ABC News: New Jersey Prosecuters Considering Hate Crime Charges

Jim Burroway

October 1st, 2010

ABC’s Good Morning America is reporting that New Jersey prosecutors investigating Tyler Clementi’s suicide are considering adding hate crime charges against Dharun Ravi and Molly Wei, who have been charged with violating Tyler’s privacy after livestreaming video of Tyler’s sexual encounter with another male without his knowledge.

According to ABC News, New Jersey’s state law against “bias intimidation” makes it a criminal offense to invade someone’s privacy because of sexual orientation. The word “because” may be the sticking point. The publicly released information available so far can easily point to this crime being motivated by other factors. Motivations of personal animus toward Tyler fit the evidence just as easily. So does the motivation to simply pull an idiotic and appalling “prank.”

Either way, invasions of privacy are felony offenses. While references to Tyler’s sexuality appear on tweets that Ravi posted to his Twitter account, none of them use anti-gay epithets or indicate overt hostility toward Tyler’s sexuality — at least what we know so far of Ravi’s postings so far. Demonstrating that Tyler was singled out specifically because of his sexuality in a court of law may prove difficult, unless prosecutors have found further evidence that they haven’t made public yet.

Lindoro Almaviva

October 1st, 2010

Yea, based on the publicly available evidence, I do not see animus towards a gay man, but just a couple of young kids doing something incredibly stupid because they thought it was funny.

TampaZeke

October 1st, 2010

This would be a gross misuse of hate crimes law that would feed right into the misinformed arguments against them.

Don’t make the bogus arguments against hate crimes laws prove to be factual.

MattNYC

October 1st, 2010

Jim,

I agree–per my comments yesterday. It was surprisingly free of slurs and even the justusboys posts–assuming they are truly Tyler’s–do not claim that the roommate was atigay–just that he was a jerk.

Jason D

October 1st, 2010

Jerks? Yes.
Criminal? Yes.

Hate Crime? I’m not seeing it.

Tyler seems to be the victim of a sh*tty roommate(with an accomplice), who would’ve probably pulled the same thing on a straight roommate. Perhaps I’ve missed something but it seems Ravi was intent on spying and the discovery that Tyler was making out with a man was a titilating discovery.

Amicus

October 1st, 2010

Well, roommate troubles are among the worst. There are stories of Harvard kids driven to killing each other.

But, we’re just four weeks into the semester. That’s not enough time, in my estimation, for personal animus to be a controlling factor, barring extraordinary circumstances.

There are some people who are quite fine with gays, as long as they stay ‘in their place’ in the pecking order and as long as they take the ribbing they are given.

It could be that Clementi wasn’t that kind of guy, even if he appears to have been shy (god knows, he had the apparent confidence as a freshman to have a guy over, twice, and the confidence to easily recognize that ‘spying’, not ‘gay’, should have been the real focus of concern after the first video).

Anyway, it’s potentially telling that Ravi went right for “the gay” in his illegal “prank” (think about all the other kinds of pranks he could have pulled). That’s a way of trying to put Tyler ‘back in his place’ and also a hallmark of people who have been picked or shunned because of their own backgrounds.

Pender

October 1st, 2010

I fully support this. Ravi is scum, and I can’t picture an argument that he would have done the same to a straight roommate passing the laugh test.

Emily K

October 1st, 2010

I think that the fact that Clementi was hooking up with a man played a factor. I mean, it IS still more “scandalous” to be gay than straight. gay hookups are more titillating and “exotic” than straight hookups.

So, the atrociousness of this crime aside, I see Ravi in the light of a TV producer. “we gotta get the most salacious thing on the air for our hidden camera special – go with the gay stuff, that’s what really gets eyeballs tuned in!” But such a guy would not necessarily think gays are inferior; just savvy enough to know that (unfortunately) to many people gay acts are more scandalous than straight ones.

F Young

October 1st, 2010

@Amicus
“Tyler seems to be the victim of a sh*tty roommate(with an accomplice), who would’ve probably pulled the same thing on a straight roommate.”

I don’t think that is a useful comparison. It is impossible to do the same thing to a straight person. Only gays can be outed.

@Lindoro Almaviva
“I do not see animus towards a gay man, but just a couple of young kids doing something incredibly stupid because they thought it was funny.”

The way I see it, they clearly must have considered that Tyler had no right to respect and privacy, or that his rights were trivial. While they may or may not have intended to hurt him, they apparently did not care if he was hurt. Indeed, they may well have thought that hurting him was funny.

So, in my book, they were sociopathic, but perhaps not homophobic. That might not be enough for a hate crime conviction, but it’s enough for a permanent expulsion from the university.

John

October 1st, 2010

The prosecutors are “considering” hate crime charges. Under the circumstances, I think it is appropriate for them to consider whether this was a hate crime, rather than dismiss that concept out of hand.

Hate crime prosecutions are difficult. There have been a number of cases in San Francisco where hate crime enhancements have not been pursued, because the DA determined that the hate crime part of the case would be too difficult to prove.

Prosecutors decide all the time what they can charge a person with and what they might actually be able to convict them of. This can also play a roll in the type fo plea bargain they eventually make. Sounds like the prosecutors are just doing their job, particularly in a case involving a dead 18 year old.

John in the Bay Area

October 1st, 2010

The above post was from me “John in the Bay Area.”

Jason D

October 1st, 2010

I said: “Tyler seems to be the victim of a sh*tty roommate(with an accomplice), who would’ve probably pulled the same thing on a straight roommate.”

F YOUNG replied: I don’t think that is a useful comparison. It is impossible to do the same thing to a straight person. Only gays can be outed.

I’m sorry, F Young, did everyone in the world become an extrovert while I was asleep?

Yes it is possible to spy on a straight person and expose a private moment and humiliate them. Or do straight people all enjoy making out for an audience and being laughed at?

customartist

October 2nd, 2010

Lindoro Almaviva,

Animus is not necessary for someone to be harrassed, which was indeed the Intent of the perpetrator. He attempted to capitalize specifically on the selaciousness of his roomate’s homosexuality. Just because he could have harrassed for other reasons is not what is at issue here.

The court should not belittle the rezults of “jokesters” actions when they equate to “bias intimidation”. This is not necessarily homo-phobia, but it is certainly Heterosexism.

This case, and the other recent cases of Gays harrassed to silmilar ends, must end in court rulings and legislation ending the phenomenon.

customartist

October 2nd, 2010

@F Young,

“Only gays can be outed.”

This is a very good point.

While overt hate may have not been displayed, THE ACT which is clearly against a Gay man, and for being Gay, is an Action of contempt, and toward a gay person.

We are not judging thought here, but actions, and proveable ones at that.

Without jail time, the rights of victims of Bias Intimidation, and those of Gays in particular, have been discarded.

Jason D

October 2nd, 2010

where are you guys getting the “bias intimidation” angle on this?

Someone writes “die, fag, die” on your house, that’s bias intimidation.

But in this case, Tyler didn’t know he was being video-broadcast and didn’t learn of it until he checked his roommate’s twitter acount the next day as BTB reported here

“I checked his twitter today. he tweeted that I was using the room (which is obnoxious enough), AND that he went into somebody else’s room and remotely turned on his webcam and saw me makeing out with a guy.”

How is it bias intimidation without them knowing? It’s one thing to paint something on someone’s house, you know they’re going to come home and see it. Depending on how often Tyler checks twitter, he may have missed the post(s) entirely.

The tweet itself suggests that Tyler’s homosexuality was discovered by Ravi when the webcam feed came through:

“Roommate asked for the room till midnight. I went into molly’s room and turned on my webcam. I saw him making out with a dude. Yay.”

Ravi and Wei are criminals. They invaded Tyler’s privacy and for that, they deserve nothing less than the full punishment of the law. The bias claim is rather flimsy given current information and the “intimidation” angle is completely groundless.

Andrew

October 4th, 2010

Jim, thanks for your measured and fact-based reporting on this emotional issue. I’ve been critical of editorializing on this site recently, and it’s really great to see information provided with a dispassionate perspective.

With respect to my take on this… the report that authorities are even considering a hate crimes charge is substantial — it sends out a warning message that authorities take orientation-based harrassment seriously.

Folks remember that these are very young adults. To say that they might employ poor judgement doesn’t justify their behavior, but it’s a bit different from someone who *hasn’t* just left their parent’s home a few weeks ago. In short — if kids are going to do something cruel & stupid, the first semester away from parental authority is pretty much the time to expect it.

My point is — this kids were pretty horrible, and their behavior was DEFINITELY CRIMINAL but I’m not prepared to say they’re “scum”. “Jerk”, “Bully”, and criminally / civilly liable certainly apply. I suspect they had no idea that this behavior could lead to death. No, I’m not minimizing bullying behavior, but I am trying to keep within the order of magnitude — there are plenty of people out there actually trying to cause physical harm or death to LGBT and we would to well to segregate those who are passively horrible from those who act with physical intent. These two are young enough that they might be rehabilitated.

I guess where I’m going is: throw the book at these jerks, but leave room for more severe punishment for fully formed adults engaging in bad behavior, and even more room for appropriate punishment for gaybashers and antigay terrorists…

justsearching

October 5th, 2010

A little off topic, but check out WND’s take on this story ( http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=211469 )

The columnist writes “The tragic story of a young college student who committed suicide after his privacy was violated has awoken many to the immense power of the Internet, Twitter, Skype and the rapidly growing and evolving technology that allows a moving image to be livestreamed to the world in real time without our knowledge or permission.”

The story then morphs into a criticism of the scary means that Obama/Democrats will similarly invade our privacy by modernizing wiretapping methods. Sigh. At least WND isn’t using this story to demonstrate their disgust for hate-crime legislation, yet.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

 

Latest Posts

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Emphasis Mine

Today In History, 1954: Miami Mayor Calls for Anti-Gay Crackdown

Today In History, 1995: GOP Presidential Candidate Sen. Bob Dole Returns Donation from Log Cabin Republicans

Today In History, 1998: Lawyer Suggests Abortion If a Test Could Prove Fetus Has "Gay Gene"

Born On This Day, 1904: Christopher Isherwood

Today's Agenda Is Brought To You By...

Emphasis Mine

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.