Dharun Ravi Trial

The prosecution is in the midst of presenting its case in Dharun Ravi’s trial for invasion of privacy of his Rutgers University roommate Tyler Clementi. Clementi committed suicide shortly after discovering that Ravi spied on him during a sexual encounter. Some observers see Ravi’s trial as critical to defining legal consequences for cyberbullying. Ravi is not facing criminal charges connected to Clementi’s death, but his suicide hangs over these proceedings as the tragic unintended consequence of Ravi’s spying. The video coverage of the trial is sad, a sobering demonstration of immature callousness and its consequences.

3 Replies to “Dharun Ravi Trial”

  1. allewich

    I believe that it will be difficult to prove Bias Intimidation. While it is clear that Ravi had spied on Clementi, and definitely possible that it had been an invasion of privacy, I do not believe there is enough evidence that there was a homosexual bias. Due to Clamenti’s letter, I think that it is reasonable to say that there is fair intimidation, however, there is no evidence that Ravi acted in such a manner due to Clamenti’s homosexuality. Because of this I do not think that Bias intimidation can be proven. 

    Ally Milewich
    However, regarding intent, I do not believe that the webcam was turned on accidentally. More than one witnesses have stated that Ravi had purposely turned on the webcam at the time of the incident. In addition, Ravi’s actions posting references to the live webcam to twitter, make it clear that he had every intent of exposing what was on the webcam publicly, and humiliating Clamenti. I think it is reasonable to assume that an act such as that in exposing privacy and cyber bullying could result in consequences such as what has occurred.

  2. Victoria Tavares- Finson

    I feel that it is going to be difficult for a jury to view the issue of “invasion of privacy” as effectively as possible without partial feelings considering the tragic suicide, how is a judge or jury going to be able to make sure the decision for “privacy” is not affected by the jurys emotional response to the suicide?

    I suppose however the judge prevents it as much as he can, in the trial on wednesday
    where jurors heard Clementis own words for the 1st time where he stated that he was “uncomfortable sharing  a room with someone who would act in this manner”, by stoping the reading of the email i assume he is trying to prevent a arge emotional response which could hinder the jurors decision

    Victoria Tavares Finson

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.