Application-Tyler-Clementi-science-homework-help

by

Application: Tyler Clementi

In September 2010, Rutgers University student Tyler Clementi committed suicide by jumping off the George Washington Bridge. The suicide occurred after the 18-year-old discovered that his intimate encounter with another man in his dorm room was broadcast on the Internet. The offenders, Dharun Ravi and Molly Wei, set up a webcam and live streamed Clementi’s encounter without his knowledge. In April 2011, Ravi was indicted on 15 counts, including invasion of privacy and bias intimidation. Wei was offered a plea bargain to testify against Ravi. Neither offender was charged with the death of Tyler Clementi. Questions remain as to whether this was merely a display of cyber-hate or if this incident could legally be deemed a hate crime.

For this assignment, review the Tyler Clementi case and think about whether or not Clementi’s right to privacy was violated. Consider whether the offense should be considered cyber-hate or a hate crime. Then think about why the offenders were not legally charged with Clementi’s death.

The Assignment (2–3 pages)

  • Explain whether or not Tyler Clementi’s constitutional right to privacy was violated.
  • Explain whether the offense should be considered cyber-hate or classified as a hate crime.
  • Explain why the offenders were not legally charged with the death of Tyler Clementi.



Two or three pages with at least three references….


It is important that you cover all the topics identified in the assignment. Covering the topic does not mean mentioning the topic BUT presenting an explanation from the readings.

To get maximum points you need to follow the requirements listed for this assignments 1) look at the page limits 2) review and follow APA rules 3) create SUBHEADINGS to identify the key sections you are presenting and 4) Free from typographical and sentence construction errors.


Readings

  • Course Text: Taylor, R. W., Fritsch, E. J., & Liederbach, J. (2015). Digital crime and digital terrorism. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
    • Chapter 9, “Anarchy and Hate on the World Wide Web”
  • Article: Bailey, J. (2004). Private regulation and public policy: Toward effective restriction of Internet hate propaganda. McGill Law Journal, 49(1), 59–103.
        
  • Article: Foderaro, L. W. (2010, September 29). Private moment made public, then a fatal jump. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/30/nyregion/30suicide.html
  • Article: Guichard, A. (2009). Hate crime in cyberspace: The challenges of substantive criminal law. Information & Communications Technology Law, 18(2), 201–234.
        
  • Article: Hu, W. (2010, October 2). Legal debate swirls over charges in a student’s suicide. The New York Times, p. A15.
        
  • Article: Perry, B., & Olsson, P. (2009). Cyberhate: The globalization of hate. Information & Communications Technology Law, 18(2), 185–199.
       

Website

  • Article: International Network Against CyberHate (INACH). (n.d.). Retrieved December 15, 2011, from http://www.inach.net
  • Article: Goldsborough, R. (2001). Dealing with hate on the Internet. Teacher Librarian, 29(1), 46.
        
  • Article: Nemes, I. (2002). Regulating hate speech in cyberspace: Issues of desirability and efficacy. Information & Communications Technology Law, 11(3), 193–220.
        
  • Article: Tsesis, A. (2001). Hate in cyberspace: Regulating hate speech on the Internet. San Diego Law Review, 38(3), 817.