The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

by **GOSD** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:51 pm

outsider wrote:That's the problem with trying bullying cases in a public judicial system. It's not illegal to be an insensitive asshole. I feel for the bullied kid that committed suicide, but it's not like suicide was the only option at his disposal (shoving his violin up his roommate's ass would have crossed most people's minds first).

Do they honestly think the jerk roommate was wanting this guy to kill himself? And should he go to jail for this?

It's obvious that he didn't have any hangups that his roommate was gay. They didn't like each other. Most roommates are dicks. One was a rich, social kid and the other was a private, not rich one.

Plus, it seems like the suicide came out of the blue. One minute he was ok with it and the next, he wasn't.

Why didn't he heed the resident advisor's advice and move out?

No, he stayed there and then had another encounter with that older dude.

Like I said, the indian kid needs a good beating for being a fucking asshole but he didn't do anything criminal.

This is a bullshit case that GLAD pushed on the prosecutor.

by **GHERU** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:51 pm

Rockman wrote:Didn't even seem like he was bullying the guy, he made jokes on twitter or whatever, which seems pretty normal now. To a lot of people it's no different than sitting around with some friends ands aying the same thing.

were they friends?
There are things my friends can say to me that I laugh off but if someone I wasn't friends with said them it would be very inappropriate

example - Jew jokes

by **GHERU** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:52 pm

Sitebreaker wrote:remember he's NOT being tried for anything involved with the guy killing himself, its invasion of privacy, witness tampering, hindering prosecution and bias intimidation that's he's being tried on.

shhhh
not the point

by **Rockman** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:52 pm

GHERU wrote:but he allegedly commited the criminal act, in NJ, of invasion of privacy. WHat his intentions were are not what is at issue, what is at issue is what consequences his illegal actions had.

according to the prosecuters, if I am reading the articles correctly.

Actually the other article I've read has said that the suicide and depression the kid apparently had are not relevent to the trial, so the consequences are not the issue, based on that other article.

by **e_galston** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:53 pm

GHERU wrote:were they friends?
There are things my friends can say to me that I laugh off but if someone I wasn't friends with said them it would be very inappropriate

example - Jew jokes

no they weren't friends.. they barely talked to each other according to that article and others i read.

by **Timbales** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:55 pm

Sitebreaker wrote:remember he's NOT being tried for anything involved with the guy killing himself, its invasion of privacy, witness tampering, hindering prosecution and bias intimidation that's he's being tried on.

I hope he gets found guilty of those charges, but I doubt he'll get more than a slap on the wrist.

by **GHERU** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:55 pm

Rockman wrote:
Actually the other article I've read has said that the suicide and depression the kid apparently had are not relevent to the trial, so the consequences are not the issue, based on that other article.

and since nothing connected to the suicide are relevent to the trial, your question about them wanting to send this guy to jail becuase the other one commited suicide is answered.

by **Rockman** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:55 pm

GHERU wrote:were they friends?
There are things my friends can say to me that I laugh off but if someone I wasn't friends with said them it would be very inappropriate

example - Jew jokes

Alright for example I work with people I am not friends with (friendly with perhaps)

when I'm with my friends socializing I might say something about a co-worker fought with his girlfriend for 45 minutes while i was trying to do my job.

To kids younger than me they think it is okay to take these complaints and post them on facebook and twitter.

I personally think it's a bad idea to put anything to writing or recording, that you'd be hard pressed to defend when push came to shove.

by **Rockman** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:57 pm

GHERU wrote:and since nothing connected to the suicide are relevent to the trial, your question about them wanting to send this guy to jail becuase the other one commited suicide is answered.

I don't think I asked that question, but it should be answered for whoever did.

by **Rockman** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:57 pm

Timbales wrote:
I hope he gets found guilty of those charges, but I doubt he'll get more than a slap on the wrist.

I really don't see how they have a strong case for anything either than the first one.

by **GOSD** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:57 pm

Sitebreaker wrote:remember he's NOT being tried for anything involved with the guy killing himself, its invasion of privacy, witness tampering, hindering prosecution and bias intimidation that's he's being tried on.

Which are all hand slaps.

This kid will get probation esp. he shows some emotion for the kid dying.

by **GHERU** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:59 pm

Rockman wrote:
Alright for example I work with people I am not friends with (friendly with perhaps)

when I'm with my friends socializing I might say something about a co-worker fought with his girlfriend for 45 minutes while i was trying to do my job.

To kids younger than me they think it is okay to take these complaints and post them on facebook and twitter.

I personally think it's a bad idea to put anything to writing or recording, that you'd be hard pressed to defend when push came to shove.

dude, allegedly, spied on and showed other people the dead guy's personal actions. this has nothing to do with Twitter / Facebook - If you'd be ok with some one you didn't like putting webcams up in your home and sendning links to people you didn't know / like, thats your perogitive. It seems this kind of activity is illegal in NJ. Along with witness tamering and other stuff

might be examples of a nanny state - not letting people spy on eachother, but thats the way it is

by **GHERU** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:00 pm

Rockman wrote:
I don't think I asked that question, but it should be answered for whoever did.

sorry
SFW skin, can't see avatars
I thought since you responded to me you were the one that inspired the post and didn't bother looking at names
my bad

by **outsider** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:04 pm

GHERU wrote:but he allegedly commited the criminal act, in NJ, of invasion of privacy. WHat his intentions were are not what is at issue, what is at issue is what consequences his illegal actions had.

according to the prosecuters, if I am reading the articles correctly.

oic

I'm not a lawyer (nor do I pretend to be one on the OH/G), so I can't keep up with actual charges or factual evidence. :derp:

Okay, invasion of privacy... 10 years in prison? Really? That seems harsh when manslaughter can give you less.

by **BlueStreak** » Tue Feb 21, 2012 3:07 pm

Eh, I'm of two minds about this thing. I dealt with some "dopey pranksters" in college that did a lot of heinous stuff. The administration didn't act because one of those dopey pranksters was sleeping with an RA who kept things hush hush. When I finally got out of the situation, I performed my own parting prank and thought that was that. A year later, I get a call from the Director of Student Life asking me if I want to press criminal charges against the dopey pranksters because one of them admitted that they were hoping to push me to suicide. One of them freaked when they could no longer find me on facebook (I blocked them all) and had contacted university officials to see if I was still alive. They got expelled, I got a written apology from the university and the president of the college said that my dopey form of revenge was one of the most hilarious things she ever heard.

It all depends on what the kid's state of mind was. If he was in fact trying to push this kid to suicide or intimidate him because of his sexuality, he deserves every day in prison. If in fact he's a moron freshman, he should get hit with the invasion of privacy charges and spend the rest of his life wondering if it was his idiocy that drove someone over the edge.