E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
John O'boyle / AP
Dharun Ravi attends his trial at the Middlesex County Courthouse in New Brunswick, N.J.
NEW BRUNSWICK , N.J. -- Prosecutors built a better than expected case before resting Thursday in the trial of a former Rutgers University student accused of using a webcam to spy on a gay sexual encounter of his roommate who later committed suicide, legal experts say.
While prosecutors set a high bar for the defense starting Friday of Dharun Ravi, 20, two pivotal charges of invasion of privacy and bias intimidation remain hard to prove, the analysts told msnbc.com.
Ravi's roommate at Rutgers, Tyler Clementi, 18, killed himself on Sept. 22, 2010, after learning Ravi covertly saw him kissing another man, according to court testimony.
“The defense has an extremely large burden; the prosecution put on a good case,” said Edward Weinstein, an East Brunswick, N.J., criminal and family law attorney closely following the trial. Before the trial started, Weinstein was quoted in several media reports as saying the prosecutor's case might be weak.
Weinstein said Thursday that among facts that first came out to the public during the trial were Ravi’s tweets showing “he was not just a mischievous kid pulling a prank” by expressing distaste for Clementi’s homosexuality and inviting people to a online viewing party of Ravi’s encounter.
“The outcome totally remains to be seen,” he said.
The defense, he predicted, will not be able to ask for a dismissal.
“What will be extremely interesting is whether they put the defendant on the stand,” Weinstein said.
Ravi faces 15 counts of invasion of privacy, witness and evidence tampering and bias intimidation, which is a hate crime. If convicted, he faces the possibility of 10 years in prison. He also could be deported to India, where he was born and remains a citizen, if he's convicted on any counts, The Associated Press reported.
AFP - Getty Images
Tyler Clementi is shown in one of his Facebook profile pictures obtained September 30, 2010.
He is not charged in Clementi's suicide, which was widely portrayed in 2010 as a tragic example of bullying and the toll it too often takes on gay teenagers.
For example, television talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres addressed the issue on her show, saying, “We can’t let intolerance and ignorance take another kid’s life.” The New York Times said outrage over the Clementi case was similar to outrage over the cyber-bullying case of Phoebe Prince, a student in South Hadley, Mass., who also committed suicide that year.
Prosecutors say Ravi spied on Clementi and intimidated him for being gay. The defense says Ravi behaved childishly but did not commit any crime.
“Before the trial, it appeared Ravi was more concerned that a 30-year-old visitor [of Clementi’s] might take some of his possessions than he was about getting a view of their sexual activity,” Jack Levin, a Northeastern University professor and author of books on hate crimes, told msnbc.com. “The position of the camera became very important.”
The camera appeared to be positioned for a clear view of the bed, said Levin, who was also quoted in media before the trial as being concerned the prosecutors' case might be weak.
“That’s open to interpretation but suggests more than just an attempt to see that Ravi’s possessions were being burglarized,” Levin said, calling the evidence “one small surprise,” Levin said, noting that invasion of privacy was tough to prove when it’s inside one’s own apartment.
However, the bias intimidation charge is hard to prove because the two knew one another well, Levin said. Most hate crimes are committed by strangers who often state slurs or leave behind graffiti, he said.
About Ravi’s actions, “it becomes difficult to determine whether the motivation was due to sexual orientation or some other conflicts between the roommates that have nothing to do with sexual orientation,” Levin said.
Among those who testified for the prosecution was the man seen in the webcam with Clementi. Identified only as M.B., he said he had noticed the webcam while in a "compromising" position with Clementi.
M.B. testified he met Clementi in August 2010 through an online social network for gay men.
After learning that his roommate watched him via webcam on Sept. 19, 2010, Clementi asked the university to switch to a single room, Reuters said, citing court records.
He jumped off the George Washington Bridge three days after the webcam incident.
Other prosecution witnesses were students and friends of Ravi's, a handful of whom said they watched Clementi's encounter via webcam for a few seconds and only saw two men kissing.
Prosecutors played a videotaped interview of Ravi in which he told police he violated his roommate's privacy but meant no harm. He said he was concerned about the security of his belongings while Clementi was entertaining a visitor.
Police in the video also questioned Ravi about a Twitter posting in which he mentioned a "viewing party." Ravi said the posting had been a joke.
Ravi said he went to a friend's room and used her computer to view images from his own webcam, which he had set up to accept webchat requests automatically, The Associated Press reported.
Jurors heard about a message Ravi sent Clementi apologizing for the webcam and saying his actions had been "good natured."
This article contains reporting by msnbc.com's Jim Gold and Reuters.
More content from msnbc.com and NBC News
Leave a Comment:
Thank god the hatemongering liberals are afraid of guns. Think of the carnage they would cause.
WTF are you talking about? But since you brought it up, from where I stand, most of the hatemongering comes from the right...
What he's talking about is the lynch mob governing this case.
Three things to think about:
Ok, so where do the guns fit into that equation?
Jim's afraid someone will take his gun (castrate him) and make him into a female (homo-erotic anxiety). It's mostly unconscious, of course.. consciously he fancies himself a manly man :D
None of those things are relevant to the charges.
@skrekk
Those things are relevant because if Clementi hadn't killed himself. Ravi never would have been charged. Prosecuters are trying to make an example of Ravi in order to prove how tough they are on "hate crimes"
Scubasteve - You are aware that the police began investigating the situation and first spoke to Ravi before they discovered that Clementi was dead, aren't you? Clementi's body was not found for nearly two weeks. The police initially questioned Ravi a few days after Clementi went missing. Ravi began trying to destroy evidence at that point and tried to get Molly Wei to lie to the police as well. If Ravi believed that what he did was not a crime, then why did he try to cover everything up?
Invasion of privacy, obstruction of justice, witness tampering and evidence tampering are crimes even when nobody dies.
Clementi's death simply isn't relevant and isn't part of the charges.
First of all,, these are college students and they do stupid things but Ravi DID NOT TAKE CLEMENTI'S LIFE. He took his own life. The faggot loving liberals should not have brought charges against Ravi. I hope the jury will find Ravi not guilty.
This speaks volumes and reinforces my comment #1.1.
endmaine: As a proud ally of the GLBTQ community, I have to say that your comments and attitude are a reflection of everything that is wrong with our society. Identifying as GLBTQ should not make anyone a target for harassment, ridicule, or invasion of privacy. If you can't understand those basic concepts, you have a hole in your soul.
I am a staunch supporter of gay rights, but I gotta say this prosecution is nonsense. Ravi had every right to put a webcam in his room - it's RAVI's room. If Clementi was so concerned about keeping his sexuality private, he should have gone to a hotel.
Sorry, but if your privacy is so important to you, you should not be sharing a room with a roommate in a college dorm.
endmaine - has Ravi been charged with Clementi's death? No, he hasn't. The charges against him are based on the laws he broke. People like you who keep trying to confuse the issue by focusing on Clementi's death seem unable to follow the simple facts of the case.
HM - Clementi did not ask for the privacy of the room because he didn't want anyone to know he was gay. He wanted privacy so that he could be intimate with his date. He asked for the privacy of the room for a few hours and Ravi agreed to it. Ravi has a right to put a webcam in his room, that is true. He does not, however, have a right to point that webcam at his roommates bed and watch his roommate being intimate with someone without the permission or knowledge of his roommate and the other person. Ravi didn't accidentally walk in on Clementi. This was intentional. Hell, he was setting up a viewing party for over 150 people for the night of September 21, which is when Clementi had requested the private use of the room again.
A dorm room is a public place because students don't pick their roommates, at least for the first year. The defendant isn't the first student forced to put up with someone who expected to have sex in their shared space. There is a girl suing a university for refusing to transfer her to a different room when she found herself stuck with a roommate who insisted on constantly having sex with her boyfriend in their room. She left the college to get away from the bad roommate. His efforts to stop his roommate may have gone wrong but he was entitled to try something.
No he's not either. Clementi believed he was alone in the room with his partner, therefore establishing a basis for privacy. The webcam being active without his knowledge is an invasion of that privacy. Your attempts at spin are futile.
Donald - You have no idea what you are talking about. Clementi asked Ravi if he could have private use of the room for a few hours before the encounter ever took place. Ravi agreed to give him the private use of the room during those hours and then violated that agreed upon privacy by activating his webcam. When Clementi asked for private use of the room again 2 days later, Ravi again agreed to it, but then began sending out invitations via Twitter for a viewing party of Clementi's intimate encounter with his date. How are Ravi's actions an effort to stop Clementi if he was doing then without Clementi's knowledge? When Clementi found out about what Ravi was doing he unplugged the webcam and requested a transfer to another dorm.
@Donald Berrian - A dorm or residence hall is a public place for students, but in a dorm room you do have an expectation of privacy if your roommate is not there. If a dorm room was a public place, they wouldn't have locks on the doors. It would be similar to having a private office in an office building -- the building is public, the office is private. In addition, you're making it sound as though Clementi insisted on having sex while his roommate was in their shared space, which is not the case. So your comparison to the girl's situation is not valid.
Furthermore, if what you're trying to do is stop your roommate, you don't lie and say you're concerned about your possessions being stolen. If you are concerned about the security your possessions, you don't train your camera on your roommate's bed -- it's not like your wallet is under his pillow. And you certainly can't expect someone to believe you're merely concerned about possessions or trying to stop your roommate having sex in your room if you invite your friends to an online "viewing party" via Twitter.
I don't think Ravi is responsible for Clementi's suicide although I do think Ravi's behavior could have been the last straw - Clementi saw the tweet about the "viewing party." But his comments about his distaste for gay people, his admission to the police that he knew he violated Clementi's privacy, his tweeting about the 2nd encounter "viewing party," and his suspicious deletion of numerous tweets from his account after Clementi's suicide seem to bolster the invasion of privacy charge against him.
I think the focus of this issue isn't whether Clementi was homosexual or not, but rather that he was being viciously attacked with public scrutiny by his roommate. This same situation could have taken place in a hetrosexual encounter as well and it would still be illegal to the same degree. However, I do think that Ravi could be found guilty to a lesser charge of contributing to Clementi's death. No matter how much someone dislikes another person's choices, a hateful attack is not the solution. Even though I am completly opposed to homosexuality, I can still see right from wrong.
Clementi's sexuality is relevant since Ravi seems to have been motivated to do this because Clementi was gay. Ravi has many texts and tweets which demonstrate his feelings about his roommate being gay. Also, legally Ravi is not responsible for Clementi's death. The police have Clementi's suicide note. If the note strongly indicated that Clementi's state of mind on the day of his death could be linked to Ravi, then they would have found a way to include it in the charges against him.
Ignorance, is something you do and does not expecting consequences that will bite your ass later. However, this is a hate crime, "viewing party" seriously? he did it knowingly that it will embarrassed his roommate and it a form of bullying to the extend that the victim killed himself. I hope the faggot was guilty and another 10 years in jail after all this mess will serves him good.
It's only a "hate crime" if Ravi actually hates homosexuals.
No Chris, it is bias intimidation (a form of a hate crime) because Ravi's motivation to humiliate his roommate was based on the fact that his roommate was gay. Hate is not required.
He filmed his own dorm room. In what way is this an invasion of privacy? There is no expectation of privacy in a shared dorm room. He uploaded the photo without permission? That happens a million times a day.
Grow up, when I use the bathroom, anywhere, I have an expectation of privacy. Using you logic, anyone not on their property is fair game.
I'm sure your view would change if some clown was filming you in the shower at the gym and posting it on 'man boobs.com' or 'itty bitty weiners.net'
None of the video or photos were uploaded!
No, not uploaded... but streamed live like a pay per view event.
Of course there is an expectation of privacy in a dorm room! We are not talking about one roommate seeing the other one getting dressed or accidentally walking in on him having sex with someone. We are talking about one roommate agreeing to give the other one some privacy and then using a webcam to spy on him being intimate with someone and then inviting other people to watch as well. Ravi was also inviting over 150 people to participate in a viewing party for Sept 21, which was the next time that he agreed to give Clementi private use of the room. And he didn't film the dorm room, the webcam was pointed directly at Clementi's bed. It wasn't aimed at Ravi's belongings that he was supposedly worried might be stolen.
The strength of the case doesn't matter. They charged him with so much crap at least one is sure to stick. Then the little prick gets a one way trip back to India.
Doubtful... But I sure as hell wouldn't want to stay in America after being tossed through numerous ethical, political, and judiciary meat grinders!
BTW, let's not forget that there wouldn't be a media firestorm over this if Clementi wasn't gay.
Chris - You might want to keep in mind that Ravi's motivation for doing this was because Clementi was gay. And I would hardly call the attention the case has been given a "firestorm". It's not exactly the top news story every day.
If he is found guilty, this is will be one of the worst cases of injustice.
Ravi is NOT a CRIMINAL. Prosecutors are clearly seeking revenge and supporting Clementi because he was homosexual. They are trying their best to give Ravi some sort of jail time, which you can see, they are trying to erect as many charges against him as they can.
I don't care if a dorm is a public place, not everyone is aware of that. If I was in my own dorm, I wouldn't ever predict being prosecuted against for setting up surveillance on my OWN goods, i.e. his bed, equipment, other property. That 30+ year old man shouldn't have been allowed in the dorm room of a 18 year old man to begin with.
What is the point of ruining the life of a kid, who has already suffered enough by being burdened by this case, the death of his roommate, widespread hate, and the loss of his undergraduate, and possibly the best time of his life. What will the world gain from him serving even a week in prison? I doubt he will even use twitter, the webcam, or any other similar site again after what happened here. The truth will always remain that he did not do a criminal action. The prosecutors themselves should be punished for manipulating Ravi's actions to resemble an action of criminal intent, defamation.
GWU111, "I don't care if a dorm is a public place, not everyone is aware of that. If I was in my own dorm, I wouldn't ever predict being prosecuted against for setting up surveillance on my OWN goods, i.e. his bed, equipment, other property." A Dorm Room is Not a public place, it is a room rented by students from the university. the camera was Not set to watch Ravi's bed or other personal property, it was aimed at Tylers bed, which is alittle sick and twisted. you all need to follow this case alittle bit more then one or two articles. this little perverted man-child knew exatly what he was doing and tried to do it again.
First, contrary to what people have posted, a dorm room is not a "public place". The expectation of privacy came into effect when Clementi asked his roommate to use the room and the roommate agreed to leave. If he was so concerned about his property, he could have simply said "no, I don't want to leave."
Second, the camera was aimed, not at Ravi's bed or Ravi's computer or Ravi's property, but at his roommates BED. Ravi can say what he likes about protecting his property, but he wasn't texting and tweeting for his friends to get together to help him guard his stuff. It's a nice attempt at a cover story, but it doesn't cut it given the facts of the case.
What is the point of ruining the life of a kid......? Are you kidding. He made a choice. He chose to invade this other young man's privacy and then, as if that were not bad enough, he chose to make public through a viewing party, his invasion of privacy. What the world gains by sending him to prison is the lesson that there are consequences for your actions.
What really amazes me is that those of a conservative ilk are so quick to point to personal responsibilty until someone does something against a group that they don't like.
Clementi is responsible for the decision to take his own life, but Ravi is absolutely responsible for his decision to make a media event out of a private interaction between two people and for that there are consequences. If this makes even one person think twice before they do something so stupid, then neither life is lost in vain.
I wonder how people would feel if it was their own child who took their life due to a terrible act committed by a college roommate? It's time for people to be held accountable for their actions.
I don't agree with what this young man did, however, The Person took his own life, there had to be more to it then just one incident by a room mate. Maybe he was still dealing with shame or sorrow but bottom line no one is guilty of murder here. People tend to need to fine some one or something to blame when our children lives are lost, which is understandable.
No one had been accused of murder. Not one of the charges against Ravi has anything to do with Clementi's death.
He's not being charged with murder...
He is being charged with a slew of crimes that in any other situation, would maybe have resulted in some discipline by the college and nothing more.
But because a student killed himself, and that student happened to be gay, prosecutors trying to make a name for themselves, came up with 15 charges.
I don't think that's justice.
You think that trying to destroy evidence and witness tampering - which are some of the charges Ravi is facing - are things that the college and the police should have just shrugged their shoulders and said, "Eh, boys will be boys."? I don't know what world you live in, maybe you're ok with people watching you have sex, but in my world, if someone were to use a webcam to watch my intimate moments and invite other people to watch, I would press criminal charges, and I would expect that the police and the district attorney would pursue them. He is being charged with these crimes because he broke the law.
I think a college aged kid who spied on his roommate and saw him making out with another dude should be facing suspension or expulsion. Not 10 years in jail.
If your alternative lifestyle leads you to ingest another man's nozzle, why is it ignorant and uninformed if your behavior is broadcast? Your alternative lifestyle is the new normal now, or so you tell us, why are you ashamed of it?
So, by your logic, since heterosexual sex has always been "normal" then I can go set up webcams wherever I want and broadcast people having sex without their knowledge, and they shouldn't be able to complain because they have no reason to be ashamed either, right?
It's not about shame, genius. Anyone, gay or straight, would be humiliated when presented with the knowledge that they were being watched by a group of people while being intimate with someone. Maybe you're ok with acting in porn, but those of us with morals and a sense of dignity prefer to keep our sexual activities private.
This is a HATE CRIME and that little bastard needs to be held accountable for his actions!!
School had only started in August.
Those witnesses, for the defense, who were called to the stand said homosexuality never came up...who believes that?
I thought the same thing when I read that. They only knew each other for 3 weeks and from what I've read, they barely spoke to each other.
I don't know how they can claim that homosexuality never came up. Ravi mentions it many times in his texts and tweets.
"a online viewing party"
Mr Ravi behaved very,very vindictive person, he should be thankful that not charged for murder of Mr Tyler. His gay companion was systematically raping/having sexual relns with Mr Tyler while another called Mr Ravi was taping and distributing it. Bullying,plagarisim of info very common practise and should be dealt very stongly. I wonder why Wei was left out when it was her computer that was used to spy sexual activity. Bad upbringing, affulent living,high IQ with less morals brings all such criminal activity. What's more pathetic is Mr Ravi's comment on death of Mr Tyler. Ideally it would be Mr Ravi who should be complaining to resident about change of room. Appears that Mr MB on lookout for fresh sexual victims albeit gay to be on safer side rather than socialing - movies,threates,mall,etc considering the young age/first sexual date of Tyler. Believe Rutgers introduced gender-neutral housing options wonder what that would lead to, young man-woman in same room. BULLYING of any kind should be dealt very strongly. Recording sexual actitivy without ones knowledge either betn homo,hetro or mastubations in Indian culture considered very criminal unlike Western culture where often find sex tapes coming everyday of celebrity or tonnes of porn available.
No, I wouldn'ts call Tyler a loser but Ravi and his associate as outright criminals.