By Trevor (Age 14, Hong Kong International School)
What does it mean to do something on purpose? What about by impulse? On September 22, Tyler Clementi committed suicide after a series of actions by two bullies. Three days earlier, Dharun and Molly uploaded a video of the boy making out with a guy on Youtube. One may ask, "What led to this?" but the more important question is "What was the intent?"
Almost for sure, Ravi had a suspicion that his roommate was homosexual. Not only did he suspect, but he thought about it, and decided that he was going to spy on his roommate through a webcam. Did he accidentally turn on the webcam or was it part of 'the plan'? Most likely, Ravi turned it on manually because Tyler himself would not risk his being exposed if he had asked for the dorm for three hours in the first place. Dharun had to have intended on somehow figuring out if his roommate matched his suspicions. The next step however was the most crucial determining factor of his sentence: was he an on-purpose exposer? Or was it a click in the head saying 'I'm just gonna do this.'?
In one perspective, one could say that it was all because the immature student felt that it was funny. However, looking at the case from the opposite perspective, would it not have all been planned if Ravi had turned on the webcam in the first place? Information on health.spreadit.org showed that this was not the first video to be captured. Both Ravi and Molly had planned to post their next video before Clementi had asked for the room. With this proof, it is affirmed that they had intended to rebroadcast such a video instead of getting a good laugh at it. Premeditation was a factor in this crime because without it, the video would never have been posted. As an addition to backup this statement, he had tweeted "Roommate asked for the room... went into molly's room and turned on my web-cam... making out with a dude. Yay." Notice the word "Yay" had strong emphasis to it because it was used as an effective short sentence. Inferring from the text, these three simple letters held the meaning of how Ravi had felt successful by accomplishing his goal. Without this word in the context, this would be a whole different story because it would not have shown accomplishment in Dharun's voice over Twitter.
It is extremely possible that the two of them would not have done so if they knew of the full consequence of Tyler jumping off the bridge. It is true that Tyler must have acted on the impulse of committing suicide before he thought about what he could have done to recover from this incident. Nevertheless, this does not change the fact that they did so. What is done is done. No matter how good the track records of Dharun and Molly are, it does not change the fact that they did something horrible to a person that they only knew for about a week. There is a great chance that Tyler would not have done so if were heterosexual because he would not be as afraid of being exposed to be dragged "out of the closet" by others.
More time to rationalize meant that they had more responsibility over the situation; more time to reflect meant less impulse - or even none - which shows that it was done based on premeditation and thoughts about consequences. Therefore, as a final statement, both Ravi and Wei should be sentenced to imprisonment because they had more than enough time to think before they had acted. Wei, though possibly not the main "brains", still participated and supported this idea, thereby saying, should be equal responsible as Ravi. It is only fair for them to learn a lesson of how powerful a small prank can be on to others. Not everyone views things with the same pair of eyes.
Showing posts with label Crime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Crime. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Emotion vs. Rationality
By Erica (Age 14, St. Paul's College)
Intent is the first thing lawyers look for when they take up a case, especially those involving murder or manslaughter. Intent provides the motive and reason behind the crime, and maybe even the method of killing. Sometimes, it also provides an excuse for the defense lawyer or the suspect.
In a recent case in the US, a college student named Ravi lent his room to his roommate, Tyler, for the night, turned on the web cam and recorded an intimate moment between Tyler and his gay partner. Ravi then later posted the video on the Internet and even broad-casted it live on the Internet. Deeply troubled by this exploitation, Tyler ended his life by jumping off a bridge. This has sparked controversy since Ravi had indirectly caused Tyler's death, making him liable for manslaughter and therefore, invasion of privacy will be too small a charge. Since intent is one of the key factors in this case, I will start off by listing some possible motives. First, Ravi may have long suspected that Tyler was homosexual and decided to record his acts in order to feed his curiosity. Second, Ravi may be homophobic and felt uncomfortable with Tyler's sexual orientation. He might have done it in order to humiliate and embarrass Tyler because of his differences or to make himself feel superior. Also, Ravi may have used this video and exposed the secret to gain popularity and to increase his social status. Most people like to gossip about others, and this may make Ravi think that the video is the ticket to become the most admired guy in school.
However, it is undeniable that this whole exploitation was planned and schemed in advance, and not acted on a moment of impulse. This is another key point in the case. The fact that Ravi committed an organized crime is far worse than committing a crime on impulse. A crime on impulse is committed based on emotions. People think less when they feel extreme emotions, but an organized crime is done after thinking with clarity. Ravi had planned this for hours, if not days, and went against his better judgment, carrying out his plan even after weighing in the consequences. He ignored human conscience and morality in order to achieve what he wanted. He invaded his roommate's privacy, indirectly causing his death. This form of privacy invasion is far worse than reading a person's diary or eavesdropping on another person's phone call. Homosexuality is still a sensitive issue and Ravi should have known about the effects and damage he would cause after he posted the video on the Internet. He should think about the impact it will have on Tyler and even his partner. Ravi's recklessness caused an innocent person to end his life. Also, Tyler's sexual orientation is something private that he keeps to himself. Ravi had no right whatsoever to expose that to the whole world through the Internet.
I believe that Ravi and Molly, his accomplice, should be charged with manslaughter. Although Molly did not participate in the recording of the intimate moment between Tyler and his partner, she would have known the plan since Ravi watched video in her room. She should have alerted the authorities and try to stop Ravi, instead of joining an immature person to humiliate Tyler. Invasion of privacy is too less of an offense to prescribe for their acts. Their actions exposed Tyler's secret to the whole world, yet they did not care about this before carrying out this plan. Invasion of privacy can only describe their actions in the dorm, but cannot describe their motive and intentions behind this plan. They had planned for a person's humiliation. If Ravi did not stream the video live on the Internet, the case would be less serious since only three people would have known about it.
In conclusion, what Ravi and Molly did was unforgivable and no excuses should be made in order to defend them. They had taken advantage of another human being to gain popularity, for fun, and to embarrass the victim. This case was not a crime of passion, committed when feeling extreme emotions such as rage or sadness. The guilty party had premeditated about the actions, yet continued to carry them out while being aware of the damage and impact. Ravi and Molly had ruined the life of Tyler, and manslaughter should be the right term for their actions instead of invasion of privacy.
Intent is the first thing lawyers look for when they take up a case, especially those involving murder or manslaughter. Intent provides the motive and reason behind the crime, and maybe even the method of killing. Sometimes, it also provides an excuse for the defense lawyer or the suspect.
In a recent case in the US, a college student named Ravi lent his room to his roommate, Tyler, for the night, turned on the web cam and recorded an intimate moment between Tyler and his gay partner. Ravi then later posted the video on the Internet and even broad-casted it live on the Internet. Deeply troubled by this exploitation, Tyler ended his life by jumping off a bridge. This has sparked controversy since Ravi had indirectly caused Tyler's death, making him liable for manslaughter and therefore, invasion of privacy will be too small a charge. Since intent is one of the key factors in this case, I will start off by listing some possible motives. First, Ravi may have long suspected that Tyler was homosexual and decided to record his acts in order to feed his curiosity. Second, Ravi may be homophobic and felt uncomfortable with Tyler's sexual orientation. He might have done it in order to humiliate and embarrass Tyler because of his differences or to make himself feel superior. Also, Ravi may have used this video and exposed the secret to gain popularity and to increase his social status. Most people like to gossip about others, and this may make Ravi think that the video is the ticket to become the most admired guy in school.
However, it is undeniable that this whole exploitation was planned and schemed in advance, and not acted on a moment of impulse. This is another key point in the case. The fact that Ravi committed an organized crime is far worse than committing a crime on impulse. A crime on impulse is committed based on emotions. People think less when they feel extreme emotions, but an organized crime is done after thinking with clarity. Ravi had planned this for hours, if not days, and went against his better judgment, carrying out his plan even after weighing in the consequences. He ignored human conscience and morality in order to achieve what he wanted. He invaded his roommate's privacy, indirectly causing his death. This form of privacy invasion is far worse than reading a person's diary or eavesdropping on another person's phone call. Homosexuality is still a sensitive issue and Ravi should have known about the effects and damage he would cause after he posted the video on the Internet. He should think about the impact it will have on Tyler and even his partner. Ravi's recklessness caused an innocent person to end his life. Also, Tyler's sexual orientation is something private that he keeps to himself. Ravi had no right whatsoever to expose that to the whole world through the Internet.
I believe that Ravi and Molly, his accomplice, should be charged with manslaughter. Although Molly did not participate in the recording of the intimate moment between Tyler and his partner, she would have known the plan since Ravi watched video in her room. She should have alerted the authorities and try to stop Ravi, instead of joining an immature person to humiliate Tyler. Invasion of privacy is too less of an offense to prescribe for their acts. Their actions exposed Tyler's secret to the whole world, yet they did not care about this before carrying out this plan. Invasion of privacy can only describe their actions in the dorm, but cannot describe their motive and intentions behind this plan. They had planned for a person's humiliation. If Ravi did not stream the video live on the Internet, the case would be less serious since only three people would have known about it.
In conclusion, what Ravi and Molly did was unforgivable and no excuses should be made in order to defend them. They had taken advantage of another human being to gain popularity, for fun, and to embarrass the victim. This case was not a crime of passion, committed when feeling extreme emotions such as rage or sadness. The guilty party had premeditated about the actions, yet continued to carry them out while being aware of the damage and impact. Ravi and Molly had ruined the life of Tyler, and manslaughter should be the right term for their actions instead of invasion of privacy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)