Rutger Suicide- Hate Crime?

[Jason Tandro]

I'm sure by now everyone has at least heard something about this teenager who had sex with another man while unknowingly on a webcam. He was so embarassed by being outed in this manner that he committed suicide.

Are the people responsible for this criminals? Hell yes. Should they go to prison? Definitely and for more than just the five years they are able to be penalized with.

But that being said, I would not call this a "hate crime". To be considered a "hate crime" the action of posting this video on the webcast would have to be based solely on the fact that he was gay, according to the defense.

First off I have a problem with Hate Crime legislation to begin with. I think it's silly to further penalize somebody because of the motivation of their crime. As I've said from day one, motivation is irrelevant, we should only be judged on our actions.

Barring that, as scummy as these kids are, they did not kill Rutger. Rutger committed suicide and while he may have been emotionally pushed the choice to end his life was still his own.

People tend to view me as a callous prick because of this, but I generally have little sympathy for people who commit or attempt suicide. I'm not totally heartless and obviously this was one of those ridiculous scenarios, but regardless the final action was his own.

That cannot possibly be considered a hate crime. And again, I'm not absolving these kids of responsibility. They still committed a crime and it led to a persons death, so I would argue for manslaughter.

[psychokind]

Jason Tandro wrote:

That cannot possibly be considered a hate crime. And again, I'm not absolving these kids of responsibility. They still committed a crime and it led to a persons death, so I would argue for manslaughter.

manslaughter? for putting a webcam in somebody's room while he is having sex? what the hell man

[SoulBlazerFan]

I hadn't heard anything about this. That is tragic...

That said, I do agree with you Jason... murder is murder, accidental or not. For instance, an actress, Rebecca Gayhart, was stuck behind traffic, and, because she was "hot shit," decided to pass it and go around- "accidentally" killing an 8 year old kid. What happened? I think she did three years time and five years probation. She made the choice to do the wrong thing- and she gets a slap on the wrist in comparison to the crime.

Or, there was this actress named Dominique Dunne during the 80's. She played the older sister in the first Poltergeist. She was murdered by her boyfriend in a fit of jealous rage- and he only got five years because it was a "crime of passion." How is killing someone without prior intent any different than killing someone with full intention of doing it? You are either capable of killing someone or your not, and if you are, then you damn well have intent- whether it was the person you killed or someone else.

[Freedan]

psychokind wrote:

Jason Tandro wrote: That cannot possibly be considered a hate crime. And again, I'm not absolving these kids of responsibility. They still committed a crime and it led to a persons death, so I would argue for manslaughter. manslaughter? for putting a webcam in somebody's room while he is having sex? what the hell man

Not just for 'putting a webcam in somebody's room', but for the fact that their actions unintentionally led to his death. Yes, he is the one who actually killed himself, but only under influence from the actions of others.

A couple of years ago, a woman was charged after she created a false MySpace account with the intent to publicly humiliate a young girl for a trivial reason. After doing so, the girl killed herself. The woman wasn't charged for 'making a false MySpace account, but because her actions led to the kid's dying.

Though in that case, the woman got off free on technicalities.

[psychokind]

Freedan wrote:

psychokind wrote: Jason Tandro wrote: That cannot possibly be considered a hate crime. And again, I'm not absolving these kids of responsibility. They still committed a crime and it led to a persons death, so I would argue for manslaughter. manslaughter? for putting a webcam in somebody's room while he is having sex? what the hell man Not just for 'putting a webcam in somebody's room', but for the fact that their actions unintentionally led to his death. Yes, he is the one who actually killed himself, but only under influence from the actions of others. A couple of years ago, a woman was charged after she created a false MySpace account with the intent to publicly humiliate a young girl for a trivial reason. After doing so, the girl killed herself. The woman wasn't charged for 'making a false MySpace account, but because her actions led to the kid's dying. Though in that case, the woman got off free on technicalities.

it's up to the judge (jury or whatever) to decide that. he has to clarify, if the prangsters were able to foresee the suicide.

[Freedan]

Whether they foresaw the suicide isn't the issue; manslaughter covers accidental death as well, even without intent. What they need to decide is whether there's a definite causal link between the accused's conduct and the victim's death.

[Miss Prime Blue]

I just saw this on the news.

This is an very sad story, and you'd have to have a major lack of empathy and basic human understanding to not care about the man who committed suicide after a video of him was leaked having sex with a man. Perhaps he was gay, or just experimenting and didn't want anyone to know -- and felt like his life was over? I have no idea, but still pretty much a tragedy.

I don't know if this is a "hate" crime. For it to be considered a hate crime, they would have had to have prior knowledge of his homosexuality (if he was indeed homosexual), and then thought posting it online would be a good idea.

At the most, this would be just a cruel invasion of privacy which led to one talented man to take his own life.

Bullying is really a problem.

[Jason Tandro]

In this age, cyber-bullying has led to so many incidents like this it's not even funny. As I said, while I normally don't sympathize with people who commit suicide this was clearly one of those extreme cases where our "wired" generation has allowed somebody to completely destroy another human's life.

Case in point. Today my dad saw that one of his old high school friend's facebook had been hacked. This mans status now read (and I'm cleaning this up slightly)

"I love to titty-hump girls who are under 14."

Obviously nobody who read it thought it was him, but still, the kind of mindset behind the person who could do this makes me wonder.

[EverPhoenix]

Jason Tandro wrote:

In this age, cyber-bullying has led to so many incidents like this it's not even funny. As I said, while I normally don't sympathize with people who commit suicide this was clearly one of those extreme cases where our "wired" generation has allowed somebody to completely destroy another human's life. Case in point. Today my dad saw that one of his old high school friend's facebook had been hacked. This mans status now read (and I'm cleaning this up slightly) "I love to titty-hump girls who are under 14." Obviously nobody who read it thought it was him, but still, the kind of mindset behind the person who could do this makes me wonder.

thats quite ... ugh just no. that kind of shit can get someone an irreparably bad reputation.

[psychokind]

Freedan wrote:

Whether they foresaw the suicide isn't the issue; manslaughter covers accidental death as well, even without intent. What they need to decide is whether there's a definite causal link between the accused's conduct and the victim's death.

and if they couldn't foresee it, there's no definite causal link, I'd say.

[Freedan]

There can still be a causal link if it wasn't planned.

If I accidentally hit someone with my car and killed them, there's a causal link. I may not have meant to hit anyone, and certainly didn't plan on anyone dying, but they still died as a result of what I did. And I'd be charged for it.

The same applies here. They may not have meant for him to be driven to suicide as a result of their actions, but if that is what caused it, they should be charged as well.

[psychokind]

Freedan wrote:

There can still be a causal link if it wasn't planned. If I accidentally hit someone with my car and killed them, there's a causal link. I may not have meant to hit anyone, and certainly didn't plan on anyone dying, but they still died as a result of what I did. And I'd be charged for it. The same applies here. They may not have meant for him to be driven to suicide as a result of their actions, but if that is what caused it, they should be charged as well.

well, I certainly hope the judge doesn't see it that way. it should be way harder to make someone guilty of driving somebody to suicide.

[psychokind]

sry for doublepost

I just heard on the news that the two students are going to be charged for "invation of privacy", jail up to 5 years (I assume they aren't previously convicted, so it'll be less than 5 years).

[Jason Tandro]

psychokind wrote:

well, I certainly hope the judge doesn't see it that way. it should be way harder to make someone guilty of driving somebody to suicide.

This all comes down to being responsible for the consequences- intended or unintended- of your actions. This goes for Rutger too. He chose to commit suicide, but it was the direct result of this video.

And the fact is whether or not he is guilty of manslaughter he still comitted a crime; violation of privacy. Even though the room was his, when he loaned it to Rutger there was nothing that gave him the authority to record the going-ons in the room.

[psychokind]

Jason Tandro wrote:

psychokind wrote: well, I certainly hope the judge doesn't see it that way. it should be way harder to make someone guilty of driving somebody to suicide. This all comes down to being responsible for the consequences- intended or unintended- of your actions. This goes for Rutger too. He chose to commit suicide, but it was the direct result of this video. And the fact is whether or not he is guilty of manslaughter he still comitted a crime; violation of privacy. Even though the room was his, when he loaned it to Rutger there was nothing that gave him the authority to record the going-ons in the room.

absolutely. it was just my understanding of law that something like that shouldn't be counted as manslaughter.