Thoughts on Virginia food delivery driver shooting of Youtube "influencer" prankster Classified Goons

[OldIronFan]

Had not seen this one discussed here.
Good guy with a gun or the worst example of a self defense shooting ever? What say you?

As much as I think the YouTube influencer is a moron, as are most social media "influencers", and deserved a good punch in the face the shooter was in the wrong here. I don't think there is a good claim for fear of bodily harm or death here. The YouTuber had no visible weapon other than a cell phone screen and while you could consider his actions aggressively annoying they were not aggressive enough to warrant deadly force in my opinion. The video shows Colie (shooter) pause and face the Cook (YouTube moron) with the cell phone before they began to move and he swipes at the phone and Cook's hand. Colie then partially turns his back to Cook and begins to walk away. While Cook does continue to pursue Colie and hold out his phone he does not make any other moves that I would consider threatening. 
 

After four days of testimony and jury deliberations the jury returned its verdicts guilty of discharging a firearm within a building (Class 6 felony) and not guilty of the more serious charge of aggravated malicious wounding (Class 2 felony) and not guilty of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony (unclassified felony). Colie has been incarcerated since the time of the incident on April 2nd. I believe I read the sentence for the charge of discharging a firearm within an occupied building in Virginia is 2 to 10 years but I can not find that link now.

Pending any changes during post verdict legal maneuverings and the actual sentencing I my gut reaction is he is getting off a bit light. Now if the Judge comes back with a full 10 year sentence and he serves 5+ before parole that might be about right. 
Do you think you would you have acquitted or found him guilty if you were on the jury? 
What do you think the acceptable sentence should be (if any) for Colie?

 

I don't think either of these are behind a paywall. 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/sep/30/delivery-driver-youtube-prankster-shooting-not-guilty

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/northern-virginia/video-shows-encounter-between-youtube-prankster-and-food-delivery-driver-who-shot-him/3433999/
 

[crc4]

Andrew Branca just covered this.

Delivery Guy Shoots Unarmed Prankster

If you want to know all the legal aspects of a lawful self-defense action, Andrew Branca is the expert.

[Grayfox54]

JMHO: Cook not only deserved, but was in dire need, of a good azz whoopin'. But there were no grounds to shoot him. 

OTOH, Cook is a good bit bigger and just kept getting in Colie's face. I can see where he would be intimidated. Fear is a powerful motivator. My guess is that fear won out over common sense. 

I will say that if somebody was to get in my face like that, I won't shoot you, but I will make you regret it. 

 

[Chucktshoes]

Cook played a game of FA and he FO. 
 

Colie was in a position of being advanced upon by two people, one of which was significantly larger and acting in a very confusing, undeniably aggressive and abnormal manner. He was retreating and voicing his desire for Cook to stop. Fear and confusion were evident in his voice to me on the tape.

 I believe the jury made the right decision as Colie was in a position of being on the negative end of a disparity of force equation. His belief of being at risk of great bodily harm or death I view as entirely reasonable.

[TripleGGG]

I believe the jury got lt right.  Each person has different levels of fear. Have that same event happen at midnight in a dark parking lot, what would be the expected results. 

I also think Cook should be charged. I know if someone is in my face like that, I may get my ass whooped, but they will damn sure know I was there. 

[peejman]

 

[crc4]

Now the questions for Colie is, "Was it worth it?" You've been in jail since April 2, you've racked up tens of thousands in legal bills, you'll be civilly sued (and lose), and it will be hard to get another job.

Plus, you're still facing a couple to ten years in prison.

Was it worth it?

 

 

[Chucktshoes]

8 minutes ago, crc4 said:

Now the questions for Colie is, "Was it worth it?" You've been in jail since April 2, you've racked up tens of thousands in legal bills, you'll be civilly sued (and lose), and it will be hard to get another job.

Plus, you're still facing a couple to ten years in prison.

Was it worth it?

 

 

His lawyers have filed a motion that the acquittal on grounds of self defense on the primary charge precludes the guilty verdict on that particular charge. There will be a hearing about having that verdict set aside at a later date. Personally, I hope it goes his way.
 

It’s a good idea to remember that we are able to look at this with the full knowledge of who Cook is. Colie didn’t have that luxury in the moment. An often repeated mantra in the EDC/Self-Defense world is “better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6”. So that’s the situation he’s found himself in, getting judged by 12. It may be a little simplistic, but it’s good to remember that it’s essentially the choice he argued he was making in the moment.

I think that the real takeaway for folks here is that you need to have something in your arsenal between a harsh word and a bullet. 

[Guest]

9 hours ago, crc4 said:

Now the questions for Colie is, "Was it worth it?" You've been in jail since April 2, you've racked up tens of thousands in legal bills, you'll be civilly sued (and lose), and it will be hard to get another job.

Plus, you're still facing a couple to ten years in prison.

Was it worth it?

 

 

That could be a question that might haunt him every night, except if he is always able to come back around to that moment, and re-decide for HIMself that he made the right call at that moment in time, for himself. He's the guy that has to look in the mirror.

As for Cook? Yes, he certainly did FA & FO. In a more just society, guys like Cook would bear the full weight of all criminal charges AND carry the scar, as an abject lesson to others and a reminder to himself.  (To STOP with the FA-FO stuff!)

[Erik88]

Getting in someone's face with a cell phone does not warrant deadly force. This guy is extremely lucky he was found not guilty. 

Watching him pop that guy in the stomach was extremely satisfying though. I'm glad he isn't going to prison for that even though I think he made a mistake. 

 

 

[crc4]

Two things worked in Colie's favor.

1. He was in Virginia. In many other states and cities, he would have been found guilty.

2. His attackers were white. Had they been black, he would have been facing an uphill battle. Imagine the typical race arsonists like Crump and Sharpton playing the always present race cards. Riots and looting would have occurred the moment he was found not guilty and most likely before the trial.

On Colie's last charge that he's facing, I believe it will be dismissed as it should have been when he was found not guilty of the two other felony charges.

 

[OldIronFan]

On 10/2/2023 at 3:35 PM, crc4 said:

Andrew Branca just covered this.

Delivery Guy Shoots Unarmed Prankster

If you want to know all the legal aspects of a lawful self-defense action, Andrew Branca is the expert.

I can only take so much shilling for his classes so I have only watched 75% of the video so far as I have had a spare 5 or 10 minutes. Branca is the king of turning a 15 minute video into a 1hr and 15 minute video. 

Branca himself states that a reasonable jury could have gone either way in this case based upon what he knew of it. If we follow his 5 key building blocks of self defense; Innocence, Immanence, Proportionality, Avoidance, and Reasonableness we can all likely come to slightly different legal conclusions. 

1. Innocence - Not much ambiguity here. Colie was an innocent party in the situation. We see nothing in the video or his demeanor that would indicate he was a willing or actively engaged in the interaction. 

2. Immanence - Again not much to argue over here by Branca's analysis. If you were to interpret the law to mean that  immanence requires the threat be present and immediate you could easily argue there was not threat of deadly harm by Cook.  

3. Proportionality - Branca seems to define this as the size difference between the parties involved and the number of individuals on both sides of the interaction. Clearly Cook is physically larger than Colie and with both is videographer and sidekick they outnumber Colie. So if you agree with Branca's definitions and principles than there is not much to argue over here. If you interpret proportionality as a proportional response things are less clear. 

4. Avoidance - As Branca states Virginia also has a "no retreat" or more commonly know as a "stand your ground" law, which means you are not required to "retreat", in other words try to escape, prior to using self defense, under certain circumstances. He does state that their law is not as clear as some other states,  such as Florida or Texas. Colie may not have had a legal requirement to retreat but he certainly could have and it could be argued he had a moral obligation to do so. Colie stops, turns, and at least partially faces Cook not once but twice in the video. He did have able opportunity to simply walk away. Cook does not appear to block or detain Colie, he only follows him. 

5. Reasonableness - Here is where I think the holes in Branca's analysis lie. Would a reasonable person fear for their life in this encounter? Would a reasonable person see a threat of deadly or serious bodily harm in this encounter? Was Colie's response to the encounter reasonable?
I do not see a threat of deadly or serious bodily harm in this video until Colie pulls his weapon and fires. Cook does not at any time verbally threaten Colie. Cook at no time presents a weapon, closed fist, or make threatening gestures. The sidekick is visibly distracted and looking down at his phone in half of the video. Again he makes no verbal threats or threating gestures. He does not present or appear to have a weapon. In fact Cook makes no effort to physically contact Colie at any time. When Colie actually reaches out to swipe Cook's phone away Cook attempts to avoid Colie's contact and promptly checks his phone again to manipulate the recording he is playing. 
I do understand that either Cook or his sidekick could have easily closed the distance to Colie at anytime and turned this into a physical altercation. At that time it clearly been self defense on Colie's part. I also understand that for a person of Colie's size his ability to defend himself would have been greatly reduced if it became a physical altercation. I still don't think it was reasonable for Colie to consider Cooks movements and actions as a threat of deadly or serious bodily harm.

Where do we draw that "reasonable" line? Take YouTube and cell phones out of the equation. If Cook was a protester standing in your path waving a sign in your face and shouting something at you would you draw your weapon and shoot them? If you turn and walk away and they walk to follow you as Cook did would you then draw your weapon and shoot? If you physically tried to push the sign out of your face and they tried to hold the sign back in your field of vision would you shoot them then? I would argue that a sign on a wooden or metal pole/stake would be a much more effective weapon than say a cell phone or fist but I doubt anyone would be advocating for the shooting of protestors. 

What if it was a picket line worker? They are have been known to actually make threats or be verbally abusive to management or scabs crossing the line. They actually do stand in the way and attempt to impend others movements. They often outnumber the management and scabs by a significant margin. Would you advocate for a non union worker to shoot a picketer impeding their movement, shouting, and sticking a sign in their face?

What if it was a "Karen" in a restaurant being verbally abusive to a member of the waitstaff? What if they were standing in their way sticking a cell phone in their face and video recoding the interaction? What if they started pursuing them all around the restaurant and continually tried to get the cell phone (camera) in the waitstaffs face while screaming about who they knew at corporate that would get them fired. Ok to shoot "Karen" when she comes by your table then? Sounds silly but Cook was not screaming, shouting, or verbally threatening Colie. He was not physically restraining Colie and he was not impleading Colie. He was sticking a cell pone in his face and repeatedly asking a nonsensical question. 
 

Edited October 4, 2023 by OldIronFan

[crc4]

8 minutes ago, OldIronFan said:

I can only take so much shilling for his classes so I have only watched 75% of the video so far as I have had a spare 5 or 10 minutes. Branca is the king of turning a 15 minute video into a 1hr and 15 minute video. 

 

I take Branca's "shilling" as marketing. He's got a make a return on  his investment. He's not working for free. Are you?

Branca does what no one else does. He presents laws, makes an analysis, and offers more and better knowledge of SD laws than anyone else.

The majority of his efforts are without cost. His book is available free with only paying shipping charges. I am a member and find that my $10 a month cost is the best money I spend on firearms training. One must train for a SD action with the knowledge of SD laws or all the range and course training with tactics you can still wind up in prison.

 

[-boatman-]

1 hour ago, OldIronFan said:

I can only take so much shilling for his classes so I have only watched 75% of the video so far as I have had a spare 5 or 10 minutes. Branca is the king of turning a 15 minute video into a 1hr and 15 minute video. 

 

I'm with you there. Just get to the point or put text of it there to read also. I haven't watched anything of his in some time.

[chances R]

Not guilty verdict will lead ( or should) invalidate the discharge case.  At least that’s the way in works in TN by statute.

[45guy]

I would not have shot the guy if it had been me. 

[chances R]

On 11/13/2023 at 11:05 PM, 45guy said:

I would not have shot the guy if it had been me. 

Me neither, but he wouldn’t have liked the pepper spray….but then again preferable to getting shot in the belly.

[Frog4aday]

Jury that heard all the evidence said not guilty (other than discharging a weapon in a bldg, or whatever exact wording was on that); I'm going to agree with the jury. They got to look people in the eye as they testified. They got a chance to hear & feel what was real & what was B.S. I'm going to trust they got it right in this case.

The real lesson here is to stop & think of an alternative level of force or way to avoid continued confrontation should one find themselves in a similar quandry. If all you have is a hammer, things start to look like nails that maybe aren't nails.

Another lesson, this one for the social media 'whores' that will do anything for clicks and views: Actions have consequences - quit screwing with people & save yourself from inevitable consequences.