The Rutgers student convicted of several privacy crimes as a result of video recording his gay roommate having sex with another man, posting the video online, and tweeting about it, has been sentenced. From my perspective, he received an extremely light sentence of only 30 days in prison, plus probation, community service, and other programming. As I always discuss with my classes, there are several purposes that may be served by punishing criminals (and let’s be clear, Dharun Ravi is a criminal, not just a stupid kid, as his defense would like you to think). Here, the purposes that seem most applicable are retribution, the desire to see a wrongdoer punished, and deterrence, an attempt to prevent future crime. I am not sure either goal is served by such a light sentence. Thirty days in prison is not going to make any future bullies think before they act. In fact, it might just comfort them. And for those who wanted Ravi to be punished, because his victim ended up taking his own life after suffering great humiliation and pain, those people seeking retribution will not be satisfied by thirty days. By the way, a lot of people are uncomfortable acknowledging that our sentences should make the criminal suffer. I think it is naive to think otherwise.
I know I sound angry, but this case makes me angry. We debated in class whether hate crimes make sense, especially in light of the First Amendment, and I still believe there is some gray area there. Invading someone’s privacy like this, mocking someone for all the world to read, is unethical and should be illegal. I am not sure it needs to be more illegal just because the victim is in a protected class; I would be just as angry if the victim here was a white heterosexual male. The fact that Ravi has never apologized to the victim’s parents is disgusting to me. What may be more disgusting is that dozens, if not hundreds, of other kids saw the video and read the tweets, and not one spoke up to stop it. Given the recent hazing incidents at our own university, it is time for all of us to think about the role of bystanders in immoral and illegal behavior. Why doesn’t anyone speak up?
5 Comments
Julianne Kodack posted on May 22, 2012 at 7:28 pm
I agree with you that the sentencing was very light as well. 30 days seems more like a slap on the wrist than any sort of real punishment. I do feel though that maybe 10 years is too harsh, 30 days, in my mind, will not do anything.
As to why no one spoke up, this is a question that mind boggles me as well. We are preached in school that bullying is not acceptable and every student shakes there head and agrees not to bully and would step up to the plate if necessary, but when push comes to shove they actually do not. In today’s society bullying can take countless more forms from when I was in growing up so I think it is even more necessary to stand up and say something, but I think people are afraid. They do not want to be the outcast who goes against what everyone thinks and fears rejection. Well I think we need to finally put those fears aside and stand up for what we think is right for a change. If we do not start doing this now, this viscous cycle will continue and the bullies will continue to win.
Say something and do what you think is right, someone will thank you. One person is all it takes.
Daniel Mello posted on May 29, 2012 at 2:33 pm
This case really illuminates the terror that is jury sympathy. Poor Dharun was kicked out of Rutgers and is the subject of national hatred; he is a young affluent fellow who made a mistake. This completely veils the point Professor Spooner makes in her blog, that he remains a hateful criminal. I reckon a jury would have ruled differently without Dharun’s parents and siblings sitting behind him in court each day…
I must say I have never seen a more brilliant show of self-concern and complete numbness to the lives of others. I am perturbed that the first tears fallen in the trial were those of relief, and not those of guilt or apology. I am also bothered by the fact that this case really became a metaphor for the persecution of the enmity and bullying of gay students across the nation, for which 30 days of jail time and a little community service is supposed to remedy.
Gays watch these types of issues with a close eye due to the sensitive political limbo currently suspending their rights. Unfortunately, this case is yet another demotivating loss for the population. Like other minorities, however, the gays will push through the stoning.
Ironically, the verdict of the case gave leniency to Dharun, redirecting its punishment to a different, weathered group.
David Han posted on May 30, 2012 at 3:50 pm
I do fully agree that the punishment was not nearly as appropriate as it could have been. I remember reading articles on this case for hours on end when it had first hit the news, and I also want to add that there was another student (I believe a female?) involved that was clearly sorry and didn’t realize what she was a part of. That being said, I wonder how many typical college students would be capable of doing the same sort of thing. A lot of young students today who have been raised in middle to upper middle wealth homes don’t fully understand a lot of implications and consequences of certain types of actions, myself included. For example, I often speed when I drive, not fully recognizing that an accident could hurt another drive, hurt their family, and hurt my own family’s finances in regards to insurance payments.
That being said, Ravi is clearly a criminal, but ALSO a stupid kid as well who didn’t know what he was getting himself into. He probably thought he would create some laughter with his friends, or something of that nature. In the best case scenario, Ravi will grow up, and mature as a man that sympathizes, is less ignorant, and understands that there are severe consequences to a lot of actions, especially when they involve others.
I agree that the sentence should be longer, or the punishment greater, in order for Ravi to grow up at least a little bit faster.
Shree Chudasama posted on May 30, 2012 at 10:10 pm
I’d like to respectfully disagree with the comment above regarding the best case scenario laid out; the light punishment Ravi was given leaves me with the impression that he probably won’t realize the full impact of his actions. I mean, we can hope that he matures and is more sympathetic in his coming years, but 30 days seems like a shoddy summer camp. His lack of any actual remorse (after the incident, during the trial and even after the verdict) sheds doubt on his ability to grow and/or learn from this. I recently read that he FINALLY apologized (http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/05/dharun_ravi_i_apologize_to_eve.html), but his apology sounded weak and generic as it was simply a general note of sorry, not to anyone specific, just “to everyone affected by [my] choices.” It also seems like he apologized and wanted to begin his jail time just as the prosecutor began the process to appeal the judge’s sentence. Primarily though, the fact that he thought any of this was okay at all is most worrisome. I feel like this case wouldn’t have gotten as much attention if the victim hadn’t taken his own life, but such invasions of personal privacy are important issues that need to be addressed.
As to Prof. Spooner’s other point, no one speaking up sort of reminds me of bystanders in the law; where bystanders aren’t required to help out unless they themselves or their actions put the person in danger. I know our law is guided partially by our own ethics, but this law bothers me. If someone’s in trouble (if trouble means they’re about to walk into oncoming traffic or being bullied), shouldn’t we help them? At least as humans helping fellow humans.
Peter H posted on June 4, 2012 at 9:33 pm
I feel like they should have cracked down on this guy during the sentencing. 30 days will definitely not deter any future bullies. I think they should have stepped in, given this guy what he deserved and set a precedent for future bullying cases of this nature or of any nature.
I agree with Shree’s comment above on bystanders. This case would have never gotten the national attention that it did if the victim didn’t take his life which shows how the world we live in today needs to change.