Rutgers freshman suicide after roommate broadcast gay sexual encounter online?

[jAZ]

Wow. Prank gone waaay wrong.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201...gers_post.html

Rutgers freshman is presumed dead in suicide after roommate broadcast gay sexual encounter online

Wednesday, September 29, 2010, 5:42 PM
Kelly Heyboer/ The Star-Ledger



PISCATAWAY — A Rutgers University freshman appears to have killed himself by jumping off the George Washington Bridge after his roommate broadcast live images of the 18-year-old having a sexual encounter with another man on the internet, according to campus and law enforcement sources.

Tyler Clementi, 18, of Ridgewood, is presumed dead after his car, cell phone and computer were found near the George Washington Bridge last week, law enforcement sources said. His wallet was found on the walkway adjacent to the New York-bound lanes. In a statement released this afternoon, Clementi’s family confirmed the suicide and said his body has not been found.

Dharun Ravi, 18, of Plainsboro, and Molly Wei, 18, of Princeton, were charged with two counts each of invasion of privacy for setting up a camera in a dorm room on Sept. 19 and using it to view and transmit a live sex scene, said Middlesex County Prosecutor Bruce Kaplan.

Paul Mainardi of Woodbury, the Clementi family's attorney, said Ravi and Clementi were roommates at Rutgers.

Ravi's Twitter feed on that date referred to seeing his roommate have sex with another man in their room on the Piscataway campus, classmates said.

"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 said on his Twitter page in a Sept. 19 entry posted at 6:17 p.m.

Two days later, Ravi posted another entry directing his nearly 150 Twitter followers to iChat, an internet messaging service with a live video feed.

"Anyone with iChat, I dare you to video chat me between the hours of 9:30 and 12. Yes it's happening again," Ravi wrote in the Sept. 21 post.

Ravi's Twitter feed has since been taken down. But the entries survived in a cached version of the page still available through Google's search engine this afternoon.

Prosecutors said Ravi and Wei set up a camera on Sept. 19 and broadcast live images of Clementi having a "sexual encounter." Ravi is also accused of trying unsuccessfully to broadcast a second sex scene Sept. 21.

The Clementi family released a statement this afternoon. "Tyler was a fine young man, and a distinguished musician. The family is heartbroken beyond words. They respectfully request that they be given time to grieve their great loss and that their privacy at this painful time be respected by all," it said.

"The family and their representatives are cooperating fully with the ongoing criminal investigations of two Rutgers University students," the statement said.

Clementi was an accomplished violinist who had received a college scholarship from the Ridgewood Symphony Orchestra for his musicianship and leadership.
The violinist left a lasting impression with some in the Bergen County town, said Hiro Kagei, 17, who played in the orchestra with the teenager. A solo Clementi played in a concert last year "blew the audience away," he said.

"Now that he’ dead, it’s sad to think we won’t hear something like that anymore," Kagei said.

On the Rutgers campus, classmates described Clementi as quiet. At a mandatory dorm meeting called the day he was reported missing, only three students said they had spoken to Clementi since they moved into the dorm last month, according to students who were at the meeting.

Ravi and Wei — who were classmates at West Windsor-Plainsboro High School North before enrolling at Rutgers this fall — did not respond to e-mail requests to comment Tuesday. Steve Altman, Ravi’s attorney, also declined to comment.

Ravi surrendered to Rutgers police Tuesday and was released on $25,000 bail, the prosecutor’s office said. Wei surrendered to the campus police Monday and was released on her own recognizance.

Under New Jersey’s invasion-of-privacy laws, it is a fourth degree crime to collect or view images depicting nudity or sexual contact involving another individual without that person’s consent, the prosecutor said. It is a third degree crime to transmit or distribute the images.

If the students are convicted on a third degree offense they could face up to five years in prison each under state law. Conviction on a fourth-degree crime could lead to probation or up to 18 months in prison.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Thanks. I'm not sure I understand, though, so maybe I can get an example.


Person A is driving drunk and gets arrested because he's weaving on the road.

Person B is driving drunk and gets arrested because he hit another car and killed the driver of that car.

Assume that neither has a previous criminal record and everything else was the same other than the fact that Person B crashed.

In this fictional location, the penalty for driving drunk is 1 to 3 years in prison. The penalty for manslaughter or murder or whatever killed the innocent driver is 20 years.

If Person A gets 1 year in prison for DUI, should Person B get the same, and then another 10 years for manslaughter or whatever? Or is it reasonable that Person B would get 3 years plus the 10 years because his drunk driving had a worse outcome?

It depends on the statutory scheme, but I'll speak as generally as possible with the understanding that some jurisdictions will differ slightly.

Person B just gets the 20 years only because presumably the statute has already taken into effect the impact of drunk driving. If you're not drunk but just miss a light or something, you'll be considered negligent but the odds of getting dinged with a vehicular homicide charge are pretty slight.

Rather than compound offenses (i.e. manslaugher = 10 years + DUI = 3 for a total of 13), it would simply become a different offense (vehicular homicide for committing manslaughter while drunk = 20 years).

Clear as mud?

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

It depends on the statutory scheme, but I'll speak as generally as possible with the understanding that some jurisdictions will differ slightly.

Person B just gets the 20 years only because presumably the statute has already taken into effect the impact of drunk driving. If you're not drunk but just miss a light or something, you'll be considered negligent but the odds of getting dinged with a vehicular homicide charge are pretty slight.

Rather than compound offenses (i.e. manslaugher = 10 years + DUI = 3 for a total of 13), it would simply become a different offense (vehicular homicide for committing manslaughter while drunk = 20 years).

Clear as mud?

I'm looking at your post like that dog looks at the RCA Victrola, but I think I kind of get it. You don't stack offenses, and offenses either combine to a different offense or you take the offense that's the biggest because it was predicated on the smaller offenses. Is that close?

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

I'm looking at your post like that dog looks at the RCA Victrola, but I think I kind of get it. You don't stack offenses, and offenses either combine to a different offense or you take the offense that's the biggest because it was predicated on the smaller offenses. Is that close?

Yup, that'll do it.

We make this stuff complicated to ensure that you'll have some reason to pay us to explain it.

If we stopped at the 10 Commandments, there would be dozens of pages in the phone book that nobody had any use for.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

But it's a whole different issue if it happens in a bar in Daytona.

or two cheerleaders in a bathroom.

Yes, there is a hypocritical nature to this. It is what it is.

[JoeyChuckles]

Originally Posted by Chiefnj2

Some of you younger people need to help me out.

When I go to youtube or collegehumor or places like that I see tons of videos and pictures of people making out, girls kissing, etc. I kind of assumed that people taping other people at college was kind of, I don't want to say common-place, so lets say not all that unusual.

I agree with whoever posted earlier, that if the kid was having sex with a girl he picked up, would it be a big deal?

I don't believe that is the collegehumor website you are frequenting.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Uh, if my roommate unknowingly taped me having sex, especially after I told him not to, I'd be ****ing pissed and absolutely up in arms.

yes, thats a go to frikking jail offense. In the privacy of our own rooms/houses there is an expectation of privacy/ Thats why the peephole dude got years in jail.

Violations of privacy teamed with bullying = jail time.

[Zaiko]

Originally Posted by The_Wiz

I don't believe that is the collegehumor website you are frequenting.

Haha I was thinking the same thing.

[WoodDraw]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Uh, if my roommate unknowingly taped me having sex, especially after I told him not to, I'd be ****ing pissed and absolutely up in arms.

I was waiting for someone to say this. Finally.

A "prank gone wrong", twice. Blatant, douchebag bullying. Your roommate texts and asks for privacy, and your first response is to set up a webcam and tweet about it to your friends? You can **** off. That's not a "prank gone wrong", that's blatant douchebaggery.

[Zaiko]

Redundant Entry: It's also against the law, master.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Naive question to you or any other lawyers in this discussion:

If there were multiple fouls, is there an interplay on sentencing? So from a legal perspective, would a drunk driver get a more harsh sentence for the drunk driving crime if he killed someone? Or would he get the same sentence, but then he also gets an independent sentence for manslaughter? I'm going to guess that each crime is independent, but I vaguely recall hearing news blips about sentences for "X crime resulting in Y outcome".

There are at least two different kinds of interplay here.

1. In some cases, the statutes or the sentencing guidelines created by the legislature include consideration of past crimes in sentencing. The three strikes laws in California and some other states are good examples of this.

2. Prosecutors and judges often take the history of a defendant into account when recommending or determining the sentence for a crime. First time offenders are generally treated more leniently than habitual offenders, although if your first offense is heinous enough you can still get the maximum. Obviously, strict sentencing guidelines that tie the hands of the judge can impact the amount of discretion he actually has.

Someone who actually does this for a living might have more to add.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

I'm not. I'm personally absolutely considered the kid's suicide. Like I said earlier - our entire jurisprudence is based on results.

But I'm also trying to look at it from a purely technical aspect. Admittedly, I have the result I'd want and am therefore going to work backwards to achieve it, but at the same time, this is clearly an extraordinarily egregious violation of privacy.

Even if you don't think it's punishable by 5 years, I don't see how anyone can say it's not a felony and it doesn't deserve jail time. If that's the case, then just take the damn statute off the books because if you're going to put this on a staggered scale, it's a hell of a lot closer to the 5 year side than the Class C Misdemeanor side for all the reasons I've already stated.

As I stated with vailpass, it's my attempt to take a completely different approach to considering the sentencing but from where I sit, the results should be the same. I'm not without my biases, but that certainly doesn't prevent me from stating the case as I see it.

OK, thanks for the honesty (about bias). Obviously we all have our biases based on what we think is the right thing to do. We'll just have to agree to disagree on what that is in this case. You think some sort of fairly serious jail time is warranted and I think something short of that but serious enough to make it clear that this isn't acceptable (e.g. kicking them out of school... maybe some community service) is enough to send the right message both to these two young adults and to others in their situation.

[BWillie]

Originally Posted by DaKCMan AP

Uh, if my roommate unknowingly taped me having sex, especially after I told him not to, I'd be ****ing pissed and absolutely up in arms.

My roommate in college taped himself screwing some skank in college w/ the background song "The Animal I've Become" by Breaking Benjamin. He put the camera in a place so you couldn't see his dong thankfully and he posted it to his website. I always thought it was a dumb thing to do and have no idea how someone would be okay with the world seeing them have sex, but nothing ever happened out of it. Everybody including the girls he knew thought it was funny.

[Hug it Out Dan]

This happens in frat house ALL across the country.

I think gay is an issue on this.

If a guy was straight and hooking up w/ a chick, more than likely he "may" be embarassed, then would get over it in a few hours, a day etc.

BUT......since he was gay, Oh no!!!! Now people know im gay!!! There's hard evidence of it. That obviuosly scared him because of it.

[Sure-Oz]

Originally Posted by BWillie007

My roommate in college taped himself screwing some skank in college w/ the background song "The Animal I've Become" by Breaking Benjamin. He put the camera in a place so you couldn't see his dong thankfully and he posted it to his website. I always thought it was a dumb thing to do and have no idea how someone would be okay with the world seeing them have sex, but nothing ever happened out of it. Everybody including the girls he knew thought it was funny.

Three Days Grace is the band

[Zaiko]

Originally Posted by Laces Out Dan

This happens in frat house ALL across the country.

I think gay is an issue on this.

If a guy was straight and hooking up w/ a chick, more than likely he "may" be embarassed, then would get over it in a few hours, a day etc.

BUT......since he was gay, Oh no!!!! Now people know im gay!!! There's hard evidence of it. That obviuosly scared him because of it.

Yeah but it's not just what you think of it yourself.. If he's taking a LOT of shit for it all the time, I'd have to think that'd get to you.