Tyler Clementi Suicide Case

[tampa24]

Here is a compilation of Tyler's posts on the JustUsBoys forum. I found them on the Gawker website.

http://gawker.com/5651659/is-this-webcam-spying-victim-tyler-clementis-last-call-for-help

 

[Frontier]

There are so many ways of looking at this case. First I did not sit and watch every detail of the court case or the judges ruling, so my opinions are of limited value. However, from what I did see I do not think fuck face was a homophobe just a fuck face. I do not think it was a hate crime and the fact that it was prosecuted as such and turned down by the court will greatly injure the gay community. The prosecution stretched the limits of the definition of the law permitting the judge the ability to nullify. I think this was intentional, this case sets case law!!! As far as the punishment I would have sentenced him to work in one of his fathers seven-elevens for one year and deported his ass to India along with his entire family and given the money they made in this country to Tyler's family. For those who do not know the Indies are quite class conscious, clannish and believe the white man is inferior. They got a point, u know a guy who owns 100 seven-elevens? BTW Tyler committed suicide because he wanted to for what ever reason. God Rest HIs Soul.

 

[tim114]

I think the problems with this case started when the prosecution decided to use the bias intimidation statues to ramp up the possible prison time Ravi might face. If memory serves correctly, the judge called the law "muddled" when instructing the jury. In his sentencing, he pointed out that these "hate crime" laws were generally used for violent crimes. I feel that Judge Berman felt the bias laws were misapplied and he nullified the jury's ruling regarding those count. I think what NJ needs to do now to take a look at many of its laws and bring them up to date for an internet world. For example, is a peeping tom (one guy looking in a window) the same as a peeping tom (one guy with a camera, recording the event and putting on a web site) the same crime?

 

[tim114]

The problems with this case started when the prosecution applied the bias intimidation charges to the case to ramp up the possible prison time Ravi might face. As the judge pointed out in his sentencing, most states only use these "hate crime" laws in cases where violence is involved. I feel Judge Berman felt the bias law was misapplied and therefore nullified the jury's ruling regarding them. It appears to me many laws in NJ need to be reworked by the legislature. They need to be updated to meet the internet world we live in. For example is a peeping Tom (one guy looking through a window) the same as a peeping Tom (one guy looking through a window with a camera recording the event and posting it to the internet)?

 

[joninliverton]

I've had a good read of the Wiki link that Tampa sent me - thanks T. I personally think there is a lot more to this than meets the eye. The suicide was IMHO far too close to the actual incidents that took place and, although no expert in suicidal cases, psychology or depression, I would have thought it would have taken a lot more events to drive someone to take their own life.

Maybe there were things going on in Tyler's life that we don't know it and that this incident was the final straw - the final kick in the teeth perhaps and he could take it no more.

Notwithstanding the above; the punishment certainly did not fit the crime and I would like to know if Ravi would have been given a much stiffer sentence had the incident been committed in another State. If the answer is yes with possibly a custodial sentence then once again I am amazed why the USA govt allows individual states to have their own laws.

 

[another1]

well ravi finally says he is sorry. this was issued yesterday by his lawyer:

"I accept responsibility for and regret my thoughtless, insensitive, immature, stupid and childish choices that I made on Sept. 19, 2010, and Sept. 21, 2010," Ravi said in his statement. "My behavior and actions, which at no time were motivated by hate, bigotry, prejudice or desire to hurt, humiliate or embarrass anyone, were nonetheless the wrong choices and decisions. I apologize to everyone affected by those choices."

 

[another1]

i think using a webcam to broadcast or even to narrowcast the private activities of another is wrong.
the instant case would not have seen the inside of a courtroom in most states. this is a case of overcharging meant to sent a message. the result was that the message was not clear. bad cases result in bad caselaw.

 

[tampa24]

well ravi finally says he is sorry. this was issued yesterday by his lawyer:

"I accept responsibility for and regret my thoughtless, insensitive, immature, stupid and childish choices that I made on Sept. 19, 2010, and Sept. 21, 2010," Ravi said in his statement. "My behavior and actions, which at no time were motivated by hate, bigotry, prejudice or desire to hurt, humiliate or embarrass anyone, were nonetheless the wrong choices and decisions. I apologize to everyone affected by those choices."

It just brings a tear to the eye, doesn't it? His very "apology" comes across as extremely self serving...and unrepentant. I'm not impressed. Nor do I think this statement will be considered much of an apology by Tyler's family or M.B.

I'll give him the hate, bigotry and prejudice. I don't think those were his motivations. But.... I'm not buying that a smart college kid (who was a legend in his own mind) would be oblivious to the fact that those actions would "hurt", "humiliate" or "embarrass" the intended target of those actions. That's Bull****!! Of course they would! That was how he intended to become popular and well known on campus. By humiliating his gay roommate.

As more facts of this case revolves it looks less like a hate crime and much more like cyber bullying. Unfortunately the legal system has just not caught up with the gravity of possible cyber crimes. So the prosecution had to go with bias intimidation. And even for cyber bullying as opposed to a hate crime, the sentence of 20 days in jail is far too lenient. If this crime had been committed by a minor, then perhaps 20-30 days in juvie, plus fines and probation might have been appropriate. Not in this case.

Is this his full, heartfelt apology? Or just an excerpt?

 

[another1]

It just brings a tear to the eye, doesn't it? His very "apology" comes across as extremely self serving...and unrepentant. I'm not impressed. Nor do I think this statement will be considered much of an apology by Tyler's family or M.B.

I'll give him the hate, bigotry and prejudice. I don't think those were his motivations. But.... I'm not buying that a smart college kid (who was a legend in his own mind) would be oblivious to the fact that those actions would "hurt", "humiliate" or "embarrass" the intended target of those actions. That's Bull****!! Of course they would! That was how he intended to become popular and well known on campus. By humiliating his gay roommate.

As more facts of this case revolves it looks less like a hate crime and much more like cyber bullying. Unfortunately the legal system has just not caught up with the gravity of possible cyber crimes. So the prosecution had to go with bias intimidation. And even for cyber bullying as opposed to a hate crime, the sentence of 20 days in jail is far too lenient. If this crime had been committed by a minor, then perhaps 20-30 days in juvie, plus fines and probation might have been appropriate. Not in this case.

Is this his full, heartfelt apology? Or just an excerpt?

i think this is it as far as apologies go. i also think it comes about 20 months too late!

 

[tampa24]

well ravi finally says he is sorry. this was issued yesterday by his lawyer:

"My behavior and actions, which at no time were motivated by hate, bigotry, prejudice or desire to hurt, humiliate or embarrass anyone, were nonetheless the wrong choices and decisions."

I'll give him the hate and bigotry part. Insomuch as I don't think that those was his motivations. But.... I'm not buying that a smart college kid (who was a legend in his own mind) would be oblivious to the fact that those actions would be prejudicial towards,"hurt", "humiliate" or "embarrass" the intended target of those actions.

I will have to amend my own post here to at least include prejudice, if not bigotry, into the equation. We would have to read his mind and decide for ourselves to decide if he was a bigot. So that would be fruitless. All we can look at are his actions and his words.

After all, this is the same guy who wrote to a friend as soon as he saw Tyler's posts on the JustUsBoys forum:

"Fuck my life! My roommate's gay."

In hindisght how can his actions be construed as anything but prejudicial at best and bigoted at worst? Even if we take hate off the table...

 

[tim114]

@Jon. Our constitution spreads power between the ferdeal government and the states. Therefore the federal government has laws regarding certain crimes and each state has its own laws regarding other crimes. And, yes, it can get confusing at times. A good example is the same sex marriage laws. If a couple gets married in state where this is possible and then moves to a state where it is not, they run into obvious problems.

 

[another1]

my problem with this case is that new jersey doesn't have a law against cyberbullying.
the state's case against ravi was brought under a peeping tom statute.
a peeping tom looks thru a window or at a person in a dressing room directly or with a camera. under new jersey law, if a person views and broadcast such sight, then they have broken the law. never has hate been added to the charges in a peeping tom case.
the case will not come to a good ending, because a state should not be able to bend the law to bring a case. the state should write a law against cyberbullying or as often the case in this country, the federal government should enact a strong anti-cyberbullying act.

 

[joninliverton]

The issue here is homophobia. I wonder what would have been the case if Ravi had captured Tyler making racist remarks against Ravi to his friend, instead of making out with the friend. There is a marked difference between racism and homophobia in the uk, although the Govt says there should not be. I suspect it is the same across the pond.

The late excuse that Ravi made was obviously on the advice of his lawyers, in order for him to get a minimum sentence. The ploy worked and NJ should be ashamed of such a light sentence.

 

[another1]

the mea culpa came after the sentencing. even the judge noted the lack of remorse.
it just says, i acted stupidly, forgive me. a late and meaningless statement.
this statement was made to make a record for immigration. self-serving!

still think there ought to be a law against any form of discrimination. everyone should be safe from bullying and cyberbullying.

 

[tampa24]

it just says, i acted stupidly, forgive me. a late and meaningless statement.
this statement was made to make a record for immigration. self-serving!

I think you hit the nail on the head there Another1. The so-called "apology" was not to show genuine remorse or ask for forgiveness. It was designed to convince an appeals court not to sentence him to a stiffer sentence...and to convince the Feds not to deport him. We'll see how he fares with both eventually.

 

[joninliverton]

I think you hit the nail on the head there Another1. The so-called "apology" was not to show genuine remorse or ask for forgiveness. It was designed to convince an appeals court not to sentence him to a stiffer sentence...and to convince the Feds not to deport him. We'll see how he fares with both eventually.

You should kick him out and send him back to India. And I said India and not the UK, where I dare say he will end up if he does get deported.

 

[tampa24]

You should kick him out and send him back to India. And I said India and not the UK, where I dare say he will end up if he does get deported.

LOL Jon. Are you insinuating that just about any Indian with a passport and airfare manages to end up living in the UK anyway?

 

[joninliverton]

LOL Jon. Are you insinuating that just about any Indian with a passport and airfare manages to end up living in the UK anyway?

I suppose they're getting their own back after the days of the Raj. They do have excellent restaurants over here, of which I often frequent. In seriousness though, my take is that any immigrant who has or get's a criminal record whilst being hosted in a foreign country, should be sent back from whence he came.

 

[tampa24]

I suppose they're getting their own back after the days of the Raj. They do have excellent restaurants over here, of which I often frequent. In seriousness though, my take is that any immigrant who has or get's a criminal record whilst being hosted in a foreign country, should be sent back from whence he came.

You're quite the diplomat Jon. I'm impressed.

 

[joninliverton]

You're quite the diplomat Jon. I'm impressed.

I must be improving then. My teacher once said I was as diplomatic as a flying mallet. Maybe this came through a bit on my first stint within this forum. I hope I have shown a bit more maturity but still kept my spunkiness.