AT VFR, Lawrence Auster writes:

Dharun Ravi, the 20 year old former Rutgers freshman, has been found guilty of most counts in the peeping Tom “hate crimes” case in which his roommate, Tyler Clementi, committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge. I opined last month that the case seemed very weak. The application of the still-new category of “hate crime” to Ravi’s behavior, under the even more questionable sub-category of “bias intimidation,” seemed so strained that I thought the jury would reject the charges.

I was wrong. The jury’s verdict shows that what seemed like a merely elite view that would be shunned by ordinary citizens, has been accepted by them. As has also become evident with regard to the birth control mandate, the nation that began with an appeal to the sacred principle of liberty has entered a new dimension of blatant, comprehensive tyranny.

                               — Comments —

Diana writes:

Ravi’s life is in ruins. What he did was stupid and nasty, but it’s not the first time a boy has pulled a prank. Let this be a lesson to all parents: tell your kids that if they have a gay roommate, set firm boundaries (no sex in the room, please), and change roommates as soon as possible.

I note that Ravi is an Indian immigrant. I know that this won’t stanch the flow of immigrants into the U.S. (that will not happen until we citizens do something about it, which will happen when hell freezes over), but it should be a lesson to them as well: America is crazy.

Pan Dora writes:

Moral of the story ….. when you do a stupid and nasty thing there are consequences. Welcome to life.

Laura writes:

The moral of the story is that if you commit a juvenile and vicious prank against a homosexual, a prank that has inflicted no physical harm, you may spend ten years in jail, more time than you would probably spend for robbing, assaulting or even raping anyone else.

Diana writes:

Note that the evidence used to convict was “atypically thin” and the prosecution knew it couldn’t prove bullying. So they hamstrung a jury of dodos with a load of charges, each of which had several “subparts” – and the prosecution only needed one subpart conviction to nail Ravi as guilty of the entire charge. Clever. This was a witch hunt.

Hurricane Betsy writes:

What happened to gay pride?

Alissa writes:

Please don’t tell me that this boy couldn’t get help and validation from LGBT groups where he was studying. Nobody was telling him that homosexuality was wrong.

The right censors because it wants to protect the good, the left censors because it wants to protect evil.

Paul writes:

This is tyranny, not justice. I don’t think it will stand. I cannot believe appellate courts will uphold this sentence. This was a runaway jury. Intent and causation alone are absent. For crying out loud, this does not even come close to the definition of criminal negligence. The defendant’s actions deserved at most a firm rebuke by the judge, probation, and some community service; but jail turns this into a human rights issue. If the intent usually required for this punishment (think the 8th Amendment’s edict against cruel and unusual punishment) is absent from the statute(s) involved, the statute(s) or certainly the sentence could be declared unconstitutional.

Actually, all he deserved, in my view, was a firm talking to by the Dean and perhaps some kind of civil suit based on a possible hypocritical right to privacy. Do we not have free speech, the right to declare publicly that someone is an active homosexual? Homosexuality is equal to heterosexuality in the liberal mind, so outing homosexuality is no more offensive than outing someone’s heterosexuality. This defendant did not have a conservative’s requisite politeness or class, which liberals know conservatives have chosen to impose upon themselves but not liberals; and therefore, he is going to jail? This is the kind of stuff that will lead to violent civil war.

Please follow and like us: