Dharun Ravi guilty of anti-gay hate crime in Rutgers spycam case
A jury finds ex-Rutgers student Dharun Ravi guilty of privacy invasion and bias intimidation – a hate crime – after exposing a gay roommate's sexual encounter via spycam. The message: Privacy rights count even in the social-media age.
(Page 2 of 2)
The prosecution didn't present evidence that he had made intimidating comments directly to his roommate, for example, or that he disparaged gays when talking with his friends.
Skip to next paragraphSubscribe Today to the Monitor
But drawing on text messages between Ravi and his friends, as well as on Ravi's actions, the prosecution built a case that was strong enough to persuade the 12 jurors that the privacy invasion was motivated by Clementi's sexual orientation.
To prove guilt, the prosecution also had to show that Clementi felt intimidated by Ravi. Ms. McClure pointed out that Clementi was keeping a wary eye on Ravi's Twitter posts, and he consulted with a resident adviser about switching rooms and seeking to have Ravi punished for the privacy violation.
Ravi was not charged with being responsible for Clementi's death, but unless the verdict is overturned on appeal, he will serve a prison sentence of some length, says Robert Honecker, a defense attorney at Ansell Grimm & Aaron in Ocean, N.J.
Clementi's family has argued against a harsh punishment for Ravi, a factor that the judge will weigh.
Tyler Clementi's father, Joe Clementi, also made an appeal to young Americans after the verdict, stressing the importance of civility and tolerance: "You're going to meet a lot of people in your life," he said, according to the Associated Press. "Some of these people you may not like. Just because you don't like them doesn't mean you have to work against them."
Legal experts have criticized New Jersey's bias intimidation law as overly vague, and as opening the door to potentially harsh sentences when a bias charge is tacked on to relatively minor crimes.
An appeal could challenge whether the jury properly applied the statute, Mr. Honecker said. The legislature, separately, may consider revising it for greater clarity.
Jurors had to decide on multiple points of law. While convicting Ravi of at least some portion of all 15 counts against him, they found him not guilty of some sections within certain counts.
But Shear says the jurors spoke loud and clear about the importance of privacy within homes and bedrooms. And he says the case may be a landmark one in reminding Americans of the role that electronic data can play in court.
"This proves how powerful digital evidence can be," he says. Viewing computer records or the text of a tweet "helps crystalize people's impressions."
RECOMMENDED: Cyberbullying: how courts ruled in five other cases
Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.



Previous





These comments are not screened before publication. Constructive debate about the above story is welcome, but personal attacks are not. Please do not post comments that are commercial in nature or that violate any copyright[s]. Comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence will be removed. If you find a comment offensive, you may flag it.