• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Student kills himself after gay sex footage put online

I think that's too far. Charge them with an invasion of privacy and leave it at that. They were not responsible for that kid jumping off a bridge. Only he had that power over himself.

If they had not did what they did? He would probably still be alive and I suspect Rutgers will have a lawsuit on their hands since he went to them and they did Nothing. The more I read about this? The sadder I become:(
 
I think that's too far. Charge them with an invasion of privacy and leave it at that. They were not responsible for that kid jumping off a bridge. Only he had that power over himself.

As much as it pains me to agree, I have to under the avaiable evidence. I think they should still be charged with invasion of privacy but I imagine these kids have already been traumatized enough by their actions. This was an act of immaturity and while they appeared to play into an anti gay bias, I don't think this was entirely motivated by it. These were kids bringing a high school mentality into a college environment and they were seeking to appear cool by publicly embarrassing someone else. For all I can tell, they weren't even bullying him because for all they knew, he was unaware that he was being watched through the webcam. It could have, and may have, escalated into bullying, but that is yet to be seen.

If it is clear later that this escalated into outright bullying then there is more grounds to hold them accountable for his suicide. Bullying can lead to people taking their own lives. As much as the "personal responsibility" line is touted, if an environment is made hostile and emotionally aversive enough, it can drive a person to suicide. Acceptance and belonging are basic human needs as much as water and food are and we would die without them.
 
Last edited:
If they had not did what they did? He would probably still be alive and I suspect Rutgers will have a lawsuit on their hands since he went to them and they did Nothing. The more I read about this? The sadder I become:(

I highly doubt he would still be alive. The kid was pretty mentally upset and it just seems this was his breaking point. The sad part is even if he didn't successful kill himself this time, chances are he would have done it again.
 
I heard today that the prosecutor wants to treat this as a hate crime, due to evidence surfacing that showed the crime being done because of the victim being gay. If that happens, then those kids are looking at double the prison time. Not sure if that is appropriate, but IMHO, what they did is nearly the same as involuntary manslaughter. Of course, it's not exactly the same, but there should definitely be punishment here.

One would have to prove this is the cause of his suicide first.

Even then, he was the one who killed himself.
 
One would have to prove this is the cause of his suicide first.

Even then, he was the one who killed himself.

Actually, it has nothing to do with his suicide.

The crime was invasion of privacy. That penalty for that crime can be doubled if it was motivated by bias.

People keep making the mistake of attributing the consequences these kids are facing to his suicide. The consequences are for setting up a webcam and broadcasting images of him without his knowledge. Furthermore, there is evidence based on comments Revi made that his reasons for doing so were because his roommate is gay.

Whether his roommate committed suicide or not, he could have faced the same set of charges.
 
Last edited:
I was incredibly shocked when i read this. What a horrible loss, not just for there families, but for everybody on this Earth that has worked hard to create an equal, accepting and open society where people are not victimized for being something they cannot help being.
 
If they had not did what they did? He would probably still be alive and I suspect Rutgers will have a lawsuit on their hands since he went to them and they did Nothing.

But he likely still would have been suicidal. The night before my dad took his own life he attended a retirement banquet for my mother. That morning he dropped her off at work (She was wrapping up a long teaching career) and returned a dead battery to PepBoys so he could get a refund on the core charge. He apparently had a heated argument with my uncle, went home, and hanged himself in the master bedroom of my parents' home. I guess we should have charged my uncle with murder then, eh? Instead of coming to the realization after the fact that my dad was suffering from depression and didn't need much of an excuse to just end it all? :confused: We thought it was pointless to try to assign blame. No one else killed him. He killed himself. It happened and that's it. We picked up the pieces and moved on.
 
I was incredibly shocked when i read this. What a horrible loss, not just for there families, but for everybody on this Earth that has worked hard to create an equal, accepting and open society where people are not victimized for being something they cannot help being.

When it comes to suicide, it's better to not try to use logic. Otherwise, one might come to the conclusion that Tyler Clementi placed his own selfish need above the anguish his act--and it was his act--would bring to his family and friends.
 
Fortunately for these two, that's not the legal standard for involuntary manslaughter (or anything, really).

Isn't that essentially the standard for Felony Murder, though?


TED,
Who thought that if you committed a (violent?) felony, and anybody died in the midst of that crime, you were culpable for their death(s).
 
If they had not did what they did? He would probably still be alive and I suspect Rutgers will have a lawsuit on their hands since he went to them and they did Nothing. The more I read about this? The sadder I become:(

The poor guy had deeper issues and it can not be said either way that he would not or would have committed suicide. Unless of course one has a properly functioning crystal ball.
 
BBC News - Student kills himself after gay sex footage put online

A tragic loss. He had more to live for. He could have done so much with his life. I understand the embarressment and the effect it can have on an 18 year old. We'll never know how he felt before he lept off that bridge. But I wish he hadn't.

I think his roommate just felt he was doing a harmless prank and nothing more. Bad things and embarrassing things happen to homosexuals for all sorts of reasons. Not the idiot liberal pc retarded notion that these things can only happen to gays because of hatred of homosexuality. The kid was weak willed, which is why he committed suicide. If it was not embarrassment it would have been something else that sent that kid over the edge.Like a lot of other people I do not have any sympathy for people who commit suicide, especially for the idiot school kids who have it better than most of the people on the planet. I kind of think we should drop these kids off in a war torn 3rd world country for a couple of years to change their perspective on the value of life and suicide.

That said they should serve some time for violating that kids privacy. And this should only be treated as an invasion of privacy case not a some poor weak willed dumbass committed suicide because of this case.
 
Last edited:
I highly doubt he would still be alive. The kid was pretty mentally upset and it just seems this was his breaking point. The sad part is even if he didn't successful kill himself this time, chances are he would have done it again.

Have you read anything about him. Who he was, as a young man.
 
But he likely still would have been suicidal. The night before my dad took his own life he attended a retirement banquet for my mother. That morning he dropped her off at work (She was wrapping up a long teaching career) and returned a dead battery to PepBoys so he could get a refund on the core charge. He apparently had a heated argument with my uncle, went home, and hanged himself in the master bedroom of my parents' home. I guess we should have charged my uncle with murder then, eh? Instead of coming to the realization after the fact that my dad was suffering from depression and didn't need much of an excuse to just end it all? :confused: We thought it was pointless to try to assign blame. No one else killed him. He killed himself. It happened and that's it. We picked up the pieces and moved on.

I'm just going to give you a cheesy internet hug and tell you I'm sorry for your loss.
 
I think his roommate just felt he was doing a harmless prank and nothing more. Bad things and embarrassing things happen to homosexuals for all sorts of reasons. Not the idiot liberal pc retarded notion that these things can only happen to gays because of hatred of homosexuality. The kid was weak willed, which is why he committed suicide. If it was not embarrassment it would have been something else that sent that kid over the edge.Like a lot of other people I do not have any sympathy for people who commit suicide, especially for the idiot school kids who have it better than most of the people on the planet. I kind of think we should drop these kids off in a war torn 3rd world country for a couple of years to change their perspective on the value of life and suicide.

That said they should serve some time for violating that kids privacy. And this should only be treated as an invasion of privacy case not a some poor weak willed dumbass committed suicide because of this case.

Depression has NOTHING to do with how strong-willed a person is. Jesus, dude. Get some education before you hit a keyboard. WTF.
 
Last edited:
Whenever I take you off ignore, I read more ****. Depression has NOTHING to do with how strong-willed a person is.Jesus, dude. Get some education before you hit a keyboard. WTF.

I didn't say **** about depression. I just said the kid is weak willed. So learn to ****en read before you hit a keyboard.
 
Have you read anything about him. Who he was, as a young man.

Yes, I have read about him, but I also know that once some one does it if it doesn't work they will try again.
 
I didn't say **** about depression. I just said the kid is weak willed. So learn to ****en read before you hit a keyboard.

Actually depending on how serious his issues were and how long he had been dealing with them he maybe stronger willed than we know. Sadly he just picked the wrong path.
 
I didn't say **** about depression. I just said the kid is weak willed. So learn to ****en read before you hit a keyboard.


He was NOT weak-willed. You know nothing about him. He couldn't be the musician he was, were he weak-willed.

People die at their own hand if they are depressed.
 
Isn't that essentially the standard for Felony Murder, though?


TED,
Who thought that if you committed a (violent?) felony, and anybody died in the midst of that crime, you were culpable for their death(s).

Felony murder generally only comes into play when it's a certain type of violent felony and the killing occurs in the course of or in the flight from the felony. If you're speeding away from an armed robbery and run someone over, that's FM. If you drive home, park your car, and then run out to get groceries and hit someone, it's not. If you're robbing a store and an old guy has a heart attack, that's FM (in some states). If you rob a store and the guy goes home and kills himself from the shock, that's not FM.

In this case, it's unclear whether they committed a felony (or even a crime), and even so, the felony is not of the proper type and the death didn't occur in the course of the crime.
 
As much as it pains me to agree, I have to under the avaiable evidence. I think they should still be charged with invasion of privacy but I imagine these kids have already been traumatized enough by their actions. This was an act of immaturity and while they appeared to play into an anti gay bias, I don't think this was entirely motivated by it. These were kids bringing a high school mentality into a college environment and they were seeking to appear cool by publicly embarrassing someone else. For all I can tell, they weren't even bullying him because for all they knew, he was unaware that he was being watched through the webcam. It could have, and may have, escalated into bullying, but that is yet to be seen.

If it is clear later that this escalated into outright bullying then there is more grounds to hold them accountable for his suicide. Bullying can lead to people taking their own lives. As much as the "personal responsibility" line is touted, if an environment is made hostile and emotionally aversive enough, it can drive a person to suicide. Acceptance and belonging are basic human needs as much as water and food are and we would die without them.

While I appreciate your compassion, I have to disagree that a bullying atmosphere is still grounds to charge them with murder. He attended that school, lived in that particular dormitory, and associated with those particular people by choice. If he wasn't finding acceptance and belonging among them, there are countless other circles of friends to find his way among.

Only he had the power to jump off that bridge. No one pushed him, inadverently or otherwise, off of it. He did that to himself. There is ZERO grounds for holding these kids accountable for anything other than invasion of privacy.
 
In this case, it's unclear whether they committed a felony (or even a crime), and even so, the felony is not of the proper type and the death didn't occur in the course of the crime.

Quick question...

Being that the room was shared by both of the boys, is it really even an invasion of privacy that he turned on the web cam on his desk in his own room?
 
Quick question...

Being that the room was shared by both of the boys, is it really even an invasion of privacy that he turned on the web cam on his desk in his own room?

I know next to nothing about NJ law and little about this type of crim law in general, but I think that you can be charged with invasion of privacy even if it involves your room.

Here's the law in question:

1. a. An actor commits a crime of the fourth degree if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, and under circumstances in which a reasonable person would know that another may expose intimate parts or may engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact, he observes another person without that person's consent and under circumstances in which a reasonable person would not expect to be observed.

b.An actor commits a crime of the third degree if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he photographs, films, videotapes, records, or otherwise reproduces in any manner, the image of another person whose intimate parts are exposed or who is engaged in an act of sexual penetration or sexual contact, without that person's consent and under circumstances in which a reasonable person would not expect to be observed.

c.An actor commits a crime of the third degree if, knowing that he is not licensed or privileged to do so, he discloses any photograph, film, videotape, recording or any other reproduction of the image of another person whose intimate parts are exposed or who is engaged in an act of sexual penetration or sexual contact, unless that person has consented to such disclosure. For purposes of this subsection, "disclose" means sell, manufacture, give, provide, lend, trade, mail, deliver, transfer, publish, distribute, circulate, disseminate, present, exhibit, advertise or offer. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection b. of N.J.S.2C:43-3, a fine not to exceed $30,000 may be imposed for a violation of this subsection.

Currently they're being charged with all three. I think that the second and third charges will be dropped once the furor dies down, as there's no evidence that there was any "intimate parts" exposed or any "sexual penetration or sexual contact" on camera. That leaves the first charge, which is only 4th degree, and possibly a charge for attempted 3rd degree, which usually receives the same penalty as a 4th degree crime.

In order to prove the 4th degree charge, they would have to show that "under circumstances in which a reasonable person would know that another may expose intimate parts or may engage in sexual penetration or sexual contact, he observes another person without that person's consent and under circumstances in which a reasonable person would not expect to be observed." I certainly don't think it's impossible for the state to prove that, but I can see some arguments that the defendants may raise that could get them off, such as the claim that they didn't expect to see nudity when they turned on the cam, there wasn't a reasonable expectation of privacy because the roommate could have just walked back in, that he believed he had the right to look at his room, etc.
 
Last edited:
While I appreciate your compassion, I have to disagree that a bullying atmosphere is still grounds to charge them with murder. He attended that school, lived in that particular dormitory, and associated with those particular people by choice. If he wasn't finding acceptance and belonging among them, there are countless other circles of friends to find his way among.

Not murder, involuntary manslaughter. However, from his posts it sounds like Rutgers makes it difficult for someone to change their rooming situation once it is established. I know at my college that is the case. Plus if you consider he may have already been in a depressed state when all this occured, it would have been unlikely he would have been motivated to move from the situaton no matter how bad it was because his emotional state was already low.

Only he had the power to jump off that bridge. No one pushed him, inadverently or otherwise, off of it. He did that to himself. There is ZERO grounds for holding these kids accountable for anything other than invasion of privacy.

This is a fault of a libertarian mindset into mental health.The argument that we are always rational decision makers has no grounds in scientific fact. Every single human being makes decisions based on emotion, not rational. It has been demonstrated by psychology time and time again that humans simply use rational to sway their emotions. If someone is put into an emotional state where they are susceptible to suicide, then whoever did so is indeed partially responsible.

Honestly, if I got you as angry as possible, provided you with a gun and bullets, and left you alone with the object of your anger, do you think I would not be partially responsible if you killed them? I manipulated your emotional state, considerably lowered your ability to be rational, and provided you the means.
 
Last edited:
Honestly, if I got you as angry as possible, provided you with a gun and bullets, and left you alone with the object of your anger, do you think I would not be partially responsible if you killed them? I manipulated your emotional state, considerably lowered your ability to be rational, and provided you the means.

Except they didn't hand him a bridge, which leaves us with the following analogy: "If I got you as angry as possible and then you bought a gun and shot yourself, do you think I would not be partially responsible"?

I'd say yes, but to a very small degree and certainly not to a level of legal culpability. Even then, it assumes that you intentionally got the other person "as angry as possible."
 
Back
Top Bottom