Social Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Was it really Mr. Ravi and Ms. Wei responsible for Clementi's death or was the choice all his?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (26879points) October 12th, 2010

While having a discussion among family and friends Tyler Clementi, (the gay violinist that committed suicide) came up. Some believed his roommate Mr. Ravi and Ms Wei did nothing worse than a fineable infraction. How would they be charged with murder or manslaughter or anything of the kind, it was Clementi himself that decided to throw himself off the bridge, no one had a gun to him forcing him to jump? They figure it was no different than the guy who killed himself after Madoff took him for hundreds of millions of dollars Madoff was never charged with that man’s suicide, was he?

Those who believe the onus was on Clementi, that while he should be upset his privacy was violated it was not serious enough to kill oneself over, and that his suicide had more to do with him feeling bad he was exposed as gay.

People asked if he did not feel wrong about being gay why not used the incident to tell the world he was gay, proud, and loud? If he was truly comfortable being gay he would not care who knew it, right?

If Mr. Ravi and Ms. Wei is charged and then if convicted what would that mean if someone killed themselves off actions of other’s indirectly? If someone was conned and they killed themselves would the conman be held responsible for the death? If a woman is date raped at a frat party and kills herself will some pledge get charged with murder? Tragic as it was they bring up a valid point as to how far does personal responsibility go?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

21 Answers

iamthemob's avatar

I’m not against a civil suit based on the death…but I think anything criminal shouldn’t even be brought up as a potential charge. The only exception would be if Clementi had indicated with certainty that broadcast of his sexual encounter would cause him enough pain to commit suicide.

Otherwise, the criminal charge would have to be based on the fact that the two students knew, reasonably should have known, etc. that this invasion would cause Tyler Clementi enough stress to commit suicide. I think that just reinforces the idea that we expect shame from exposure regarding homosexuality. I make this point only because, based on current information, it seems clear that any charge for criminal responsibility in the death would just fail.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

They didn’t kill him, he killed himself. So they shouldn’t be tried for murder or even involuntary manslaughter, imo but they are responsible for being homophobic and contributing to conditions that could lead to a persecuted person’s suicide. @iamthemob I don’t think anyone can claim that they should have have known it would lead to suicide but they knew that it would lead to something negative.

marinelife's avatar

It depends on if they were systematically harassing him, which is bullying, or if this was the first thing they had done.

If it was the former, then they are responsible criminally. If it was the latter, then they are not criminally responsible, but they certainly are reprehensible and are ethically responsible.

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

Indeed. And maybe that’s merit for a civil suit. And it’s definitely something that we should discuss as an example of the damage that homophobia, in generally, can cause. My only objection is toward any criminal responsibility attaching…the standards would have to be that they should have expected his shame at something like this would lead to his suicide.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@iamthemob I don’t think we can actually put forth such standards. It’d be too arbitrary. There are kids experiencing horrid homophobia in buttfuck, USA but they don’t kill themselves (not all of them, anyway). Who is to say, you know?

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

I’m confused. I’m just applying these specifics to a criminal charge. In order for there to be a reckless homicide, negligent homicide, or something of that sort, the accused needs to know, reasonably foresee, or should have known that the result was likely. I’m not trying to invent a new standard – is that what you think? That may be the source of our apparent disagreement here.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@marinelife It depends on if they were systematically harassing him, which is bullying, or if this was the first thing they had done. Bullying comes in many forms even such were there is no touching at all. If a boss is riding his manager, belittling them in front of other staff and customers but never strike then and oneday that person can’t take it anymore, and walks into the break room, sticks a .357 in their mouth and turns the back of their head into pizza toppings, how do you formulate the boss, or the boss’es boss done a crime equal to murder? Where would the line be from not murder to definately murder?

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@iamthemob You’re better in legal issues that I am…I just don’t get how anyone can prove that they ‘reasonably foresaw’ a suicide.

ETpro's avatar

I haven’t been following the story closely, but I have not heard of any move to charge the two with murder. The worst they are likely to face is a federal hate crime charge. From what I have heard of the two they were not routinely gay basher and probably acted more out of a desire to pull off a stupid prank than any hatred toward the victim. Hopefully this will give other pranksters pause to realize, before doing something meant to terribly embarrass another through a gross violation of their privacy, that we have no idea what is going on in that other person’s mind or how stable they are. If Tyler Clementi had laughed it off, it might have been funny. But that is not what happened. And what did happen is not all Mr. Clementi’s fault. Mr. Ravi and Ms. Wei do share responsibility for provoking a shy, possibly unstable young man to suicide.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@ETpro And what did happen is not all Mr. Clementi’s fault. Mr. Ravi and Ms. Wei do share responsibility for provoking a shy, possibly unstable young man to suicide. Playing Devil’s advocate here because Ravi and Wei did not seem to bright on how fragile Clementi was it was still his (Clementi’s) call to make. Because those who teased and bullied (at least to the extent Cho Seung-hui thought) would be partly responsible because he got a gun and started blasting away on the VT campus? Whether they bullied Cho intentionally or in his head it was he who chose to buy the gun and fire away on his fellow classmates.

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

Reasonable forseeability is one of the essences of liability where specific or general intent are not required. From a negligence perspective, consider dropping your air conditioner out of a window. It’s reasonably forseeable, during the day on a busy street, that you might harm someone.

In a suicide context, if someone is deeply, medically depressed, and you tell them that you don’t see it getting better, that if you were them you would kill yourself, and leave them in a room where you know they have a gun, then it’s reasonably forseeable that they would kill themselves. Whether you’re going to be held legally responsible depends on all surrounding facts, etc. – but in that case, you don’t have to intend that they would kill themselves at all – just know that it’s very possible it could happen.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@iamthemob I don’t know the details of their lives enough to even make a statement, but I see what you’re saying. Since, supposedly, they didn’t previously bully him, could they have known how something like this would affect the victim?

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

I don’t think so at all – I’m firmly on the side of no liability for his death in the criminal context. However, the standards are lower in the civil context.

Personally, I think that considering his youth, that he may have just been coming out, that he was new to the school, that it was so public and humiliating generally, that his parents could have seen it, and that he may have looked at it as being something that would haunt him forever, and that an 18 year old should understand that reaction, I think his family should sue the kids, they should win, and the kids should have their wages garnished forever.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@iamthemob “that considering his youth, that he may have just been coming out, that he was new to the school, that it was so public and humiliating generally, that his parents could have seen it, and that he may have looked at it as being something that would haunt him forever,” – was this supposed to be what the homophobes were to consider?

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

This may be merely semantics, but I think that it’s something any reasonable 18 year old would know, The amount of time and effort it takes for someone to set up the filming equipment and connect it for real time (and most likely archived) viewing is sufficient for that person (or people) to consider these issues and the potential effects.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@iamthemob I do agree that there was a lot of premeditation but I expect nothing reasonable from anyone, you know?

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir

I’m talking solely about the law. Reasonableness is the standard for liability. It relies on the fiction of the reasonable person in those circumstances.

E.g., a reasonable person would obey the speed limit. NO ONE really does, but if you get pulled over for speeding, you can’t point to what everyone else is doing to relieve yourself of liability.

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

@iamthemob Interesting. It’s kinda hot when you talk like this.

iamthemob's avatar

@Simone_De_Beauvoir It’s kinda hot when you think I’m kinda hot.

Nullo's avatar

The responsibility is both theirs and his. Clementi took his own life, by himself, very likely without prompting. The other two, however, failed in their responsibilities to be decent human beings.

@iamthemob In many states, it is considered preferable to match the speed of traffic. The only time that I’ve been pulled over was for driving 45mph in a 45–60 zone.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther