What Dharun Ravi did was wrong, but will justice be done if this young man serves a ten year prison term for the wrong he did, is clearly debatable! If punishment accorded to the
guilty in a court of justice aims to improve society, then the Dharun Ravi case does not appear to qualify.
By definition, society is a work in progress. With the passage
of time social norms change, as does the social ethos, especially when new ideas
and trends make their way into society; women’s suffrage was one such idea, cinema was another, and in recent times it is the advent of the internet that provides quick and easy dissemination of news and information.
Our society is blanketed by this technology, and at times reels under its weight, especially that part of society housing the forty
plus age group. However, the same is not true about the younger generation; they have become adept users of trendy technology and at times use it with indiscretion, as did young Dharun Ravi. Youth by definition is
foolhardy, and oftentimes falls prey to bravado and peer pressure; this may
have been the case with the eighteen year old in question.
It isn’t just the fast changing technology, but also new ideas and new trends that frazzle us. One such trend being the need to acknowledge
and recognize gay and lesbian rights unequivocally, and as a nation we are
still grappling with this trend. I say grappling because until
2004, same-sex couples couldn’t wed anywhere in the country; however, now, gay
marriage is legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, Maine and most recently New Hampshire. Nonetheless, it is still
6 states out of 50 that have a clear resolution on gay and lesbian
relationships! In the light of this
statistic, would it be fair to expect an eighteen year old Dharun Ravi to be
nonchalant about what he witnessed in his dorm room?
Clearly, Dharun Ravi’s case
illustrates the limitations of a justice system that along with a puritanical bias
often times selects juries with limited exposure to advanced technology; the Dharun Ravi case is an example. The wrong of Dharun Ravi is ‘modern’ by
definition; nevertheless, deserves punishment as it embeds a wrong, but it also showcases the ills and challenges of the 21st
century which will not be recognized or/and addressed even after Dharun is sentenced because the justice system lacks the know how. Unfortunately, it is still wearing blinders from the century before. Our justice system, like our society, has
some growing up to do, and expeditiously, so that offenders such as
Dharun Ravi will receive punishment that is crime appropriate.
Every now and again society is confronted with an idea or event that is avant-garde, and it is then that the flexibility and adaptability of a society is tested; the Dharun Ravi case is doing just that. The question here is not whether Dharun Ravi committed a crime with bias; maybe he did, but where did the bias stem from? Is this young man's proclivity unique to him, or do we all share in this prejudice which we often hide by feigning ambivalence? This, is the more significant question the jury and the justice system need to address: Do our fellow gays and lesbians enjoy equal status in society? Until we, as a society, provide an unequivocal answer to that question, we cannot conclusively sentence a Dharun Ravi whose wrongdoing mirrors the predisposition of his family, his immediate community, and this society at large. His biases, his thinking or his lack thereof, are a direct reflection of his environment, and yet he, an eigteen year old just out of high school, alone stands trial. Dharun Ravi is scheduled to be sentenced in May this year, and the chances are he will be put behind bars, for a couple of years at least, with hardened criminals, and all this while a felonious society looks on. Dharun Ravi's wrong doing, a 'webcam case' of invading a dorm-mate's privacy, could well have been regarded as a teenage prank, were it not so closely associated with the larger issue of gay and lesbian relationships about which we as a society are still 'ambivalent'.
Every now and again society is confronted with an idea or event that is avant-garde, and it is then that the flexibility and adaptability of a society is tested; the Dharun Ravi case is doing just that. The question here is not whether Dharun Ravi committed a crime with bias; maybe he did, but where did the bias stem from? Is this young man's proclivity unique to him, or do we all share in this prejudice which we often hide by feigning ambivalence? This, is the more significant question the jury and the justice system need to address: Do our fellow gays and lesbians enjoy equal status in society? Until we, as a society, provide an unequivocal answer to that question, we cannot conclusively sentence a Dharun Ravi whose wrongdoing mirrors the predisposition of his family, his immediate community, and this society at large. His biases, his thinking or his lack thereof, are a direct reflection of his environment, and yet he, an eigteen year old just out of high school, alone stands trial. Dharun Ravi is scheduled to be sentenced in May this year, and the chances are he will be put behind bars, for a couple of years at least, with hardened criminals, and all this while a felonious society looks on. Dharun Ravi's wrong doing, a 'webcam case' of invading a dorm-mate's privacy, could well have been regarded as a teenage prank, were it not so closely associated with the larger issue of gay and lesbian relationships about which we as a society are still 'ambivalent'.
