Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have not much issue with "hate crimes" that involve violence. But then you have stuff where liberals will accuse people of hate crimes that are non violent, like burning a koran or something. They want to limit free speech by alleging hate crimes.
no act of violence took place in this instance. He was filmed. That is NOT anything remotely close to a hate crime.
It has nothing to do with conservatism or liberalism or whether the crime was violent to call it a hate crime. Legally speaking, you can burn the Koran or spew the N-word or other racial epithets like a person with Tourette's Syndrome as long as it is not directed towards a specific individual. But once you say it directly to a person in an offensive manner then it is crossing the lines of free speech and therefore, considered to be harassment.
Of course I don't see a hate crime here unless Tyler Clementi's roommate was already calling him homophobic statements to begin with. It all depends on whether there was already existing bad blood between the two.
It has nothing to do with conservatism or liberalism or whether the crime was violent to call it a hate crime. Legally speaking, you can burn the Koran or spew the N-word or other racial epithets like a person with Tourette's Syndrome as long as it is not directed towards a specific individual. But once you say it directly to a person in an offensive manner then it is crossing the lines of free speech and therefore, considered to be harassment.
Of course I don't see a hate crime here unless Tyler Clementi's roommate was already calling him homophobic statements to begin with. It all depends on whether there was already existing bad blood between the two.
No matter what, for the criminal defense, I have no doubt he's going to argue that Tyler Clementi was a homophobe and he wanted to prove him a hypocrite. Whether it's true or not, that is up to a jury to determine
Greetings,
This brillant young man was raped to the fullest. I believe these 2 should be charged with murder, have there picutres of there naked bodies on the web for all to see and not be allowed to use a computer ever again. This is past the point of a joke.
My heart goes out to his family. I wish them speedy recovery of a great lost.
Be Blessed
I am sure that while they intended to record him doing something embarrassing they did not intend for it to turn out the way it did. We would not even be talking about this case if he didn't commit suicide.
What you're calling for is something out of emotion and not law. In my opinion, charge these kids with whatever they can legally be charged with, let the do their time, and let their credit rating be forever ruined because of the wrongful death suit that will keep them from ever getting a bank loan, buying a car, house, or getting credit cards.
Assuming these kids had no prior criminal history, if I was the prosecuting attorney I definitely would not admit them into the PTI program.
No matter what, for the criminal defense, I have no doubt he's going to argue that Tyler Clementi was a homophobe and he wanted to prove him a hypocrite. Whether it's true or not, that is up to a jury to determine
I'm not sure this case will even make it to trial. They'll probably take a plea, serve their time, and ponder how to deal with the additional obstacles that will shape their lives.
I am sure that while they intended to record him doing something embarrassing they did not intend for it to turn out the way it did. We would not even be talking about this case if he didn't commit suicide.
What you're calling for is something out of emotion and not law. In my opinion, charge these kids with whatever they can legally be charged with, let the do their time, and let their credit rating be forever ruined because of the wrongful death suit that will keep them from ever getting a bank loan, buying a car, house, or getting credit cards.
Assuming these kids had no prior criminal history, if I was the prosecuting attorney I definitely would not admit them into the PTI program.
You're sure, huh? Do you have a crystal ball? Do you think they thought ahead? Not likely. (And to think some people want to lower the drinking age to let people like this use alcohol.)
People, think logically here. Can you imagine the precedent this would set if these people are treated harshly by the law? Imagine you record someone without their permission, put it up on the internet, just mundane stuff, like dropping somehing. It doesn't have to be this "initimate". And the person then commits suicide? You're really going to to want to throw people in jail over this? Or wrongful death suits?
someone who is irrational could kill themselves over you filming them flip out on a train or on a bus, or someone dropping their chipotle..
This could have serious repercussions on society.
People film other people without permission all the time. Tourists are fliming people her ein DC all the time. I filmed some guy dancing on a street corner. If I posted it and he killed himself, I should go to jail? Let alone be charged with murder and face wrongful death causes of action?
No matter what, for the criminal defense, I have no doubt he's going to argue that Tyler Clementi was a homophobe and he wanted to prove him a hypocrite. Whether it's true or not, that is up to a jury to determine
I wouldn't even go there. Plead out to a lesser charge, get probation. These are two young college students, who presumably have clean records and no history of trouble-making. They didn't demonstrate good judgment, but their isn't any evidence of real malice on their parts. To handle the case the way you suggest would open the door to the question of intent, that Ravi really intended some harm.
I wouldn't even go there. Plead out to a lesser charge, get probation. These are two young college students, who presumably have clean records and no history of trouble-making. They didn't demonstrate good judgment, but their isn't any evidence of real malice on their parts. To handle the case the way you suggest would open the door to the question of intent, that Ravi really intended some harm.
But the prosecution will allege that, and thus they have to provide a defense to it.
If they plead out, it will come down to a discussion "prosecutor saying, i'm gonna get you for harassment" and they'll say "but I was only trying to prove he was a hypocrite" and then they agree on some lesser charge.. They'll HAVE to bring it up at some point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
