Application: Tyler Clementi, science homework help

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.