India-US Strategic News and Discussion

Hitesh · Post by **Hitesh** » 19 Mar 2012 20:33

Jarita wrote:Check out a similar case

United States v. Lori Drew
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

United States v. Lori Drew[1] was a criminal case in which Lori Drew was convicted and then subsequently acquitted of violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) over the "cyber-bullying" of a 13 year old, Megan Meier.[2] Meier died by suicide as a result of the bullying.[3]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Lori_Drew

Depends on how old the bias intimidation law is. If the law was passed in response to Megan Meir's death, then Dharun Ravi is well SOL. But if it was passed before this case, then Dharun may have a chance.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 19 Mar 2012 20:57

Gay lobby in the US appear to the be the new inquisitors.
Does anyone know if the channels Ellen works with have a tie-up and investments in India

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 19 Mar 2012 21:00

Rutgers Trial Post-Verdict Breakdown

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 19 Mar 2012 21:01

Rangudu - The "Muddled legislation" of NJ, as the judge described it was, at the core of this verdict. A knee jerk reaction to protect a special class, NJ legislation was extremely unclear.

For background, see for example:
'Muddled' legislation exists at core of jury deliberation in Ravi trial

..In his instructions to the jury in Dharun Ravi’s trial yesterday, Judge Glenn Berman explained the four counts of bias intimidation that could put Ravi in jail for 10 years.
Reading the statute, he defined words like “purpose” and “knowingly” and “intimidation,” the latter being to “cause fear.”
But what he could not verbalize were the behaviors or actions that would cause fear.
The New Jersey bias intimidation law — 2C:16-1 — doesn’t say a jury must find evidence of hateful language or slurs, physical intimidation or contact, written or spoken threats, or damage to property to convict someone of bias intimidation. Instead, it vaguely describes the intimidation as “conduct” and “circumstances” that can be perceived as biased.
On Monday, Berman (The presiding Judge) called the statute “muddled.”

“I’ve read the statute and read the statute more times than I can count,” Berman said in open court but after the jury was excused. “I’ve studied it. The statute, to me, is muddled. If I had written it, I would have written it differently. But I didn’t write it. The Legislature did.”

Blair Zwillman, a partner with Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer in Woodbridge, and co-chair of the state’s Criminal Law Civil Rights team, was a little stronger in his opinion:
“This is a particularly egregious, bad piece of legislation,” he said. “New Jersey has a history of knee-jerk legislation, and this is one of them.”

The statute was adopted in 2001 and amended in 2008, and while it has been used in cases of assault, severe vandalism and other acts of violence, this is first time it’s been used in an invasion of privacy case.
<snip>
“
.... Over four weeks of testimony, there was plenty of evidence Ravi never exhibited hatred for gays, but he did admit, through text messages to friends, he wasn’t exactly comfortable with having a gay roommate.

In court this week, assistant prosecutor Julia Mc-Clure argued that “being uncomfortable” could constitute bias. Because the statute has no examples of bias conduct, “biased” behavior is subject to wide interpretation.
....
In Ravi’s case, the members of the jury have to ask themselves this question: If Ravi’s roommate weren’t gay, would he still have attempted to spy on him?
Yesterday, in his instructions to the jury, Berman told them they could “infer” the “state of mind” of the defendant based on their own common sense and life experiences to determine if he acted with bias. Ironic, don’t you think, in that a juror’s own bias could lead to the conclusion a defendant is biased.
...

Perhaps most troubling is the statute’s third section. The first two cite a defendant’s “purposeful” or “knowing” actions as criminal conduct. But the third section says a defendant can still be found guilty — absent of “purposeful” or “knowing” conduct — as long as the victim feels fear or becomes intimidated.
So, while the jury may find Ravi didn’t display bias toward Clementi, it can find him guilty if they determine Clementi felt intimidated.
“That’s a pretty slippery slope,” Robbins said. “In some ways, this is a test case of how broadly the statute can be applied.”

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2012 21:12

Sanku, Please dont bait Prasobh.

Thanks, ramana

Prasobh that doesn't mean you are right.

Both of you try to carry on a civil conversation. If not please desist.
Admins are not bucket brigade to clean up.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 19 Mar 2012 22:54

Amber G.

Thank you. I see the vague legislation further supporting the view that this was less about race, but about prosecution/state govt not wanting to be seen as less supportive of the gay rights groups

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 20 Mar 2012 00:17

Rangudu wrote: I see the vague legislation further supporting the view that this was less about race, but about prosecution/state govt not wanting to be seen as less supportive of the gay rights groups

Rangudu, to test the truth of this one must determine the incidence of "hate crime" or "bias intimidation" charges in ALL cases of alleged "harrassment" or "cyber bullying" where the victim was a gay person who committed suicide.

In 2010-2011 these would include Billy Lucas of Greensburg, IN; Asher Brown of Houston, TX; Seth Walsh of Tehachapi, CA; Raymond Chase of Providence, RI as well-known cases covered in the US national media.

Were "hate-crimes" or "bias intimidation" charges brought against the alleged perpetrators in any of these incidents?

Did the alleged perpetrators in any of these incidents, belong to a non-white and non-Christian and/or Jewish minority group?

Definitely the prosecution and state govt. in the Clementi case were pandering to gay-rights groups. It would be interesting, however, to see if the alleged perpetrators in any of these other cases are being treated as Dharun Ravi has been.

It would also be instructive to compare the specifics of how these other victims (some of them minors) were bullied, harrassed, threatened with violence, etc. on a daily basis for months on end... to the specifics of what Ravi is alleged to have done to Clementi.

From what I can see in the public domain, there seems no doubt that Ravi has been singled out for scapegoating. It's very hard to prove that it's because he is Indian; but then, racial discrimination is very hard to prove in any case where it isn't overtly accompanied by the use of slurs, racist language etc.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 20 Mar 2012 00:31

I didn't get a chance to go through all the posts above. So apologize if this has already been posted.
One recurring question everywhere is "Why did Dharun not take the plea". Here is what his father, my friend, has to say about it.

http://blog.nj.com/njv_mark_diionno/201 ... ction.html

"There is a principle here," Pazhani Ravi said while seated outside the Middlesex County courtroom. "My son was not raised to have hate in his heart. We are not hateful people. My wife and I are not like that. We have not raised our family to be like that. I know my son, and he is not a hateful person. Whatever he did to Tyler was not out of bias toward him."

... snip

"The family wanted no part of it. They didn’t believe their son acted with hate, or bias, and they didn’t want him labeled like that for life," Altman said in his office hours after the verdict.The first plea deal, offered in October, gave Ravi an option of significantly reduced jail time, if he pleaded guilty to bias intimidation in conjunction with invasion of privacy. Under that deal, he would have only faced five years in jail.

Altman remembered when he put the deal in front of Pazhani and his son.

"I didn’t even get the words ‘biased’ out of my mouth, and (Pazhani) said, ‘No,’ like ‘no way,’" Altman said.

The second, offered in December, was the same as the first, except the prosecution promised to recommend only probation, and no jail time.

Again, Ravi Pazhani and his wife refused the offer.

"This is a very principled family," Altman said. "Ravi (Pazhani) told us Dharun never expressed any bias against Tyler or even discomfort with him as a roommate. He understands his son did things that were immature, but they weren’t done because of hatred or bias toward Tyler because of his sexuality.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 20 Mar 2012 00:43

I know the family personally. I believe his father's words are the absolute truth. Convicting him of bias and hate is not correct, even if the law says so. It is not justice.

I have a question about the legal system in US. How does a prosecutor decides that the alleged criminal should be charged against these crimes. In this case did the prosecutor have the option of charging him with a misdemeanor, but charged him with everything technically possible.

If the prosecutor has so much power, then that is could be a source for dispensing a different "justice" to white/Judeo-Christians compared to others.
For example, a prosecutor might have just charged a white kid with misdemeanor in this case and he could have walked away with a slap on the wrist.

Is this possible?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 20 Mar 2012 00:55

Prasobh wrote:
rudradev wrote:
Ravi's mistake was that he didn't approach the authorities and insist on a room re-assignment, but instead set up this webcam. Maybe he was afraid to approach the authorities on account of being branded a homophobe, or prejudiced; so he set up the webcam hoping it would gather some evidence (of his belongings being tampered with, perhaps) to bolster his case. It was still an invasion of privacy, but the "hate-crime" label is bogus, and I wouldn't be surprised if it's been applied only because Ravi happens to be of Indian descent.
This post basically said spying is fine if you deem that it is necessary. That is a crime and don't blame the constitution when the court rules otherwise.

It's called literacy... try exercising it sometime before you bloviate. Unless of course, your penchant for slimy misattribution makes it convenient not to.

Even in the part of my post you've quoted, the following words occur:

It was still an invasion of privacy,

Does that sound like "spying is fine" to you?

Rudradev wrote: "Sorry you raised a messed-up kid."
This is just in poor taste. No indictment for the Indian kid for being a jerk? Or do you feel that being Indian makes him immune to being messed up and immature?

It's called context. The statement that you've quoted (out of context) was in response to a question (very useful and dispassionate of course) about what we on Bharat-Rakshak have to say to Tyler Clementi's parents.

So why exactly would you insist that I indict Dharun Ravi in the same breath? Because Massa won't throw you a bone unless you engage in some self-flagellating equal-equal at every turn?

I don't know the Clementis, and I would say nothing to them, but if I were forced to make a statement about Tyler Clementi, it would be that he was obviously messed up. Every responsible account of the incident, including that in the New Yorker, is unable to draw any reasonable correlation between Dharun's acts and a state of mind that could conceivably have driven Clementi to suicide.

The only accounts that suggest such a conclusion are shrill, hysterical rants that distort the facts of the case and suggest that Ravi "bullied Clementi, a closeted gay man, by broadcasting video of his sexual trysts on the internet"... an entirely false allegation.

Just how messed up Clementi was we can't know... as part of its single-minded drive to lynch the brown boy for Clementi's death, as reported in the New Yorker article, the NJ State prosecution has suppressed Clementi's own digital documents about his mental anguish that might possibly present alternative explanations for the suicide.

On the other hand, the New Yorker article mentions that Clementi's own mother was "dismissive" and "rejected him" for coming out to her.

That certainly suggests that she had at least as much, if not far more, to do with what happened to Clementi; and yet it is brown Dharun, not white Ms. Clementi, who has been indicted for the death.

Most of this discussion has been one side wailing that he was crucified for his Indian-ess when it wasn't. White/Black/Brown did not matter in this case how much ever you want it to.

Really. I suppose that in preference to "chest thumping and wailing"... it's ever so much better for Indians to prostrate themselves for GUBO and trust in the best intentions of Massa.

How exactly do you intend to prove that "White/Black/Brown did not matter in this case?" Or is it, like everything else about your posts, a product of rectal extraction?

In conclusion, I think that will be be good for him all things considered, if he gets sent back to India. It is the one place he wont have the stigma of this case branded on his forehead. He is a highly intelligent man, I am sure a fresh start is what he needs to move on.

Unless people think its a terrible thing to be here.

And this profound little judgement isn't in poor taste, of course.

The man is an American for all intents and purposes. He grew up here, lives, thinks, speaks and acts as an American kid would. His parents didn't change his citizenship while he was a minor; but that's hardly his fault. At 18, he had lived only a few months as an adult and the issue of securing American citizenship for himself may never have arisen.

The business of "deporting" Dharun Ravi is what stands out over and above all other indications that this is a racially-motivated incident of scapegoating. "Deporting" to some country from where he was brought as a toddler, over some technicality that his parents overlooked to fulfill? A technicality that he, in his brief adult life, never even had the chance to fulfill?

This is where the tell-tale reek of racist targeting becomes (for me anyway) impossible to ignore. This isn't simply killing a mockingbird, but killing two with one stone. First scapegoat the brown boy for all the gay bashing that happens everywhere in the United States, and then send the immigrant packing.

Pronouncements that Dharun Ravi would be "better off in India"... coming from people of ostensibly Indian descent... are an excellent illustration of why our community will remain the scapegoat of choice in the American "justice" system for the foreseeable future.

tejas · Post by **tejas** » 20 Mar 2012 01:03

The prosecutor has the discretionary powers to try the case to whatever limit the law allows down to doing nothing. In New York state adultery is still technically a criminal offense. When is the last time you heard of it prosecuted? In this case, 600 hrs of community service was offered in lieu of a guilty plea, again at the discretion of the prosecutor. The plea bargain which excluded jail time and practically excluded deportation was, as you know, rejected.

subodh · Post by **subodh** » 20 Mar 2012 01:18

tejas wrote:The plea bargain which excluded jail time and practically excluded deportation was, as you know, rejected.

Without knowing much about the family, and only reading about this case from the press - i found this aspect to be very strange - eitehr he got absolutely terrible legal advice, or his parents (and the kid himself) gambled with his life practically speaking - and lost.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 20 Mar 2012 01:23

Tejas,
Thanks. If this is correct, then the entire justice system in US is subject the arbitrariness of the prosecutor. If he/she is biased knowingly or unknowingly, then it will lead to different "justices" for different folks. Too scary, arbitrary and unfair IMO. They have the power to destroy people's lives and brand them, as they have chosen to do in this case.

Please say that I am wrong.

Regarding the reason for rejecting the plea bargain, I have made a post on that a couple of posts above. The family thought that truth will prevail, because Ravi didn't have hatred and he was trully not biased.

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 20 Mar 2012 01:29

Rudradev, Excellent post

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 20 Mar 2012 01:46

Racial Bias works like this:

Assume Dharun Ravi was a WASP. The prosecutor would have "understood" where he is coming from. I mean, come on, WASP kids do silly stuff, they even do stuff like this and get away with serving just 45 days in Prison: http://www.tooasian.ca/the-real-mark-wa ... racist-man . So should I even charge him with hate crime????.

Lets say the prosecutor did go ahead and threw the entire book with ALL the draconian laws present in the book at the WASP (this is what usually happens to the coloreds). The Judge will ask the prosecutor to re-consider, because he understand WASP boys doing stuff like this all the time, so why charge him like this now.

Even if the judge allows all of it, the majority of the Jury (who would have atleast one WASP in them) would understand that WASPs kids do stupid stuff all the time, this is just a prank gone stupid and an innocent gay man died. The WASP media would fling into action, and there would be a crying WASP version of mr Ravi all over the news, saying how he did not intend for his prank to go this far and how sorry he was , and how he will never get over Mr. Clementi's death.

The Jury would then need MUCH more evidence from the prosecution to convict the WASP-Ravi than it needs for the colored-Ravi. If I was Ravi's family, I would have called a press conference and cried like a little child. Instead they stood by principles of what is right. They stood by Dharma, thinking that the American justice system is based on Dharma. American justice system is based on Bull$hit.

Here is how the caste system works:
If a crime is committed against a WASP the Jury would need much more evidence to convict you if you yourself were a WASP (because they are sympathetic towards both), than if you were not a WASP. They would need lesser evidence to convict you if you were a colored. They would need still lesser evidence to convict you if you were a black person. Back in the lynch mob days (pre-1960) all it needed was a statement from a WASP woman that a particular colored man raped her (read the case of Emett Till for example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till) and you would be either lynched or spend the rest of your life in prison. This is still the rule nowadays, but without the lynching part.

If a crime is committed against a colored the Jury would STILL need much more evidence to convict you if you were a WASP, more than the evidence needed in case the victim was a WASP. Even if you were convicted, the Judge would "understand" and sentence you for a lower level of sentencing. Even if you were sentenced to a medium prison sentence, the Jail authorities might "understand" that you were treated unfairly and release you before you serve the entire time. If you were colored the rest of the rules from the above paragraph follow, and when you cry discrimination, no one gives a flying phaack.

Is it any surprise that 1 in 4 blacks are in prison, and most of them males?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 20 Mar 2012 01:53

subodh wrote:
tejas wrote:The plea bargain which excluded jail time and practically excluded deportation was, as you know, rejected.
Without knowing much about the family, and only reading about this case from the press - i found this aspect to be very strange - eitehr he got absolutely terrible legal advice, or his parents (and the kid himself) gambled with his life practically speaking - and lost.

Maybe they simply had faith that the American justice system was unbiased enough to give their brown son a genuinely fair trial, rather than throw him to the media-circus lynch mob gathered outside the door. Not an uncommon perception among Desis, as some posts on this thread indicate.

Haresh · Post by **Haresh** » 20 Mar 2012 02:33

Why are some Americans so dammed ignorant about the world in general and India/Indians ???

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/03/19 ... g/#comment

This comment just shows the christian fanatics are not much different from the islamic ones.

"vitalstatistix12356 minutes agoin reply to senseher"

It's cows for them, it's horses for us. And yes, India has a bunch of Hindus but we are talking about Christians being killed. Xenophobia has no place in the Fox News forum.

so it's bad because the victims were Christians, but if they had been Hindus??

I think we should all joiun Fox news so we can give the Indian viewpoint.

lakshmikanth · Post by **lakshmikanth** » 20 Mar 2012 02:42

Hareshji,

Did you watch the Rajiv Malhotra video posted sometime back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 3Y#t=1304s

In a nutshell:
"South Asia" intellectuals in the US are a bunch of hardcore Biblethumping racists. They determine the dominant narrative in the academia on what India "is". Anyone dissenting is severely punished*. The US media and the Churches (evangelical or otherwise) tap into this "knowledge base" on India and learn about our Caste system and how yeeevil it is (forgetting about their own $hit in the backyard). This $hit is then half-digested and regurgitated by the drones you see on sites such as faux news.

These are like heads of Ravan, you cut one of them, the next one would arise, indoctrinated and "white"washed by the media/churches. Again, you have to break the back of these organizations (like China and Korea have done) in order for getting control.

They have special hatred reserved for Indians because their ancestors, the brits colonized us.

You can identify a drone by these keywords <well known here

>:
Caste, Brahmin, Human Rights, Kashmir, Oppression of women, Sati, Dalits

I am taking a natural language course in Stanford (its out there online for free), and one of the algorithms they have is to analyze the phrases and how they are used in contexts. Once I get some understanding of that I want to apply it to common site and come up with a list of anti-Indic phrase indicators, by which we can get an idea of who is a drone and who is not.

* See Richard Crasta for an example (Crastaji is the one who opened my eyes, along with Rajivji):
More info on how to go full-gungadeen in my post here : http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 4#p1252994

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 20 Mar 2012 04:02

Rudradev,

Shouldn't the right sample be ALL cases where the victim was gay and committed suicide because he was exposed as such?

Also, if you want to prove racial bias, shouldn't you also consider cases where the accused is Indian and ended up with some sort of leniency?

Shouldn't you at least try to find evidence that the prosecutor or some other government official had said or done things against Indians?

If all you have is the outcome of one particular case compared against a miniscule sample size across the whole US, isn't the attribution of racial bias to the "system" just as unfounded and wrong as the attribution of anti-gay bias to poor Dharun Ravi? BTW, if the system was racially rigged, then would Ravi have even received the plea deal?

To me it's clear that Ravi got a tougher treatment than what would appear reasonable. But is it because of his race or is it because the prosecutor was afraid not to appear lenient in front of the gay lobby and Ravi got poor legal advice. Had Ravi appeared remorseful and made statements up front to show that he is not homophobic, could he have been spared this?

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 20 Mar 2012 04:48

rgsrini:

The prosecuter has the right to decide whom to pursue, what to pursue, and whether to pursue.

The fairness of the US judicial system is also being tested here the Trayvon Martin case where the killer has not even be arrested.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/19/2 ... fense.html

Interesting thing is that he is being portrayed as Hispanic. He is of a mixed heritage but his last name is as White as it gets.

Karan Dixit · Post by **Karan Dixit** » 20 Mar 2012 06:08

rgsrini wrote:
I have a question about the legal system in US. How does a prosecutor decides that the alleged criminal should be charged against these crimes. In this case did the prosecutor have the option of charging him with a misdemeanor, but charged him with everything technically possible.

If the prosecutor has so much power, then that is could be a source for dispensing a different "justice" to white/Judeo-Christians compared to others.
For example, a prosecutor might have just charged a white kid with misdemeanor in this case and he could have walked away with a slap on the wrist.

Is this possible?

Legal system in USA has plenty of room for mishaps. Your concern is well founded. It all depends on the person prosecuting the case and how influential the accused is.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 20 Mar 2012 07:40

Shouldn't you at least try to find evidence that the prosecutor or some other government official had said or done things against Indians?

Rangudu,
Even Ravi didn't say or do anything against gays...But he was convicted of hatred anyway.

You are not going to find a lawyer, of all the people to say or do something stupid that can even be misconstrued as hatred.

I don't disagree with the other aspect of your posts. We should certainly find out other cases where Indians were treated leniently.
Doesn't help in this case. But will certainly help in reinforcing the belief in US justice system. This case has dealt a severe blow to the fairness of US justice system, IMO. I am saying this because I personally know Dharun's family and this is no hatred.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 20 Mar 2012 08:18

Clementi's sexual partner was a 30 something homeless appearing guy. If I was in Dharuns situation , I d be scared too .How did such a weird looking person , enter the dorm ?

The clippings were barely 3-4 seconds .. what can you see in such short clippings ?

is the lawyer hired by the defendants a government lawyer ? or did they hire a private one ?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 20 Mar 2012 08:35

How dharmic should one be?

Why not just be biased and say that the US is racist? To me that seems like a politically convenient position to hold on the premise that I don't see Americans bending over backwards to see if justice is being done by blaming India and Indians for many wrongs.

The facts of the case are irrelevant in the overall context of such a political posture.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Mar 2012 09:04

shiv wrote:How dharmic should one be?

+1

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 20 Mar 2012 09:25

shiv wrote:How dharmic should one be?

Why not just be biased and say that the US is racist? To me that seems like a politically convenient position to hold on the premise that I don't see Americans bending over backwards to see if justice is being done by blaming India and Indians for many wrongs.

The facts of the case are irrelevant in the overall context of such a political posture.

Oh yes, the US justice system is indeed racist, and the prosecutor has to run for reelection, so going after an Indian person (especially when he can't even vote) serves his purpose well. The prosecutor will move on to a more lucrative career and is banking on this case. That said, I would argue that US courts resolve cases far better than courts in India where bias is less of concern than outright corruption.

The facts of the case are very relevant because there was a documented electronic trail left behind by the fellow who committed suicide and by Ravi. The facts made an easy prosecution, and made it easy to persecute an Indian for political advantage, and the Ravi family needed better attorneys since the case was high profile. The case is still open to appeal by higher courts.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 20 Mar 2012 10:08

What we fail to understand just how ignorant Americans are of their own country apart from the world.Some time ago,it was found that barely 40-% of US servicemen could locate the US on the world map.They are so ignoramt of the rest of the world,the peoples and their customs,that they behave like animals when they serve abroad,as we've seen again and again in Iraq,and Afghanistan sadly only too recently.When a Yanqui soldier engages in what used to be a sport in the US,n*gger hunting" in the deep south,in Afghanistan with his buddies,he is quickly relocated back home,and described as being "sick" ,or under the influence of liqour,homesick,etc! rape,torture,desecration of dead bodies like urinating on them and savage acts of murder,are commonplace to US servicemen.They are trained to do so at their boot camps where rape of their female colleagues is another sport and is rampant! The USN a few years ago had the infamous "tailhook" scandal too.

Therefore.expecting justuce for the "inferior races" in the US like Blacks,etc.,who are treated as criminals first requiring themselves to prove their innocence,is a pipedream.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 20 Mar 2012 10:28

Rangudu wrote:Rudradev,

Shouldn't the right sample be ALL cases where the victim was gay and committed suicide because he was exposed as such?

Rangudu, I don't think it should, because in fact that's not what happened in Ravi's case at all.

That is indeed one of the primary grievances here; Ravi was tried and convicted in the media for "outing" a closeted gay man and inducing his suicide. However, as the New Yorker article relates, Clementi was already public about his orientation. He had come out to his family, and posted online in gay forums under a recognizable handle. Potential roommates could identify him as gay based on his online identity, before he even came to Rutgers. Also, he did not conceal the fact that he was bringing male lovers to his room, even after the first webcam incident.

The cases to be compared here are cases where a person revealed him/herself to be gay and was THEN harassed or bullied (online or in person) to the extent he or she committed suicide. That is indeed the situation in the cases I listed (Lucas, Brown, Walsh and Chase.) Surely there are others, but these four were also relatively high-profile with attendant media coverage.

In each of those cases there is a long track record of abusive posts on Facebook, threats of violence, actual violence etc. over months. I have not seen any indication that the alleged perpetrators were charged, let alone convicted with hate-crimes in any of those cases.

By contrast, Ravi spied on his roommate exactly once (two viewings of a few seconds each.) Even these two viewings revealed Clementi being amorous with his gay partner but not having sex; in that sense they can't even be ascribed to sexual voyeurism. At the most it was "cheap thrills", and Ravi was being an immature, attention-grabbing jerk by trying to share his cheap thrills with a few friends on the second night. The second night, of course, Clementi switched off the webcam and there was no spying. At the most Ravi should have got expelled from Rutgers, and maybe faced a misdemeanour charge for invasion of privacy.

Also, if you want to prove racial bias, shouldn't you also consider cases where the accused is Indian and ended up with some sort of leniency?

Fair point, but where does one draw the line? It's hardly appropriate to consider traffic violations or even white-collar crimes here. To stay relevant, one would have to limit the search to cases involving the victim's death (murder, manslaughter or suicide.) I'll see what comes up; still, the sample size will likely be very small.

Systemic racial bias against defendants of other non-white races, of course, has been amply supported by available data (including that presented by Lakshmikanth on this thread.)

Shouldn't you at least try to find evidence that the prosecutor or some other government official had said or done things against Indians?

I think that would be a wild goose chase. In this case itself, the victimization of the Indian has occurred under the garb of extreme PC concern for gay rights. DAs and cops are always careful about the statements they make on the record, and especially since the Mark Fuhrman business (OJ Simpson case) they're extra careful.

If all you have is the outcome of one particular case compared against a miniscule sample size across the whole US, isn't the attribution of racial bias to the "system" just as unfounded and wrong as the attribution of anti-gay bias to poor Dharun Ravi?

I don't think so. "Miniscule" compared to what?

The incidence of Indians getting charged with serious crimes is itself low (not because the system is unbiased, but because Indians are generally high-income, law-abiding and offer little opportunity to be accused of crimes.)

Meanwhile the comparators would have to share certain common parameters with Ravi's case: a victim who was (already publicly) gay, was harrassed by means including the internet, and subsequently committed suicide. Additionally, they would need to have occurred within a few years' window of the Ravi case, when the same prevailing climate of gay-lobby politics and media sensationalism was applicable.

Just because we don't have the large sample size afforded by, say, the criminal justice system's treatment of African-Americans doesn't mean that conclusions of bias aren't warranted.

BTW, if the system was racially rigged, then would Ravi have even received the plea deal?

Interesting question. I would like to highlight two things:

1) Ravi's plea deal came with the threat (by default) of deportation. Even if he had accepted the plea, there was no guarantee of being spared deportation. I am not an immigration lawyer, but I'm aware that the state govt. typically has little influence over deportation proceedings, which are in the INS' domain.

One must consider what deportation means in a case like this. Ravi would essentially have been exiled... permanently... from the only country he had ever known. Ravi's family would have had to visit India to see their boy, or else pull up their own roots and move back. It's a very calamitous prospect that no US citizen would have to face in making a similar choice to accept the plea.

So in a sense the prosecution was offering an innocent man the chance to plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit (bias intimidation) and then possibly be exiled from the US for life. Not much of a plea deal.

2) There are many reasons why prosecutors offer plea deals. Sometimes it is to bait the defendant into going to court (the defense lawyer concludes that because the prosecution is offering a deal, they must have a weak case, and opts instead to attempt a full acquittal.)

In fact with Ravi, the prosecution DID have a weak case, but Ravi had an even more inept defense lawyer. Evidence that could have established reasons for Clementi's suicide unrelated to Ravi's spying, was suppressed without challenge. Moreover, the prosecution was blessed with a jury already saturated with media bias about "Ravi posting gay sex videos of Clementi on the internet and exposing his orientation."

Given the inherent bias inculcated by the media circus, and the bountiful career opportunities for those prosecuting a "landmark gay rights case", it is conceivable that the prosecution wanted Ravi to go to trial, and offered him the plea deal as "bait". They bet that he would not take it because of the risk of deportation (plus blemished record, etc.) So they set him up for the axe to fall.

Had Ravi appeared remorseful and made statements up front to show that he is not homophobic, could he have been spared this?

See above. I don't think Ravi believed there was any need to show that he is not homophobic, because he did not count on the media's vilification beforehand. He (and his family) clearly believed that the American judicial system would justly acquit him as innocent.

In the New Yorker article, another (gay) Rutger's student is interviewed. He says that Ravi's IM conversations on finding out Clementi was gay do NOT show any evidence of homophobia, and that Ravi is in fact quite mature about having a gay roommate, even though some of his chat partners are not.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 20 Mar 2012 14:14

Modi praised by TIME Magazine and Brookings Institution for effective governance.
Congress in damage control mode.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 20 Mar 2012 14:20

looks like modi's us pr firm is earning its $$!

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 20 Mar 2012 14:45

Lalmohan wrote:looks like modi's us pr firm is earning its $$!

Modi's PR team knows where the master control for Indian media is and they are playing to a plan. Slowly but steadily many US politicians are coming to know about Modi. It is entirely possible that atleast some sections in US would prefer a capitalist Modi to the current eurotrash in New Delhi.
Just before the General elections in India we will see the Indian media get the nickels and trinkets from their US masters to sing paeans to Modi. Its all money honey!
Jai NaMo!

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 20 Mar 2012 15:07

he has been getting airtime in a number of 'influential' magazines, buttressed by the good governance story and what looks like a sustained economic growth story. he is however going to be hampered by the riots - and US may not be ready to let that go unless many more $$ start to flow under the potomac bridge

Atri · Post by **Atri** » 20 Mar 2012 15:38

Altair wrote:
Lalmohan wrote:looks like modi's us pr firm is earning its $$!
Modi's PR team knows where the master control for Indian media is and they are playing to a plan. Slowly but steadily many US politicians are coming to know about Modi. It is entirely possible that atleast some sections in US would prefer a capitalist Modi to the current eurotrash in New Delhi.
Just before the General elections in India we will see the Indian media get the nickels and trinkets from their US masters to sing paeans to Modi. Its all money honey!
Jai NaMo!

Jai Namo indeed..

It is OT, but only concern is this from here - http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 3#p1235373

a large nexus of vaishya lobby has parked plenty of money in safe-havens today. until that money exists, no meritorious man can win the election on his own. in words of our own RM ji, the baniya-neta-babu-judge-media pentacle. this network will try its best to save the incumbent system. if the force gets too much to resist, they will switch sides and help those who are opposing the system. But that support will come with riders. riders say that the opposers, when in power, will not touch their money. Thus in time, Marathas who left deccan as bitter enemies of mughals, became their protectors. classic bollywood tale, but is a repetitive motif in history. This is also what happened to invaders like mughals under akbar. one tried to reverse this effect was aurangzeb, and look what happened to him.

to ensure no compromise happens, entire network either has to be relieved of their assets in short time, while the buddhi is stable like parashuraama, british, mughals (under babar) did and what ramdev baba is asking to do OR substantial network be trained to indulge in nishkaama daana yoga, perhaps like Sri Raama or what MKG wished for.

Dharma cannot withstand one more heartbreak. It will take one entire generation to stand back. After all, they are still recovering from non-performance on promises given around Ayodhya liberation movement. (UCC, Article 370, Ram mandir and what not).

the problem which I see in promoting Modi Model is this.

Regions like MH, MP, CH, Bihar, RJ, AP, KN have different USPs. Gujarat succeeded because of entrepreneurial nature of Gujaratis, large Gujarati diaspora, barren land (to Kutch side), an arable land is arid. NaMo capitalized these strong points of Gujarat and beautifully used it for upliftment of people.

Do other regions have same USPs like Gujarat had? No.. As far as I understand India, other regions have different strong points. Wanting development is good. But wanting NaMo style development in CH, for example is recipe for disaster, not only for state but also for entire Indic civilization and rashtra.

While it is Dharmik to have Modi style development in regions like GJ, it is dharmik to have RSS type environmentally sensitive socialist model in regions like CH-Vidarbha-Telangana-Odisa-Jharkhand. India needs to identify provinces and caste-dominant regions where

Zone 1, Model 1 - Modi style capitalism can be effectively utilized in regions like TN, AP (minus telangana), Punjab, haryana, delhi, kerala, malabar coast of KN and northern KN in continuation with Western MH and Marathwada, southern WB (around Kolkata), Marathwada, Western MH, Goa. Socially right, economically right. Being socialist in these regions is waste of potential. Leadership centralized dictatorial. Certain places like TN would require socially center-left, economically right type of model.

Zone 2, Model 2 - RSS style socialist model based on OR derived from Deendayal upadhyaya's template should be implemented in eastern MP, CH, VD, TG, OR, JH, Bundelkhand, Konkan, RJ. Socially right, economically center. Being Modi-like capitalist in these regions is severe threat to Indian civilization and nation. leadership decentralized and accommodating.

Zone 3 - In places like upper Ganga valley - UK, Braj, Awadh, Purvanchal, Bihar, neither of the above model can be used at the moment. It seems that Bihar can throw up a model of its own, but it will require some sanitization (entrenched mullah lobby and some caste-lobbies need to be uprooted and deracinated). For UP, if it is divided into smaller states, then a fusion of first two models need to be done. The geography of UP is not as continuous as Bihar. But if the power centers of Awadh-Braj-purvanchal can exist in mutual equilibrium, then a federation of socially right, economically center with leadership that is non-dictatorial and accommodating states can be created.

Zone 4 - Northeastern region needs a socially center-left, economically center-left model.

While emphasis on Bijli-sadak-paani is universal, rest has to be local. India needs to have such four to five different "development" models. Feeding dreams of zone 1 to zone 2, 3 or 4 will be catastrophic. This is what I fear from NaMo. While for a literate and semi-literate person from zone 2 and 4, the glitter of zone 1 looks awesome, he needs to be educate that development using that model is possible in those regions only, owing to certain factors. If he wishes to be a part of that model, India gives freedom to migrate and settle in any part of country. But he should be told not to insist replication of model 1 in other zones verbatim.

This is what I fear of Modiji. I am sure, he has very able and sagely people to advise him, if only he chooses to heed to their advise now that he is on a local maxima. Indic people will scatter, in case of second heart-break, resulting in catastrophe for India.

subodh · Post by **subodh** » 20 Mar 2012 16:41

Rudradev wrote:Maybe they simply had faith that the American justice system was unbiased enough to give their brown son a genuinely fair trial, rather than throw him to the media-circus lynch mob gathered outside the door. Not an uncommon perception among Desis, as some posts on this thread indicate.

I do still think it was less 'brown' that nailed him, more the liberal agenda on the gay issue.

In any case, this 'faith in the US justice system' is a naive way to think about the system - be it in civil torts or criminal cases, you are always playing the odds - and working within the system to game the most favourable outcome for yourself should be primary - not hanging on to 'principles' or 'faith that the truth as i percieve it to be, will prevail' - that is gambling with your (or your kid's) future - if that is how some in the desi crowd here think about the system.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 20 Mar 2012 17:21

Most desis in unkilland generally deal and move in circles (just passing through cities, getting in and out of stores do not count) that are well groomed to contain exhibition of racism. Except for some professions such as medicine where desis come in contact with general populace (even here it will be restricted under guided hospital settings). The exhibition of racisim is well regulated and occurs only where one could get away with it and is effective. Hence, one can see lot of desis going through shock and disbelief to accept that racism lurks underneath the surface in the hoi polloi. Most desis would readily dissect and accept about caste system in India.

But get a desi to accept to talk about "sun down towns" and other such things, they would vigorously defend their experience as though no such thing exists. Present them evidence that people wearing white clothes getting penalized less often for similar fouls in sports compared to people wearing black clothes, they would accept as scientific. Give them similar or better evidence about how blacks and coloreds are treated they would question statistical significance of that. Understandable, because most desis are sheltered and rigged to experience that part of US that paints a better picture. Part of the reason why Ravi's may have gambled on the fairness based mostly on hope and experience, than on statistical data.

Good luck convincing that a set of mostly (may be all) fair skinned people naturally (maybe unconciously, media, jury etc.,) colluded to put a brown boy out to pasture. QED: The boy was offered plea deal - Here is the proof that the outcome of the case has no bearing due to melanin content. Ergo- One offer of plea deal is statistically significant than other statistical data that proves that racial bias exists and is thriving.

subodh · Post by **subodh** » 20 Mar 2012 18:09

jwalamukhi

I dont deny there is potential racism involved, but the power of the liberal lobby in setting the agenda here (and setting it in a context that is way bigger than this case) drowns out the racism - as in any complicated human drama, a lot of stuff influences the outcome - ignoring the main power that moves things in this specific case does our understanding of the US a disservice.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 20 Mar 2012 18:18

has anybody been following the case of black teen shot to death by an armed 'neighborhood watch patrol' man..

the guy has not been arrested because of this law - 'stand your ground', where even if its outside your home/property (where self-defense is allowed traditionally), you can 'stand your ground' and claim self-defense for using force (to meet force, presumably) - even fatally.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/201 ... -spotlight

"As long as you are somewhere you have a lawful right to be, if someone attacks you, the words of the statute are you can meet force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe that that is necessary," Jeffrey Bellin, who teaches law at Southern Methodist University, told Joel.

That law is known as the "Stand Your Ground," or "Shoot First" law and it's been controversial since it was passed in 2005. Basically, The Christian Science Monitor reports, the law gets rid of the English Law concept of "duty to retreat" from a situation that is dangerous outside your home.
..
16 states have followed Florida's lead since 2005 enacting "stand your ground" laws.

easy way to escape..all you have to do is shoot somebody alone and claim self-defense. Its your word against...nothing.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 20 Mar 2012 18:20

this case is also troublesome - i believe that people are pushing for the FBI to take it over. the shooter has a history of vigilantism and calling the police frequently. the victim being a black kid is probably enough for the local pandus to look the other way

member_23061 · Post by **member_23061** » 20 Mar 2012 18:31

Jarita wrote:
Read before you post. That was not my comment but a posters that I picked up. Also don't quote out of context.

Indeed, I misunderstood what you said. I thought you were agreeing with it. Sorry.

@ Rudradev

Not really interested in responding to your rant. My point has been expressed here by others as well, Dharun was not a victim of race discrimination but poor legislation. The more you make it about race, you move from the fact that anyone can become a victim of this predatory law.

For example, this is a proposed Federal law in the aftermath of the US v/s Lori Drew case that Jarita posted

The federal Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act was introduced to Congress on April 2, 2009 by Rep. Linda Sánchez.(H.R. 1966) [26] This bill was designed to set a federal standard definition for the term cyberbullying.[27] According to Rep. Linda Sánchez, the behavior must be repeated, hostile, and severe to fall under the cyberbullying definition.[28] However, the Act has been criticized for its broad language. If passed, the law would criminalize any online communication done "with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person."[29] This language would potentially implicate those who enjoy engaging in "trolling" or "flame wars" on message boards.[30]

These kind of laws are the enemy, once inside the book of law ... you can't really escape them.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Mar 2012 19:10

Prasobh wrote: Not really interested in responding to your rant. My point has been expressed here by others as well, Dharun was not a victim of race discrimination but poor legislation. The more you make it about race, you move from the fact that anyone can become a victim of this predatory law.
.

But the fact remains that though anyone can in theory, in practice only some are. Obviously and clearly.

And there in lies the rub, the system is deliberately opaque and messy so as to be used in a manner which can be discriminatory without breaking the law.