not go for involuntary manslaughter.

Dharun being guilty of Homophobia is a "BIG FARCE". come on !, he was just 18 yrs old !. for godsake, which ever way you look at it, Jurors had no business to pronounce him guilty !!. His age should have been the overriding factor here even if the "stupid" law says these are crimes !!

Assuming he is guilty, are the mistakes so great that he should be jailed for 5 yrs, 10 yrs etc..??

Cheers,
JK
 
....Agree with you - that the actions of Dharun contributed to Tyler's death.
Dear JayKay, do you have any verifiable evidence for the above, that Dharun's actions contributed to Tyler jumping off the bridge? Please do not speculate that it must have played a part, I would like to see solid evidence for this.

Dharun being guilty of Homophobia is a "BIG FARCE". come on !, he was just 18 yrs old !.
The society at large is still mired in homophobia while the LGBT community is increasingly asserting their rights. This is the environment in which Dharun grew up. Many cases of direct and spiteful bullying directly leading to suicides have been coming to light. Yet, Dharun did not show any sign of such hatred, in fact he says in his text messages he is fine with his roommate being Gay.

As you say, what Dharun did was abominable, but the NJ jury action is an attempt to make Dharun pay for the society's continuing sins. The irony is, as Dharun is being vilified, many Republican controlled states are getting rid of anti-bullying laws, or weakening them, and in some cases even making it legal to bully Gays on religious grounds, read about it here.

Another interesting contrast is the case of Travon Martin (Google it for more), one in which a self-appointed vigilante pursued a young teenager returning home from a store because he was armed with black skin, and shot him dead. The police let the murderer go free because he claimed it was in self-defense, even though he was the one pursuing the teenager and he was the one with a gun and all the teenager had was a bottle of ice-tea and a packet of candy. After weeks the case has finally caught the national attention, and even now, it is only being reviewed, the murderer has not been arrested. But for this attention there would have been no case at all.

We have Dharun acting abominably for which the weight of society's guilty conscience is put on his head, and here is a vigilante killing of a defenseless unarmed teenager and the "justice" system is grappling with fine points of the law to see whether the killing was justified.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear JayKay, do you have any verifiable evidence for the above, that Dharun's actions contributed to Tyler jumping off the bridge? Please do not speculate that it must have played a part, I would like to see solid evidence for this.

The society at large is still mired in homophobia while the LGBT community is increasingly asserting their rights. This is the environment in which Dharun grew up. Many cases of direct and spiteful bullying directly leading to suicides have been coming to light. Yet, Dharun did not show any sign of such hatred, in fact he says in his text messages he is fine with his roommate being Gay.

We have Dharun acting abominably for which the weight of societies guilty conscience is put on his head, and here is a vigilante killing of a defenseless unarmed teenager and the "justice" system is grappling with fine points of the law to see whether the killing was justified.

Hi Nara,

There is no direct evidence to prove Dharun contributed to Tyler, however one can say there was enough circumstantial evidences like the hate messages, putting a webcam & broadcasting etc.. However all this does NOT make him guilty to be put into a jail.

The"right decision" here is to put in into community service & counselling.

Agree with your observations on the issues with LGBT community, case of Travon Martin, is terrible. Republican discourse is definitely a major polarising issue & contributing to the hatred of LGBT.

Cheers,
JK
 
...There is no direct evidence to prove Dharun contributed to Tyler, however one can say there was enough circumstantial evidences like the hate messages, putting a webcam & broadcasting etc..
Dear JK, no you are wrong, there was no broadcasting at all. There was only one instance of webcam peeping, the second attempt did not take place. The first one didn't last long at all and no recording was made. Please get your facts straight.

As far his text messages, there was nothing overtly hateful, in fact he says he has no problem. Even the prosecution didn't go there at all.

In summary, there is absolutely no evidence, direct or indirect, that the web-peeping contributed to Tyler jumping into the river. Of course fact-free speculation is inevitable.

On the contrary, it is quite possible Tyler coming out to his parents just a couple weeks earlier was more of a proximate cause -- Tyler himself tweeted to a friend "mom has basically completely rejected me".

Cheers!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dear brother Nara Ji,

I agree with your pov on this.

One element for the conviction in my opinion is that a scapegoat had to be found for a suicide.

I wonder what the suicide note had said.

But suicides and accompanying notes happen all the time. Even if a note points a finger at a person as the reason for the suicide, I do not think that there is a single law in any country that would take any legal action against the person so accused.

Regards,
KRS
 
Dear JK, no you are wrong, there was no broadcasting at all. There was only one instance of webcam peeping, the second attempt did not take place. The first one didn't last long at all and no recording was made. Please get your facts straight.

As far his text messages, there was nothing overtly hateful, in fact he says he has no problem. Even the prosecution didn't go there at all.

In summary, there is absolutely no evidence, direct or indirect, that the web-peeping contributed to Tyler jumping into the river. Of course fact-free speculation is inevitable.

On the contrary, it is quite possible Tyler coming out to his parents just a couple weeks earlier was more of a proximate cause -- Tyler himself tweeted to a friend "mom has basically completely rejected me".

Cheers!

Hi Nara,

fyi - pl read the new york times.

Dharun used webcam to capture the gay act on the video, encouraged others to watch through twitter. Ravi & his laywers have agreed to this !!

if you dont call this as broadcast, then what ?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/nyregion/defendant-guilty-in-rutgers-case.html

A former Rutgers University student was convicted on Friday on all 15 charges he had faced for using a webcam to spy on his roommate having sex with another man, a verdict poised to broaden the definition of hate crimes in an era when laws have not kept up with evolving technology.

The student, Dharun Ravi, had sent out Twitter and text messages encouraging others to watch. His roommate, Tyler Clementi, jumped to his death from the George Washington Bridge three days after the webcam viewing, three weeks into their freshman year in September 2010.

The jury also found him guilty of lying to investigators, trying to influence a witness and tampering with evidence after he tried to cover up Twitter and text messages inviting others to join in the viewing.

Mr. Ravi’s lawyers agreed that he had set up a webcam on his computer, and had then gone into a friend’s room and viewed Mr. Clementi kissing a man he met a few weeks earlier on a Web site for gay men. He sent Twitter and text messages urging others to watch when Mr. Clementi invited the man again two nights later, then deleted messages after Mr. Clementi killed himself.

Cheers,
Jk
 
Hello ALL:

Dharun Ravi Vs Tyler Clementi. Trayvon Martin Vs. George Zimmerman. Who is the Victim and who is the Villain?

There a few complain that Dharun Ravi was a scapegoat at the alter of a bigoted Society.

1. Yes, in spite of Progressive Movement since 1980s, American Society has homophobia perpetrated by largely religious conservatives like Rick Santorums of the world.

Like, in spite of strict enforcement of the law, still about 1% of the motorists run red light and stop signs...

Can we condone this? No.. We must apply the laws more harshly to prevent future occurrences.

2. Dharun did lot of research on the background of Tyler who committed suicide on Sep 22, 2010 because, most probably, that he felt humiliated by what Dharun did to him on Sep 19 and 21, 2010. Tyler's homosexuality was spread among dozens of students at Rutgers University.

3. Dharun was at least mildly homophobic from his tweets: "Tyler is a POOR GAY" and he wants to "Keep GAYS Away".

4. This very homophobic feelings prompted him to set up his webcam spying on Tyler and his companion.

5. Hence the motive was to "keep the GAYS Away" to invade the privacy of Tyler & Co.

6. Therefore, a 12 member Jury found him guilty unanimously on FOUR counts of Bias Intimidation - a hate crime and 21 other counts.

Where's the scapegoating here?

The law worked as intended here.

17 year old Trayvon Martin was killed cold blooded by a goonda with his gun. And the Sanford Police is pathologically brain dead for not arresting and prosecuting him. The country rose up ((I am one of the 650,000 petitioners who asked for his immediate arrest and prosecution) and the Seminole County District Attorney is taking the case to the Grand Jury in Apr 10, 2012, nearly two month AFTER the incident.

Read here:

Sanford, Florida (CNN) -- Outrage over the killing of an unarmed Florida teen rippled nationwide as supporters planned more protests Wednesday and a petition demanding the shooter's arrest amassed nearly 1 million signatures.
Trayvon Martin was fatally shot February 26 while walking to the house of his father's fiancee in Sanford after a trip to a convenience store.
George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch leader, said he shot the teen in self-defense.
Zimmerman has not been arrested or charged in the killing of the black teenager. A police report describes Zimmerman as a white male, but his family says he is Hispanic.
120321032215-zimmerman-travyon-mashup-story-body.jpg
Florida shooter 'is not a racist'
120321030124-ac-trayvon-martin-toobin-hostin-call-00023816-story-body.jpg
Why Trayvon's cell records matter
120321012514-drew-florida-shooter-psychiatrist-00011524-story-body.jpg
Psychiatrist: Florida shooter 'paranoid'
120320112056-exp-jvm-trayvon-martin-00002001-story-body.jpg
Friend defends George Zimmerman
Demonstrators demanded justice at a Tuesday night rally at a Sanford church, where Ben Jealous, the head of the NAACP, called for the police Chief Bill Lee's resignation.
Jealous said Lee's department mishandled the case by not arresting Zimmerman.
The U.S. Justice Department has also launched a civil rights investigation into the shooting. Jealous said the federal agency's decision to get involved has empowered Trayvon's supporters to stand their ground.
Nearly 750,000 people have signed a petition on Change.org demanding Zimmerman's arrest, making it one of the website's largest campaigns.
On Wednesday, supporters will gather in New York City for a "Million Hoodie March," a reference to the attire the 17-year-old was wearing when he was shot.
"A black person in a hoodie isn't automatically suspicious. Let's put an end to racial profiling," the protest page said.
The February 26 shooting occurred when Zimmerman -- who was patrolling the neighborhood -- saw the teen walking home after buying candy and a drink at a convenience store.
Zimmerman called 911 and reported what he described as a suspicious person. A few moments later, several neighbors called the emergency number to report a commotion outside.
Heated debate erupted over whether Zimmerman used a racial slur during the 911 call released this week.
"We didn't hear it, however, I am not sure what was said. So I never said we missed a racist remark," said Sgt. David Morgenstern of the Sanford Police Department.
A top CNN audio engineer enhanced the sound of the 911 call and several members of CNN's editorial staff repeatedly reviewed the tape, but could reach no consensus that Zimmerman used a racial slur.
Benjamin Crump, the Martin family's attorney, said the 911 call was questionable even without the slur.
"Without even hearing the conflicting part, we did hear number one that he said 'these people,'" Crump told CNN. "What did he mean when he said 'these people?' He also profiled him because he was a young black person with a hood on.
"So it goes without saying, even if you don't get to the thing that everyone is debating, he already had a mentality when he got out of that car that this was a young black man and he had assumed that he was a criminal, and you know what happens when you assume," Crump said.
While some neighbors were still on the phone with the emergency dispatchers, cries for help followed by a gunshot sounded in the background.
"The time that we heard the whining and then the gunshot, we did not hear any wrestling, no punching, no fighting, nothing to make it sound like there was a fight," said Mary Cutcher, one of the callers.
Cutcher said Zimmerman was confused after the shooting.
"He'd pace and go back to the body and just like -- I don't know if he was kind of 'Oh, my God, what did I do? what happened?' " she said.
Another caller, Selma Mora Lamilla, said she did not hear any altercation, but the teen cried and "whimpered" before the shooting.
She described Zimmerman as "straddling" the teen after the shooting, saying he was "on his knees on top of a body."
Crump said Martin's girlfriend was on the phone with him during the incident and can help prove he was killed "in cold blood."
The girl connects the dots and "completely blows Zimmerman's absurd self-defense claim out of the water," Crump told reporters Tuesday.
Shortly before he was shot, the teen told his girlfriend that someone was following him, and he was trying to get away, according to the lawyer. The girl, who did not want to be identified, said that during the call, she heard the teen ask why the person was following him.
She got the impression there was an altercation in which his earpiece fell out after he was pushed and the connection went dead, Crump said.
She did not hear any gunfire, he said.
Phone records show the teen was on the phone with her much of the day, including around the time of the killing, the lawyer said.
A Seminole County grand jury will convene April 10 on the matter, State Attorney Norm Wolfinger said in a statement.
Martin's family said they believe race was a factor in his death, fueling an outcry in the racially mixed community 16 miles northeast of Orlando.
Zimmerman's family has denied race played a role, saying he has many minority relatives and friends.
CNN has made numerous attempts to contact Zimmerman, but has been unsuccessful. His father told a Florida newspaper his son had moved after receiving death threats.
Police say they have not charged Zimmerman, 28, because they have no evidence to contradict his story that he shot in self-defense.
In a police report, Officer Timothy Smith said Zimmerman stated he was "yelling for someone to help me," but the victim's family said it was the teen asking for help.
The shooting has renewed a debate over a controversial state law and sparked calls for a review.
Florida's deadly force law, also called "stand your ground," allows people to meet "force with force" if they believe they or someone else is in danger of being seriously harmed by an assailant, but exactly what happened in the moments leading up to Martin's death remains unclear.
Zimmerman's father said his son never followed or confronted the teen, but 911 recordings tell a different story.
During the incident, the teen started to run, Zimmerman reported.
When Zimmerman said he was following the teenager, the dispatcher told him, "We don't need you to do that."
The case is rooted in one main thing, said Jeffrey Toobin, a senior legal analyst for CNN.
"Clearly, the question at the heart of the case is whether Zimmerman reasonably felt threatened. On this issue, the evidence currently seems murky," Toobin said.
Finding other witnesses is crucial because the teen is no longer here to give his side, he said.
State Sen. Oscar Braynon II sent a letter to Florida Senate President Mike Haridopolos asking for a review of the stand-your-ground law. Braynon called for a legislative panel to look into how the law has been used and implemented.
"The ultimate goal of such process is to decrease the number of incidents like that of Trayvon's and discourage more individuals from deciding to become vigilantes resulting in more lives lost," Braynon wrote.
Florida Gov. Rick Scott said he was going to look into the law "because if what's happening is that it's being abused, that's not right."
CNN's Vivian Kuo, David Mattingly, Brian Vitagliano and Moni Basu contributed to this report.
Watch Anderson Cooper 360° weeknights 10pm ET. For the latest from AC360° click here.

______________________________


The System terribly failed here.

More later....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest ads

Back
Top