<p>
That’s a lie. He could have pleaded “no contest” which is essentially a statement that you are accepting the consequences of a guilty plea without admitting guilt; and the the statute does not have the word “hatred” in it, nor does it require that the person have “hatred” or bias toward all members of a class. You can read the law here: [New</a> Jersey Statute Directory - NJSA 2C:16-1. Bias intimidation.](<a href=“http://nj-statute-info.com/getStatute.php?statute_id=1576]New”>New Jersey Statute Directory - NJSA 2C:16-1. Bias intimidation.) </p>
<p>The above statement attribute to Ravi is just one more example of rationalization & refusal to accept responsibility for what he did – which was to invade his roommates privacy and ridicule him because of something associated with his gayness. </p>
<p>It’s not much different than the Trevon Martin case, where a young black man was seen as suspicious because he was black – we can even hear the 911 tape documenting that – but the shooter’s father & lawyer are making statements that he is not a a racist - he has black friends, he comes from an interracial extended family, etc.</p>
<p>A person can act in a biased way towards some individuals, based on their status, without necessarily being overtly biased toward that class as a whole. If, for example, a male employer says he likes and enjoys the company of women – and his social life clearly demonstrates that – but he refuses to hire or promote women to management positions because he believes that men are more suited to positions of leadership – then that individual would be showing a clear “bias” – but certainly not a hatred. His bias wouldn’t make him a misogynist – just a male with a bias that is fairly common in work place environment – and the reason that we have anti-discrimination laws is precisely because those biases are pervasive enough to cause serious harm. </p>
<p>I didn’t watch the 20/20 segment but unless that young man took responsibility for his actions and admitted that he was wrong, it sounds to me like excuse-making and rationalization, and all the more reason why the NJ law is appropriate. Eventually the message will get through: it is not ok to harass, tease, or humiliate others because of their race, color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity. </p>
<p>Ravi was offered the opportunity to acknowledge that he got that message – and avoid any possibility of jail time – before the case went to trial. Apparently even after having been convicted, he has yet to understand the message.</p>