537

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 comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

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

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.

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago

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?

[-] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

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

[-] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

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.

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

In that one I think ol' zimmy kinda deserved it and I wasn't happy with the charges/trial results.

I don't think it's the same at all, though. Zimmerman was the OG aggressor. He fucked around, found out and got butthurt and killed a kid.

[-] JoeBigelow@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

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?

[-] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

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

this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
537 points (100.0% liked)

News

22926 readers
3423 users here now

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.


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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS