A jury has found a delivery driver not guilty in the shooting of a YouTube prankster who was following him around a mall food court earlier this year

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
-18 points

Pulling out a gun should have a VERY HIGH bar. This kid is clearly an idiot but was the bar high enough to kill him?

permalink
report
reply
-6 points

I am not a lawyer. So everything I say could be wrong and every state is different but generally I think there’s a five point test for claims of self defense: Avoidance, Innocence, Imminence, Proportionality, and Reasonableness.

Avoidance is moot because I think this is Virginia and I think they have a no-retreat provision. Innocence is just that you didn’t willingly engage in a fight that got out of control. So that applies. Imminence applies because it happened in the moment. I just don’t see how Proportionality applies here. I just don’t see how holding a cell phone is proportional to a shooting. Emotionally I get it that the YouTuber is a major jerkwad and may have deserved a comeuppance. But I don’t think the jury followed the law.

I’m not a lawyer. Everything I said there could be wrong

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

I’m happy he didn’t die over this, but I’m also kind of happy he got a little fucked up over it.

I tend to think about these situations with small people as the initial victim. How far should a smaller person or woman let something go before they can defend themselves? If the person is way, way bigger, do you just have to let yourself get beat?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

I honestly don’t know what the right answer is here. I don’t like that it seems like it’s easier to shoot someone because of a threatening feeling. This makes me think of Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman. People will say these are completely unrelated cases but both involved a shooting and a claim of self defense. Again I don’t know what the answer is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

He’s still making videos, so apparently he didn’t actually learn anything from the experience

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Looks like someone has paid attention to Andrew Branca @ The Law of Self Defense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

No I’ve never heard of him. I just quickly researched self defense law.

permalink
report
parent
reply

I kinda waver on reasonableness for cases like this but I generally think using a weapon against an unarmed aggressor is reasonable when there is a significant size disparity or a disability or something like that. In this case the “prankster” was significantly larger and had a group of friends with him so I don’t think it’s out of the question that the use of a gun for defense is reasonable in this situation.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

If the defendant has been carrying a less lethal self defense measure, such as a taser, mace, or a baton, and had used that to defend himself, would you see that as more proportional?

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

I honestly don’t know. Emotionally I agree with the verdict but intellectually I question it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

Running a youtube prank channel should justify a drone strike.

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

I’d watch the prankster-drone strike channel though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

Can the narrator be the cart narcs guy?

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

From the description of the incident, it definitely sounded like he feared for his life. A 6 foot something guy keeps advancing on him, asking why he’s thinking of the guy’s penis. He tells the guy to leave him alone multiple times, but the guy keeps advancing. He retreats multiple times, but the guy keeps at it. He even tries knocking the phone out of the guy’s hand, but the guy keeps at it.

It definitely sounds like the guy was afraid of where this was going and tried all of the non-lethal options (retreat, tell the person to stop) before resorting to pulling out his gun. The YouTube “pranker” has nobody to blame but himself. He should have stopped when asked instead of repeatedly pressing the defendant for a YouTube “prank” video.

(I use “prank” in quotes because I don’t consider this type of thing a real prank. It’s just a guy acting like an idiot and calling it “a prank.” A real prank should leave all involved laughing when it’s revealed, not leave one person fearing for their life.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-37 points

He was in a public food court at a mall during lunch

permalink
report
parent
reply
50 points

Oh true. Violent acts had never happened in a food court before! /s

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points

And?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I’ve been robbed at a busy, open public library with a gaggle of elementary kids literally 15ft away. Being in public ain’t the deterrent you think it is.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

So was Dominic Billa.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points
*

Well like the article said, he fucked up by shooting immediately after drawing the weapon, instead of giving Cook (the YouTuber) a chance to see the gun and finally back off. I agree with their decision to keep him in jail because of that one simple fact. The guy should have warned him that he was going to shoot if Cook didn’t back down.

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*

This is wrong and will firmly land you on the wrong side of the law in many places. Pulling a gun is a last resort to defend yourself when de-escalation doesn’t work. You pull the gun when you’ve already determined that you have to fire it. Otherwise you’re just escalating and making the situation more dangerous for yourself and any bystanders. This is also why I don’t carry a gun in the first place even though I might legally be allowed to.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

From the description of the incident, it definitely sounded like he feared for his life.

No it fucking doesn’t. The whole thing lasted less than 30 seconds and the driver never tried to retreat. He told the prankster no a few times, tried to swat the phone out of his hands, and then shot him. It’s not shocking that the jury had a difficult time coming up with a verdict.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

The driver did try to retreat:

In the video, Colie says “stop” three different times and tries to back away from Cook, who continues to advance.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

No one was killed, so…

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

the whole point of firearms is that it’s deadly force. you can’t fire one at a person without being ready to take their life because it’s always a likely outcome.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points
*

But no one was killed. You can’t put a person in jail for shooting at someone else assuming that their intent was to kill.

This is coming from someone who despise the idea of owning a gun.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

I guess not according to Lemmy, lol. I don’t care if the youtuber was. the size of Shaq, you can’t just shoot someone for showing a phone in your face not even if he is following you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

What would you have done in that situation?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points
*

Walked away, if necessary run away? Maybe throw a punch?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

He did try to back away. And punching someone significantly larger than oneself is generally unwise.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-13 points

This sounds like jury nullification more than an actual legal judgment.

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 20K

    Posts

  • 524K

    Comments