Dharun Ravi grew up in Plainsboro, New Jersey, about three or four miles from where I grew up in Princeton. He went to West Windsor-Plainsboro High School, my high school’s main rival. His trial begins today. He’s the notorious Rutgers University roommate of Tyler Clementi, the young man who jumped off the George Washington Bridge three weeks into his freshman year, presumably because Mr. Ravi had used a webcam to spy on him and another man, and then tweeted about it.
I just read Ian Parker’s long profile of this case in the New Yorker, and I now realize that the early reporting was inaccurate. I was under the impression that Ravi had taped Clementi having sex with another man and then had posted footage of their sexual encounter on the internet, thereby outing him. That’s not what happened.
Ravi is very good with computers, and he developed a way of remotely activating his webcam through iChat. He dimmed his monitor and then accessed his camera from a friend’s computer across the hall. What he and his friend saw was two men apparently kissing. They watched for a few seconds and then turned the camera off. Then they started tweeting and instant messaging about it. Later on, after a few people had come to the room (and Ravi had stepped out for a smoke), the camera was turned on again for a few seconds. This time, Clementi noticed the green cam-light go on and moved to go turn the camera off. But before he got there, the light went off by itself. During this second viewing, Clementi and his partner had their shirts off. Nothing was taped, and no footage was posted on the internet.
Clementi confirmed that he’d been spied on by reviewing his roommate’s Twitter feed. At that point he began seeking advice and taking steps to get a new roommate. If this is all that had happened, maybe there wouldn’t be a trial going on. Unfortunately, a few days later Clementi asked Ravi to vacate the room so he could have another date with his partner. This is when things went deeply wrong. Ravi, not realizing that Clementi knew about the prior invasion of privacy, planned to spy on their encounter again, and he invited people to call in to his computer so they could watch, too. Once again, he tweeted about it, not thinking about the fact that Clementi could read his tweets. Clementi turned off Ravi’s computer and unplugged the power strip. He searched the room for evidence of any other hidden cameras. And then he had his date.
But he wanted a new roommate, and he talked to the resident adviser. The next day, Clementi talked to his mother and sounded normal. He went to symphony practice. Then he came back to the dorm, wrote out a suicide note that he put in his backpack, took a bus to the train station, made his way uptown to the George Washington Bridge, and posted the following to his Facebook app on his iPhone: “Jumping off the gw bridge sorry.”
Now Ravi is on trial:
…last spring, shortly before Molly Wei made a deal with prosecutors, Ravi was indicted on charges of invasion of privacy (sex crimes), bias intimidation (hate crimes), witness tampering, and evidence tampering. Bias intimidation is a sentence-booster that attaches itself to an underlying crime—usually, a violent one. Here the allegation, linked to snooping, is either that Ravi intended to harass Clementi because he was gay or that Clementi felt he’d been harassed for being gay. Ravi is not charged in connection with Clementi’s death, but he faces a possible sentence of ten years in jail.
The charges really stem more from the incident that didn’t take place than the one that did. And the case for bullying may ride on a peculiarly 21st-Century discussion of whether Ravi should have reasonably expected Clementi to read his tweets (thereby, intentionally bullying him) or he obviously thought he wouldn’t read them (because they would have tipped him off).
Regardless, I can’t see a 10-year sentence as justified. I won’t win many friends by sticking up for this kid, but there’s no evidence that he wanted to bully his roommate or that he had any special hatred of gay people or that he knew his new roommate enough to know that he was vulnerable and potentially suicidal. In no way did he want his roommate to die. And Clementi was already out of the closet to his friends and family.
By all accounts, including his own, Mr. Ravi is an asshole. And his plan to have his friends watch his roommate engage in a sexual encounter with another man was not only incredibly stupid but plainly criminal. He should face charges, but jail time seems extreme. Ten years seems very extreme.
When I first heard about this case I was disgusted and wanted some harsh punishment. But many of the key details were wrong. I imagined that the suicide was related to the humiliation of having his sexual encounter posted on the internet and the trauma of being unwillingly exposed as gay. Neither of those things happened. No one ever saw Clementi having sex, nor did he think they did. And, while he assuredly didn’t appreciate people discussing his sexuality on Twitter, he was open enough about his sexuality to visit a meeting of the Bisexual, Gay, and Lesbian Alliance during his first weeks in school. He was open enough with his roommate to ask him to leave so he could be alone with another man. If Ravi’s criminal invasion of his privacy led to his death, it must have been more of a last straw for someone already wrestling with some serious demons.
I’m not a psychologist and I didn’t know Mr. Clementi. But after reading about him and Mr. Ravi, I don’t think Clementi would want his roommate to be facing 10 years in prison. I think he’d want him expelled, and to maybe pay a small penalty like a fine and community service. I think Mr. Ravi might, on his own accord, make it his mission in life to educate people about the dangers of picking on gay people, or kids who are weak, shy, or can’t defend themselves. I think Tyler Clementi would like that, too.
How responsive was the school in getting him a new roommate. “Taking steps to get a new roommate” sounds like planning to get away from the problem and dealing. If the school wasn’t willing to help him get a roommate who could respect his privacy then they are guilty of negligence as well.
We’re talking about a very compressed timeline here. I’m going from memory here, but after Clementi talked to his RA, the RA confronted his roommate within hours. And he sent an email to the housing authority and they followed up with a response asking him to call them. So, there was responsiveness and not enough time for negligence. Plus, the definition of bullying implies repeated acts over time. Here we had one act, followed by a planned act that never actually happened. It was enough to seriously upset the victim but not enough for the administration to begin to consider it as bullying. It was bad enough on its own, as a clear invasion of privacy that probably would have had some consequences.
Not to take the plea bargain! He’ll see prison time and deportation, rightfully so. Tampering with evidence/witness, privacy intrusion, bullying and bias charges. Molly Wei as witness for the prosecution. Born in Tamil Hindu, a different culture for the third gender. Hardworking parents with a highly intelligent kid, however socially akward and a boastful nerd.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I agree with you. To be perfectly honest, I am indifferent about the anti-bullying crusades, especially having seen what my own local schools are doing about it first hand. To be clear, I think in a lot of school districts the problem stemmed from the teachers not being properly trained to take care of problems (see the articles with regard to schools in Mrs. Bachmann’s district). Like the way they’re dealing with bullying is overreaction and I don’t think it will work. In fact, it creates a big annoyance with tattling over stuff that SHOULD be “normal” with growing up. But the schools have been using silly things like powerpoints and other methods similar to their anti-drug campaigns (which are also grossly ineffective and need serious retooling). I guess I can’t blame principals per se, considering if someone at their school commits suicide and it appears they did nothing, it comes back on them.
In this case, I can’t really say if any problems went wrong with administration or w/e. However, in almost every circumstance I am in favor of less punishment, not more. And this is absolutely no different. It’s like they’re using him as an example to scare people into not bullying or something. I can’t quite articulate what I’m trying to say, but I just can’t get on with this stuff. I think TNC also has the same stances (and he does a wonder with the written word).
.
… of bullying. It should be dealt with!
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I’m not denying it “should be dealt with,” but “how” is a completely different story. I don’t like how the schools in my area have dealt with it, but I don’t think they’ll do any harm so I’m indifferent.
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/08/bullying-cont/244384/
.
cyberbullicide
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I’m sure there is some overcompensation in places, but bullying has gone too long ignored. Overall, it’s good that people are looking to protect the vulnerable instead of assuming they can take it.
.
Experts: Trial in Rutgers case will be difficult. Defense has the best lawyer of the state, I do believe some counts will be proven in court and Dharun Ravi will serve time.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Dharun Ravi seems a serious dick and deserves to be expelled from college at the very least. But is there any evidence that he would have acted differently if the sex had been heterosexual? I.e was he just being prurient or had he a particular problem with gay sex? Perhaps he didn’t like his room-mate having his trysts in his room full stop and this was his imbecilic way of getting his own back.
However stupidity isn’t a crime even if wanton invasion of privacy is. The guy needs to do some serious community service but I don’t see any point in sending him to prison.
This is what bugs me about this. What evidence is there that Ravi’s actions were specifically motivated by his roommate being gay? Without that component, the implication is that any crime against a person in a protected class is automatically a hate crime. And I have a problem with that.
Ravi was an asshole, no question, and his actions crossed the line into criminality. But he did not set out to kill his roommate (or drive him to suicide), and he does not deserve to have his life destroyed by what has become a hugely sensationalized case based solely on a young man exercising very poor judgment.
There isn’t a whole lot of evidence. The prosecution has stuff to work with, but I don’t find any of it compelling. Ravi investigated his roommate before he left for college and discovered he was gay. He and his friends made some disparaging remarks about that, but nothing I’d consider hateful. Ravi seemed more concerned that he was poor (though, he wasn’t poor) and had weird interests. Ravi used the word faggot in an email or IM to a friend. As in, “Hey, faggot, you should come visit me at Rutgers.”
Ravi set up a barrier in the room to change behind, which Tyler thought was incredibly awkward. And he made that first tweet that alerted the world that his roommate was having sex with a ‘dude’ as if that were something extraordinary.
Ravi’s friends don’t consider him to be homophobic. Consider this:
Does that seem like a guy filled with hate for gays?
I don’t think so.
in me is suspicious of the case as well in some ways. The facts described make me think the Prosecution believes that Ravi contributed to the death, but they don’t enough evidence. SO they charged the defendent with everything they could.
I will confess I am of two minds about hate crimes. To wit, consider the following cases:
Both injuries cause the same amount of pain and injury.
Under the law, maybe person one gets 6 months (first time offense, injuries not serious). But the second person (first time offense, injuries not serious) might get 10 years.
Now advocates of hate crime laws have always had pretty compelling arguments, but I struggle with the application to specific cases.
My career in dorms lasted about six weeks. I found a loophole to get out of my contract, but the main reason was that my randomly assigned roommate turned out to be aspiring to become the biggest dope dealer on campus.
Having a roommate who’s a jerk is a drag – but it doesn’t lead most people to kill themselves. At some point some responsibility has to rest with Clementi. Bullying of this sort truly sucks, but the damage Clementi caused to himself, his family, and his friends with his rash, permanent act sucks a lot more. If people are going to try to crucify Ravi for his exceedingly poor judgment, Clementi’s poor judgment deserves to be noted, too.
Having a roommate who’s a jerk is a drag – but it doesn’t lead most people to kill themselves. At some point some responsibility has to rest with Clementi.
Why go there? People deal with hurt in different ways. Some let it slide like it means nothing. Others take even the slightest slight extremely personal.
That’s true. And there is something else, too.
Tyler Clementi had a date the night before he killed himself. Maybe that date didn’t go well. Maybe his date said something very hurtful. Maybe his date treated him sexually in a way he didn’t appreciate or consent to. No one knows what happened between them. But it’s conceivable that his mental anguish was more focused on his lover than on his roommate.
As for Geov’s point, I see what he’s saying but I don’t want to judge Clementi because I simply have no idea what his life was like or what was going through his mind. He seemed very fragile in his conversations with friends about how to confront his roommate. He couldn’t even bring himself to ask his roommate to open the drapes on his side of the room. Just the idea of dealing with the hassle of getting a new roommate may have overwhelmed him. Add to this that the first couple of months away from home are traumatic for a lot of people, so the first couple of months of college can be a time of heightened vulnerability. Even Ravi was probably acting strangely, trying to impress people, showing his insecurities. These were kids we’re talking about.
.
“These were kids we’re talking about.”
At the age of 18 a person has a drivers license and in NJ one can purchase a handgun. In today’s world, a senior in high school isn’t a kid anymore. This is not a prank, but a number of serious violations of the penal code. The “kid” has the advantage of wealthy parents who can afford excellent legal counsel. When Dharun Ravi gets a conviction, he (and the family) risks deportation back to India according to US Immigration Law. At least that was the case in the sixties when I lived in the States when a family member (a minor) was convicted for shoplifting with some friends. The whole family was deported back to Europe.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
I have a 19 year-old living with me right now. He’s a kid.
.
I’ve worked with teens over a period of 27 years in an affluent neighborhood of the city of The Hague. Both parents pursuing a professional career with great personal wealth, tend to compensate caring with protection when their kids get into trouble. “How dare you, my son/daughter would never get involved with such mischief.” These kids have way too much money to spend and have all sorts of comforts, gadgets, good life, vacations, etc. These kids are not taught being a responsible person. These kids have plenty of talent but often lack empathy. It’s a pretty tough world out there, in the end one has to earn his achievement. There comes a moment when mommy or daddy can’t clear the mess you made. I’m thinking of the excesses of an Amanda Knox, George Huguely and Dharun Ravi. Kids grow up in a protected comfort zone and look with disdain on kids less fortunate or with some handicap. Those persons are not helpful in climbing higher on the ladder of personal achievement. Those weirdos are a drag. I admire persons with great wealth and a social heart, working in the community. Businesses and a corporation should also have a social heart in the community they serve.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
My SWAG of a prediction. Ravi will be found guilty by the jury, will be sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year, given probation and community service.
He is very unlikely to get ten years…or any time at all. Unless he refuses to show remorse for what occurred as the result of his actions. Then he’ll get six months to a year of hard time.