• CLICK HERE To Join Broke Straight Boys & Instantly Get Full Access To Entire Site & 3 FREE bonus sites.

Tyler Clementi Suicide Case

"The message was sent at 8:46 p.m. on Sept. 22, four minutes after Clementi posted a note on his Facebook page announcing he was going to kill himself."

Now we know.

Ravi's lengthy apology, rationalizations and justifications for his actions posted 4 minutes after Tyler announced on his f/b page that he was committing suicide. It's very very unlikely that Ravi saw Tyler's f/b post because the tweet he sent out probably took far more than 4 minutes to compose and type out on a cell phone. We may never know if Tyler read his apology or if it would have mad any difference. So in Ravi's defense here, it's safe to say that his apology to Tyler was not sent with the intention of deflecting blame for a suicide. He honestly didn't know about it.

After watching the trial yesterday the only things that came out were all the deleted tweets and text messages that Ravi attempted to cover his tracks with. TV coverage only lasted about 15 minutes into the recorded police interview before it ended at 3:00. The trial proceeded though until 5:00 I'm sure.

One of the more amusing things (in a bad way) that we saw in the interrogation interview with police when Ravi was 18 y/o, was how artfully he lied and withheld information. Like he had had some practice?

He at first deflects any blame or connection at all to the suicide and plays dumb. Then when confronted with the statements of Molly Wei he says all the spying was unintentional but he was just worried about his property and valuable possessions with this "sketchy" old man in his room. Then the detective confronted him with the tweet about "I dare you to ichat me tonight between 9:30-12:00..." Ravi first tries to say that he was telling people not to view his webcam. The detective was not amused.

Then Ravi lies again. He says that he purposely fixed it so that his cam would not work that night. Then a few minutes later in the interview he said that after coming back from Frisbee practice that he texted one of his friends to ask if he had viewed the webcam. And the friend said he had tried to view it but that it didn't work. I think Ravi was assuming that this would assure the police officer that the webcam didn't work on the second night. And therefore he didn't intend to spy on Tyler twice. But of course that just caught him in the first lie. After all, if he disabled the webcam himself as he claims...then why ask a friend in a text if he had viewed the webcam and seen anything? Ravi would have already known the answer to that.

These police officers and investigators are used to dealing with hardened criminals with high I.Q.'s. They are trained and experienced to go toe to toe with some of the most brilliant criminal minds out there. Trying to catch them in lies, and trying to make them say other things that would incriminate themselves. That's their full-time job and career. Figuring out when people are lying or withholding information...and then tricking them into giving up information they don't want to.

The detective didn't have to be nice and polite to Ravi and maintain courtroom decorum like in a trial. He was looking to see if he had grounds to arrest and charge Ravi. As I say the detective was not impressed or amused with all the lying, dodging, weaving and the withholding of information that Ravi was trying to make look so smooth and honest. I loved it at the one point where in a scoffing tone he said to Ravi, "Look! You can try to spin this any way you want. But...."
 
Last edited:
My prediction on where the defense is going:

Mr. Altman is going after the counts on bias and the one on hindering that could lead to possible prison time. The hindering charges had no prison time until the judge informed the prosecution that they got the level wrong. Judge Berman stated that he may not consider prison time for the hindering count since he was the one that found the error. So the focus appears to be on the bias charges.

Mr. Altman will probably call witnesses that testify that Mr. Ravi was not a homophobe and was not out to harm Tyler. I think Mr. Ravi can explain away the fist viewing. However, there is no excuse for the second attempt (which didn't work). There is not much Mr. Altlman can do with the hindering changes.

If the jury agrees with Mr. Altman and passes on the bias charges and finds Ravi guilty of everything else, I think it a win for the defense. I am guessing the judge will not push for prison time on the hindering charge.

Bottom line: Mr. Ravi gets some sort of community service time and that's it. About the same as the plea deal that he refused. EXCEPT, Ravi is not pleading to felony charges and the possibility of being deported.

My view of this is that is was overreaching for the prosecution from the start. If this is what happens, is justice done, I think so. Did Mr. Ravi, et. al., learn a lesson from this? I would certainly think so. Will society learn a lesson from this? Depends. Maybe incoming Freshmen should be made very aware of this case.
 
The link I tried to put up doesn't work. It is from the Christian Science Monitor. A google search should get you there. It discusses Mr. Altman's attempt to show that the prosecution may have picked witnesses that supported their case of bias and ignored those that didn't.
 
The link I tried to put up doesn't work. It is from the Christian Science Monitor. A google search should get you there. It discusses Mr. Altman's attempt to show that the prosecution may have picked witnesses that supported their case of bias and ignored those that didn't.

Even if true, that's how the system works. Nothing illegal or unusual there. Unless there is a serious and credible accusation of hiding exculpatory evidence from the defense that would exonerate a defendant...then the prosecution has still done nothing wrong or out of the ordinary. It's up to the prosecution to paint the defendant in a negative light. It's up to the defense to do the opposite. The jury weighs both sides and makes a decision. Just as with many things in life where there is an argument or disagreement, and you have 2 sides or more with very strong opinions on what is accurate and true...the truth will usually lie somewhere in between. That's what juries are for.

Along with the presumption of innocence the defense always tells the jury their side last. In that sense they usually gain some advantage because the defense testimony is the freshest in the jurors' minds right before deliberation. The defense can challenge every single thing the prosecution might have misconstrued. So there are checks and balances in the system available to all defense lawyers and defendants if the prosecution goes overboard with unfair character assassination of said defendant.
 
You guys missed nothing at all from today's proceedings. It was a snoozefest. The defense started it's case today with several character witness who were all friends of and the same age of Ravi's parents. They all said he did not discuss with them any conversations where Ravi said anything homophobic in nature. Then Altman brought in a police investigator who worked for the prosecution as his own defense witness. For nearly 4 hours out of the 6 that were televised, he totally wasted everyone's time with testimony that revolved around custody of evidence, the techniques and procedures used to interview people being charged with a crime, and other workplace tasks.

The viewers on tv , the judge and the jury probably all wanted to throw a sock at Altman and tell him to either make a point with all this or get that witness off the stand. Altman went in circles with no apparent goal for hours on end. Zzzzzz....
 
Again, Tampa, thanks for the taking the time to post.

Ran across comment today wondering why the young man who helped Ravi set up the camera for the attempted viewing (Apr. 21) wasn't charged also. I believe he was also caught lying to the investigators. Good question. What's your take on that one?
 
If the jury agrees with Mr. Altman and passes on the bias charges and finds Ravi guilty of everything else, I think it a win for the defense. I am guessing the judge will not push for prison time on the hindering charge.

Bottom line: Mr. Ravi gets some sort of community service time and that's it. About the same as the plea deal that he refused. EXCEPT, Ravi is not pleading to felony charges and the possibility of being deported.

My view of this is that is was overreaching for the prosecution from the start. If this is what happens, is justice done, I think so. Did Mr. Ravi, et. al., learn a lesson from this? I would certainly think so. Will society learn a lesson from this? Depends. Maybe incoming Freshmen should be made very aware of this case.

I wanted to return to this point Tim because we are pretty much in agreement. Especially so, now that the prosecution has rested and we know most if not all of the most damaging evidence they have against Ravi. Up till now we were only guessing at how much and what type of evidence they had.

It may well turn out that he gets no jail time and no felony conviction that would get him deported. I will take exception though with the idea that the prosecution should not have gone after Ravi with all the felony charges. There is the important matter of public perception. I have to say that to take Ravi to trial after he turned down the plea deal and then go easy on him, would have sent the wrong message to other bullies or would-be homophobic bullies out there.

Consider the climate in which Tyler's suicide occurred. His marked the third suicide in a month of children and young adolescents who killed themselves because of bullying at school for being gay. All but the most hardened and homophobic people in our society were sad, anguished and/or angry over this news. A message needed to be sent to elementary schools, high schools and colleges around the country that if you were caught bullying someone to the point of suicide...that you would face very serious consequences. That you would not get just a slap on the wrist. Leave that thought in the minds of the bullies themselves as to whether they might take things too far and push someone over the edge.

Take some of that worry and preoccupation and put it where it belongs anyway...off of the victim and onto the shoulders of the perpetrator. Let the bully stay awake at night in a cold sweat wondering if a prank at school, the playground, the mall, the dorm, or a post online or wherever went too far. Let him or her know by example from this set of circumstances that there can be very negative consequences to what they are doing or contemplating doing. Maybe the thought of losing their own future will be a deterrent.

If the prosecution had let Ravi off easy with the charges we would have been having a whole different kind of discussion. It would have been over whether gay lives are cheaper than straight peoples'. Not that as a gay person I see the world as "us" and "them". I don't. I see all people equally. Nonetheless we would have been in an uproar over whether there was institutionalized homophobia in the U.S. criminal justice system had they played softball with him.

Did the state of New Jersey want to spend several hundred thousand dollars (or more) of taxpayer money prosecuting this case? Of course not. They wanted him to accept blame and take the plea deal. And then do the penance of community service and probation. The national and international outrage over this case was intense. Once he snubbed the plea deal and forced them to trial, then why shouldn't they throw the book at him? And then let a jury sort it out.

I agree that he is not the poster child of the homophobic skinhead bully who sets out to make every gay classmate's life a living hell, online and offline, day in and day out. Ravi will suffer more intense punitive circumstances for the rest of his life because this case went to trial and got so much publicity. Regardless of course whether he is convicted on any felonies or not. Is that fair to him? Perhaps not. But were the events set into motion by Ravi's actions fair to Tyler?

For many of the same motivations as the prosecution, the judge will be under enormous public pressure not to go lenient on Ravi. I expect that most of the misdemeanor charges upon which he is convicted will draw close to the maximum sentences allowed. The judge knows that he needs to send a message of deterrence to other bullies out there. Even if Ravi's case itself is not a perfect example of bullying. The judge is also well aware of the 1000 lb elephant in the room. Even if Ravi is not charged in Tyler's death...a man is still dead.
 
Well, it appears the defense has rested. On Tuesday, we have the closing arguments from both sides and then on to the jury. It basically boils down to the issue of intent at this point. If the comments on the articles I have been reading are any indication, the public appears to be fairly split on this subject. I really could not predict where the jury is going on this. We could very well end up with a hung jury. Would the prosecution then ask to retry the case?
 
There was someone who appears to be Tyler chatting on JustUsBoys. I believe this was traced back to Rutgers, but not to Tyler's computer. Therefore it could not be presented an evidence.
 
There was someone who appears to be Tyler chatting on JustUsBoys. I believe this was traced back to Rutgers, but not to Tyler's computer. Therefore it could not be presented an evidence.

The JustUsBoys website and its forum is where Ravi most likely found out that Tyler was gay before he ever arrived on campus. From what I understood, Tyler's posts from the site were removed and then forwarded to law enforcement. They were probably removed and/or forwarded by our very own Mark or another BluMedia employee. Are Tyler's posts still online on the JustUsBoys website Tim?
 
The biggest news today is that the defense rested. I was shocked! They called 7 character witnesses all 25 years or more older than Ravi. All said he never talked to them about homosexuality or any hatred he had for gays. None of them were close to him on a daily basis. All of them were friends and business associates of Ravi's father or were friends of both his mother and father. They called 2 more police investigators and didn't make much headway there either. The defense tried to poke holes in the police investigation like they did at the O.J. Simpson trial. But it didn't work here. They found no major flaws in the police investigation (for the benefit of the jury) that would help their case.

The defense lawyers also tried to accuse the prosecution of hiding evidence from the defense. The judge disagreed with the defense and shot them down. The big news of this trial will always be the witness they did not call.

Ravi never took the stand to defend himself.

More later!
 
Top