Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Former Rutgers student convicted in webcam case
AP ^ | 3/16/12

Posted on 03/16/2012 9:10:02 AM PDT by Williams

NEW BRUNSWICK, N.J. (AP) — A former Rutgers University student accused of using a webcam to spy on his gay roommate's love life was convicted of all counts Friday in a case that exploded into the headlines when the victim of the snooping committed suicide by throwing himself off a bridge.

*******************

More at the link: http://news.yahoo.com/former-rutgers-student-convicted-webcam-case-155436220.html

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gay; homophiles; homosexualagenda; rutgers; spying; webcam
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-83 next last

1 posted on 03/16/2012 9:10:12 AM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Williams

Not that I support homosexuality, but absolutely humiliating somebody like that was absolutely uncalled for and I support the conviction.


2 posted on 03/16/2012 9:15:28 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

The student faces up to ten years in prison. IMHO this is one of the best examples of the over reach possible with bias crime laws.

I watched a good amount of this trial. The defendant student did spy on his roomate and invade his privacy. He never expressed any dislike or hatred of gays whatsoever. He may have been motivated by additional curiousity of a snickering kind because the roommate was meeting older men for gay sex.

But 10 years in prison for spying on your roommate just because the roommate was gay? A terrible miscarriage of justice.

By illustration, if your kid is spyed on having sex but they aren’t gay, this level of “protection” is not afforded them. Nor does the “spy” face ten years in prison.


3 posted on 03/16/2012 9:15:52 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Yes he definitely deserved the invasion of privacy conviction. It is the long sentence because the victim was gay that is unfair on many levels. IMO


4 posted on 03/16/2012 9:17:38 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

“All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”


5 posted on 03/16/2012 9:18:15 AM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

“Not that I support homosexuality, but absolutely humiliating somebody like that was absolutely uncalled for and I support the conviction.”

I am in total agreement. If he did not want a gay room mate why did he not speak up to the RA instead of setting up a web cam?


6 posted on 03/16/2012 9:18:32 AM PDT by LottieDah (If only those who speak so eloquently on behalf of animals would do so on behalf of the unborn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

" [pause] Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I gotta plead ignorence on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing is frowned upon... you know, cause I've worked in a lot of offices, and I tell you, people do that all the time."

7 posted on 03/16/2012 9:18:38 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

“Not that I support homosexuality, but absolutely humiliating somebody like that was absolutely uncalled for and I support the conviction.”

I am in total agreement. If he did not want a gay room mate why did he not speak up to the RA instead of setting up a web cam?


8 posted on 03/16/2012 9:18:38 AM PDT by LottieDah (If only those who speak so eloquently on behalf of animals would do so on behalf of the unborn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

We all know that if the roommate were a heterosexual football player, this wouldn’t have even made it into the news. It would have rather been a campus joke.

homosexuals are indeed a protected class in the eyes of the law.


9 posted on 03/16/2012 9:18:45 AM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Are there any parallel cases where someone posted vids online of a heterosexual pair?

I think there have been pervs caught wiring a bathroom or bedroom with a cam and putting videos of girls changing online, but I don’t know what the sentences have been.

None I can think of where the victim suicided. That plus it was a homosexual is what makes this case exceptional.


10 posted on 03/16/2012 9:19:03 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Even if you disregard the bias-related charges, he’s guilty of tampering with witnesses and evidence. Those merit jail time.


11 posted on 03/16/2012 9:19:44 AM PDT by Coronal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

There may be Freepers who disagree with you but I am not one of them. A reasonable expectation of privacy is just that, reasonable. No one should be humiliated like this.

The sentence should reflect the harm done tempered by how likely and foreseeable the outcome of the suicide was. It’s difficult for me to decide, I hope there is a good judge on this case.

Sad all around.


12 posted on 03/16/2012 9:21:44 AM PDT by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

The ‘spying’ part is wrong; but that’s not the main part that he did. He used a web-cam, and then publically broadcast the act, onto the web.

Peeping-Tom is one thing.

Taping it, and distributing it with intent to inflict pain, and humilation is something entirely different. This was done with intent, planning and malice - to inflice as much misery as possible upon an unsuspecting victim.

I think the sentence is about right.


13 posted on 03/16/2012 9:22:06 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I think Ravi’s defense team dropped the ball here. They should certainly have come back with statistics about the extremely common use of high-tech gear in people of this age group, as well as freedom of speech claims AND references to his Hindu culture and upbringing, etc.

Also, they should now sue the university, which has not only fostered the dubious practice of dorm rooms being used for sex and the “sexiling” of roommates for this purpose; but also has belatedly recognized that throwing gay roomates in with same-sex straights causes distress to both parties.

I hope he gets sentenced to time served; but he will probably be made an example.


14 posted on 03/16/2012 9:22:10 AM PDT by Albion Wilde ("The facts of life are Tory." -- Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I agree. Ten years is far too long and it should have been handled internally with the university.

The more appropriate punishment is being thrown out of the university and have it on his record.


15 posted on 03/16/2012 9:22:30 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I don’t have a big problem with the sentence, though it might be a bit too severe. I DO have a problem with the fact that if the victims had been a heterosexual couple, the sentence would have been far shorter.


16 posted on 03/16/2012 9:23:30 AM PDT by Above My Pay Grade (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

why wasn’t he charged with some video voyeurism type offense?

Erin Andrews was secretly taped naked and put it on internet that guy got close to 3 years. I think there should be stricter video voyeur laws in every state.


17 posted on 03/16/2012 9:24:32 AM PDT by snowstorm12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

http://www.nbcs.rutgers.edu/newcomputers.php The security system Ravi had set up was as recommended by the university. This opens the school’s deep pockets for Clementi’s parents. They may get back their violin lessons.


18 posted on 03/16/2012 9:24:47 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LottieDah
If he did not want a gay room mate why did he not speak up to the RA instead of setting up a web cam?

Because he would have prima facie been accused of homophobic bias right there. He was in a no-win position due to being assigned with a gay roommate in the first place. Now, the university has changed its policy; he should sue the university for emotional distress and damages.

19 posted on 03/16/2012 9:25:09 AM PDT by Albion Wilde ("The facts of life are Tory." -- Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: LottieDah
If he did not want a gay room mate why did he not speak up to the RA instead of setting up a web cam?

The RA would have probably sent him to sensitivity and diversity training.

20 posted on 03/16/2012 9:25:48 AM PDT by Tijeras_Slim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

Nonsense hodar. http://www.nbcs.rutgers.edu/newcomputers.php is what the university told Ravi to do.


21 posted on 03/16/2012 9:26:48 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Williams
I agree. I don't see how invasion of privacy in this case could be used to toss him jail. Also, it was the 'peepers' room as well.

I wish we only were dealing with double-standards these days...

22 posted on 03/16/2012 9:27:04 AM PDT by NativeSon ( Grease the floor with Crisco when I dance the Disco)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Williams
"But 10 years in prison for spying on your roommate just because the roommate was gay? A terrible miscarriage of justice."

Maybe he should have written an investigative journalism article and sent it with pictures to a tabloid exposing sex open house practices at Rutgers.

23 posted on 03/16/2012 9:27:04 AM PDT by ex-snook ("above all things, truth beareth away the victory")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Coronal

I am not totally against the ten year sentence.

In a very real way he is somewhat responsible for a persons death.

Admittedly the person wasn’t packing a full sea bag to begin with, but he had the right not to be exposed in this manner.


24 posted on 03/16/2012 9:27:11 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Above My Pay Grade

Actually, I now see he was NOT convicted of the “hate crime”. Looks like the jury got this one just right. Good job.

Hopefully, he will deported after his sentence is served.


25 posted on 03/16/2012 9:27:16 AM PDT by Above My Pay Grade (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

I was in that young man’s situation. In my case, I hadn’t done anything, but because of where I was, it was assumed I had done something and throughout my junior high and high school, there were individuals totally committed to my humiliation, ensuring that everybody possible knew about a rumour and using it against me whenever possible, so I know that is like.


26 posted on 03/16/2012 9:27:31 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Williams
I was listening to the verdict being read on TV earlier, and it didn't sound to me that he was convicted on all counts.

I'm not a legal expert, but it appeared that the jury drew a distinction between counts that alleged he had the intention of committing the act due to bias vs. counts that maintained the victim had reason to believe that he was singled out due to bias. He was convicted on some counts reflecting the latter, but not the former.
27 posted on 03/16/2012 9:31:44 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia (Be careful of believing something just because you want it to be true.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

I do not believe this was ever widely broadcast or viewed on the web. He provided an email link to friends who could access the webcam. I believe one of the students involved mistakenly said under questioning that it had been “broadcast”.

In any event he definitely showed several students. He was guilty of invasion of privacy. The inappropriate part IMO is the “bias intimidation” charge. Technically, he probably was guilty of that as well. He may indeed have watched bc the sex involved was gay though there was very little evidence of that. IMO that in itself should not be a more serious crime.

There was no evidence he disliked gays or his roommate. Let’s say I spy on my (female) roommate because she has big hooters. Should there be a more serious crime for bias intimidation against well endowed women? The bias crimes are liberal fantasy land crimes, and certainly in this case where there was no hatred or anger involved.


28 posted on 03/16/2012 9:33:21 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Williams

“By illustration, if your kid is spyed on having sex but they aren’t gay, this level of “protection” is not afforded them. Nor does the “spy” face ten years in prison.”

There should be a class-action lawsuit, against the state of New Jersey, from all the other victims of invasion of privacy in Neww Jersey, on the Constitutional basis of “equal protection” of the laws.

That suit should lead to dismatling New Jersey “hate crimes” as nothing other than unconstitutional thought crimes where mere motive becomes a crime in itself but not even in all cases of the same crime.

The original victim was a victim of deliberate invasion of privacy. The defendant in the case is now the victim of an unconstitutional thought crime.


29 posted on 03/16/2012 9:36:36 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

Agreed. Awful what happened here.


30 posted on 03/16/2012 9:38:31 AM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: 2nd wave of attacks on America after 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rightwingintelligentsia

TY for the clarification. I agree he probably was technically guilty because he seemed to be more interested in spying because the sex involved was gay sex. BTW from all parts of the trial I watched, they never saw this roommate having sex. They saw him with his shirt off and possibly a kiss. Whether they were all being honest, the witnesses all claimed they turned it off within seconds.

Still my objection is to the law itself and to the possibly high sentence. This defendant really is being prosecuted for the victim’s subsequent suicide, which is tragic but not legally chargeable.

Stupid college kids screwing around, tragic consequences and lives ruined. Not really stupid, many pre med students.


31 posted on 03/16/2012 9:38:31 AM PDT by Williams (Honey Badger Don't Care)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

>>>I agree. Ten years is far too long and it should have been handled internally with the university.

The more appropriate punishment is being thrown out of the university and have it on his record.<<<

I hope you forgot the /sarcasm tag.

What he did was clearly a serious crime, not merely a violation of university rules, like copying his roommate’s term paper or drinking on campus.

How would you feel if someone planted a webcam in your bedroom and secretly videotaped you having sex with your spouse and then broadcast it to others?

I’m not sure it warrants 10 years (and I think the 10 years would only be in play if he had been convicted of the “bias crime”), but it definitely warrants jail time.


32 posted on 03/16/2012 9:38:42 AM PDT by Above My Pay Grade (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: NativeSon
I agree. I don't see how invasion of privacy in this case could be used to toss him jail. Also, it was the 'peepers' room as well.

Apparently you were not aware of the Web-cam that was used to record the encounter, and the internet postings of that encounter, followed by mass emails to students directing them to the video.

Peeping Tom is one thing ... what he did was something completely different.

Compare this to someone secretly recording you and your wife during an intimate interlude, editing it, posting it online; then sending a mass email directing your co-workers, friends, family members, neighbors and anyone with a mind to see, to go watch with a web-link to the video. Cabish?

33 posted on 03/16/2012 9:38:45 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DBrow
I think there have been pervs caught wiring a bathroom or bedroom with a cam and putting videos of girls changing online, but I don’t know what the sentences have been.

An illegal alien in Hartford, CT was conviced last year of recording videos of women in bathroom stalls. Sentence: 18 months, with early release for good behavior. If h had done it in a gay bar? 50 years? Disgusting verdict today. "Gay" is the super-protected class of the new millenium.

34 posted on 03/16/2012 9:39:48 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Jonty30

“but absolutely humiliating somebody like that was absolutely uncalled for and I support the conviction.”

Public officials in CA did nothing to stop a perverted homosexual student from absolutely humiliating a heterosexual student in public. In fact these public officials openly encouraged the perverted homosexual student to do that. This was after the heterosexual student asked the public officials to stop this homosexual sexual harassment. When no public officials would not help this heterosexual student. The student killed the perverted homosexual. The state of CA then tried to charge the heterosexual student with a hate crime!


35 posted on 03/16/2012 9:45:15 AM PDT by DMG2FUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Williams

So, your defense is the ‘level’ that this event was broadcast?

The fact that the webcam was secretly placed in the room, where the roomate had a legitimate expectation of privacy is irrevalent? The fact that his actions were recorded without his knowledge or concent are irrevelent?

The intent was to hurt and humiliate as much as possible. In this, he was wildly successful - now it’s time to pay the price.


36 posted on 03/16/2012 9:48:37 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Williams

This entire story is tragic for everyone involved, but I’m not sure why they bothered with a court trial. The verdict was a foregone conclusion.


37 posted on 03/16/2012 9:48:37 AM PDT by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Does ten years in prison mean 9 actual months in jail? A woman here in Houston who stood by while her boyfriend (not even her baby daddy, just her current live in) molested then killed her 3 year old daughter. She got 20 years in prison and is up for parole.... after less than 2 years served.


38 posted on 03/16/2012 9:48:37 AM PDT by WhyisaTexasgirlinPA (Congress touched me inappropriately, they should be put on administrative leave immediately)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Above My Pay Grade

I wasn’t sure if it was a criminal case or not.
I don’t have the problem of it being so.

But ten years still seems too much. I think 3 years is more apropriate.


39 posted on 03/16/2012 9:49:25 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Williams

The universities need to get out of the housing business. Let the market provide housing. How would you like to be an apartment owner trying to compete with taxpayer funded dormitories? The universities don’t provide cars for the students. Why should they provide housing? They exist to provide education, not housing. Think of how much tuition could go down if the universities got out of the housing business.


40 posted on 03/16/2012 9:50:00 AM PDT by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I think the sentence was far too long; half that would send the right message. But I can’t agree more with sending him to jail for a significant amount of time for doing what he did. People must be assured of some sense of privacy in their home. And this was an invasion of privacy in the student’s home (away from home.) Secretly video-taping and then humiliating him should be a crime with severe punishment. If the convicted did not like his roommate there are acceptable alternatives to resolving the issue.


41 posted on 03/16/2012 9:53:35 AM PDT by Jenny217
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: DMG2FUN

That’s the trouble with socialism. It wants identical outcomes, so it removes equality under the law to achieve it.


42 posted on 03/16/2012 9:55:21 AM PDT by Jonty30 (What Islam and secularism have in common is that they are both death cults.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Williams
the roommate was meeting older men for gay sex.

The Web-cammer is being convicted of invasion of privacy? What privacy? To have your privacy invaded, you have to act as a private person, rather than a public utility.

The most abnormal and heinous crime here is not being addressed: Bringing strange perverts into a dormitory where other kids' parents have paid good money on the assumption that there is meaningful security.

43 posted on 03/16/2012 10:00:19 AM PDT by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Williams
I condemned this kid in a few posts to this site. Later I began to learn some of the details.

Anyone curious about the environment college kids find themselves in these days ought to get a copy of Tom Wolf's I Am Charlotte Simmons

The book reports how chaste (or inactive) dorm-mates often find themselves "sex-iled" from their rooms while their room-mates carry on affairs. I seem to recall there were several such episodes. Clementi doesn't seem to have been very stable.

My understanding is that this kid used a typical computer device-- an inconspicuous, low-resolution web-cam-- he did not install an elaborate surveillance system. His action, it seems, was spur-of-the-moment response to momentary anger.

Ten years of his life have been taken by a jury--no doubt prejudiced by prior media exposure and the judge's denial of pertinent details--for embarrassing the room-mate over the use of his own bed-room.

44 posted on 03/16/2012 10:03:15 AM PDT by tsomer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

So, the University told Ravi to use a Security system to secretly record his roommate, in his bedroom - where the expectation of privacy exists - and then post his intimate activities on the intenet?

Really? I didn’t see that anywhere at your souce. It seems to me that Ravi decided to use the webcam to invade, humiliate and hurt his roommate - to the great amount possible.


45 posted on 03/16/2012 10:06:20 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LottieDah
Suppose a young adult calls another overweight young adult a "fat bastard" and posts pictures of him with his shirt off on the internet. Then, the next day, the overweight young adult jumps off a bridge.

Should the rude name caller go to prison for 10 years? Is he responsible for the other adult's death? For the ensuing tsunami?

46 posted on 03/16/2012 10:09:02 AM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
still not 10 years. Also, people have done this and didn't get ten years; it is unequal justice. understand?

And considering that our friendly gub'mint is pushing that we Americans no longer have any expectations of privacy I see a contradiction.

47 posted on 03/16/2012 10:09:28 AM PDT by NativeSon ( Grease the floor with Crisco when I dance the Disco)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Williams
For the first time I just heard on the radio that the guy who took the video was a Pakistani and was not born here and would probably be deported after his sentence.
48 posted on 03/16/2012 10:10:10 AM PDT by org.whodat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NativeSon

If someone installed a webcam in my bedroom, and recorded intimate sessions with my wife, edited and posted the video; then sent emails to my friends, family and neighbors - I think 10 years would be about right.

If I caught him, I’d likely get about the same for what I would do.


49 posted on 03/16/2012 10:14:45 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: WhyisaTexasgirlinPA

...20 years in prison, then out before 2 years...

I think the system does this to criminals who belong to some politically correct protected category. When the crime is too heinous to merely let the criminal go with a suspended sentence, they will give her/him what may look like an appropriate sentence but then when the story is out of the public eye, the system works to let the criminal get out after a short term. It is all part of the political system’s art of manipulating the public. They spend most of the time lying to us rather than doing what they are supposed to.


50 posted on 03/16/2012 10:19:36 AM PDT by cradle of freedom (Long live the Republic !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-83 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson