Rutgers Spy-Cam Case

Jason P

What are everyone’s thoughts? I’m surprised they found him guilty of hate crime as from what I could tell they didn’t have any evidence of prior discrimination or bias. The suicide was (supposed) to not be taken into account.

(Also, where did they find a jury that didn’t know anything about this case … and if someone didn’t know about this case, would you want someone that ill-informed deciding your fate? And of course the suicide was being taken into account otherwise this wouldn’t be a case)

I remember the initial outrage in regards to this story that implied the webcam was broadcast world-wide. From the court proceeding, it was only viewed by two people for a few seconds. Now Mr. Ravi faces up to ten years and deportation.

If anything, it outlined the dangers of technology and social networking. Something that was written in the past with little consideration can come back to haunt you big time.

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

JonnyPistachio

This is such a sad case.
I didnt hear all the info that led them to conclude that it was definitely a hate crime. Bullying, yes, obviously.
Did he make homophobic remarks or gay slurs? I guess my question is, would he have done the same thing if his roommate was straight?

hedonist

What exactly IS a hate crime? Another topic for another thread, I guess.

As for this kid, he had no business doing what he did. Conjecture on my part, but had the roommate been straight, it wouldn't have been so provocative for his encounter to be filmed (no matter how many actually ended up viewing it).

Not sure if the punishment fits the crime, at this point.

Jason P

I think they concluded that the spy-cam was a form of bullying. Without question it was a huge douche-move that deserved a good beating. But if there is no evidence of any bias past or present, I don't know how it can be ruled a hate crime.

He could have taken a plea deal that would included 300 hours of community service like his friend Michelle Wei did, but he and his lawyers thought they would win easily.

Cliffy6745

Jason P wrote:

I think they concluded that the spy-cam was a form of bullying. Without question it was a huge douche-move that deserved a good beating. But if there is no evidence of any bias past or present, I don't know how it can be ruled a hate crime.

He could have taken a plea deal that would included 300 hours of community service like his friend Michelle Wei did, but he and his lawyers thought they would win easily.

Just a horrible situation in every way imaginable. That lawyer has to feel like a piece of shit right now. 300 hours of community service and help avioding deportation and now he could be looking at 10 years and deportation. Just ends horribly for everyone involved.

gimmesometruth27

i think that his comments on social media made it a hate crime. he was portraying it as if the roommate was some sort of oddity, a sideshow exhibit, and maybe even a freak. singling him out because of his sexuality is what makes it a hate crime. if the roommate was straight i do not think that he would have filmed or broadcast it, because "hey, my straight roommate is gonna get some...nothing out of the ordinary about that..., meh, big deal..." if he had, it was an invasion of privacy for sure, but there was clearly a reaonn why he did this in this case....

to me, the crux of the case is that the roommate was gay and the defendant was not.