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

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Uh… the guy who shot the YouTuber isn’t being punished; they found him not guilty. The YouTuber isn’t being punished because this case wasn’t about his actions, it was about the dude who shot him. He’s not being rewarded, though.

    The only weird part about the ruling is the jury wants to convict on the “gun charges” (that’s what the article referenced, doesn’t say what that means) but acquitted him on the shooting.

    • Breezy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The victim is being punished! He is recieving a felony for protecting himself just because it took place in a building. And that dumb youtuber was rewarded by having his followers almost double after the fact, which equates to more money, while the victim is sitting in jail.

    • athos77@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The only weird part about the ruling is the jury wants to convict on the “gun charges” (that’s what the article referenced, doesn’t say what that means) but acquitted him on the shooting.

      The original three charges (I don’t know if any were modified later) were “aggravated malicious wounding, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony, and discharging a firearm within a building”. In Virginia, use of a firearm in the commission of a felony acts as a multiplier charge for malicious wounding. My guess is that he was acquitted of malicious wounding and use of a firearm in commission of a felony, and convicted of discharging a firearm inside a building.