A YouTube prankster who was shot by one his targets told jurors Tuesday he had no inkling he had scared or angered the man who fired on him as the prank was recorded.

Tanner Cook, whose “Classified Goons” channel on YouTube has more than 55,000 subscribers, testified nonchalantly about the shooting at start of the trial for 31-year-old Alan Colie, who’s charged with aggravated malicious wounding and two firearms counts.

The April 2 shooting at the food court in Dulles Town Center, about 45 minutes west of Washington, D.C., set off a panic as shoppers fled what they feared to be a mass shooting.

Jurors also saw video of the shooting, recorded by Cook’s associates. The two interacted for less than 30 seconds. Video shows Cook approaching Colie, a DoorDash driver, as he picked up an order. The 6-foot-5 (1.95-meter-tall) Cook looms over Colie while holding a cellphone about 6 inches (15 centimeters) from Colie’s face. The phone broadcasts the phrase “Hey dips—-, quit thinking about my twinkle” multiple times through a Google Translate app.

On the video, Colie says “stop” three different times and tries to back away from Cook, who continues to advance. Colie tries to knock the phone away from his face before pulling out a gun and shooting Cook in the lower left chest.

Cook, 21, testified Tuesday that he tries to confuse the targets of his pranks for the amusement of his online audience. He said he doesn’t seek to elicit fear or anger, but acknowledged his targets often react that way.

Asked why he didn’t stop the prank despite Colie’s repeated requests, Cook said he “almost did” but not because he sensed fear or anger from Colie. He said Colie simply wasn’t exhibiting the type of reaction Cook was looking for.

“There was no reaction,” Cook said.

In opening statements, prosecutors urged jurors to set aside the off-putting nature of Cook’s pranks.

“It was stupid. It was silly. And you may even think it was offensive,” prosecutor Pamela Jones said. “But that’s all it was — a cellphone in the ear that got Tanner shot.”

Defense attorney Tabatha Blake said her client didn’t have the benefit of knowing he was a prank victim when he was confronted with Cook’s confusing behavior.

She said the prosecution’s account of the incident “diminishes how unsettling they were to Mr. Alan Colie at the time they occurred.”

In the video, before the encounter with Colie, Cook and his friends can be heard workshopping the phrase they want to play on the phone. One of the friends urges that it be “short, weird and awkward.”

Cook’s “Classified Goons” channel is replete with repellent stunts, like pretending to vomit on Uber drivers and following unsuspecting customers through department stores. At a preliminary hearing, sheriff’s deputies testified that they were well aware of Cook and have received calls about previous stunts. Cook acknowledged during cross-examination Tuesday that mall security had tossed him out the day prior to the shooting as he tried to record pranks and that he was trying to avoid security the day he targeted Colie.

Jury selection took an entire day Monday, largely because of publicity the case received in the area. At least one juror said during the selection process that she herself had been a victim of one of Cook’s videos.

Cook said he continues to make the videos and earns $2,000 or $3,000 a month. His subscriber base increased from 39,000 before the shooting to 55,000 after.

  • SSUPII
    link
    fedilink
    13
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    The person who shot did it directly, without actually showing what was he carrying. Just showing the gun would have had a better effect with no injuries and no arrest, and that already is going over the top.

    You are an asshole for defending getting hurt for this. I want to assume you would not be so eager to go against the kid if it was your family member.

    • teft
      link
      fedilink
      352 years ago

      Just showing the gun is called brandishing and is illegal. You don’t announce you have a weapon before you shoot someone because you could get shot if you do.

      You are an asshole defending an asshole.

      • SSUPII
        link
        fedilink
        62 years ago

        I didn’t say it was not criminal, only that it would have had no injuries.

      • SSUPII
        link
        fedilink
        82 years ago

        And in what backwards world are you living where someone had to risk his life for this. The prankster should be punished for harassment, but doesn’t leave the fact that someone SHOT HIM FOR THAT. Nobody should be shot in a situation like this, period.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          242 years ago

          Nobody was risking their life, the “prankster” was threatening someone in public. I normally am entirely anti-gun, but this was a completely logical use of force to stop someone who you believe is attacking you.

          • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            Subjective belief isn’t justification. There were zero verbal or physical threats and plenty of room to just walk the fuck away.

            Lethal force is only moral or legal when there is an imminent threat to your life that is subjectively and objectively reasonable.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              202 years ago

              There was absolutely threats. Coming at someone, shoving a phone in their face and aggressively speaking in an unfamiliar language absolutely is a threat.

          • SSUPII
            link
            fedilink
            4
            edit-2
            2 years ago

            I can see that completely too. In fact you nailed my problem and that is with the usage of the gun, nothing else.

            The prankster did absolutely wrong, I never tried to reduce that. But at the same time, was there really no other way to manage the situation? I want to wish there was, but at the same time also cannot know and very likely wasn’t. Still, it won’t remove me from being disappointed that it had to end in injury.

              • SSUPII
                link
                fedilink
                32 years ago

                No doubt at that too. But I was aiming at a security person being nearby, or the food shop this happened nearby. This possible being unreliable if another thing.

                If there was really no other choice as i am being made very clear, I of course cannot say anything and would agree.

                Also in the example you just did I can say the same, cannot say anything and won’t if no other safe option was available.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  142 years ago

                  The “prankster” was kicked out by security the day before and was actively avoiding areas with security on the day of the event. It’s unreasonable to expect someone being attacked not to defend themselves. It’s victim blaming to even imply the shooter did anything wrong here.

                  • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
                    link
                    fedilink
                    3
                    edit-2
                    2 years ago

                    You sound like a bootlicker.

                    The right to use self defense doesn’t mean you get to just jump to lethal force.

                    The dude did nothing wrong? Why was he arrested and on trial for criminal attempt* homicide and gun use charges*? Seems at least the prosecution and I disagree with you.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      352 years ago

      Yeah, I can’t believe that while being threatened by a large, erratically acting man, he didn’t think to calmly try to defuse the situation/s

      • SSUPII
        link
        fedilink
        52 years ago

        There are ways to defuse a situation not entirely calmly without firing a gun.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          362 years ago

          Like saying stop multiple times and trying to back away? Hey look, he did that and the asshole kept advancing towards him.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          372 years ago

          Like the multiple attempts to tell him to stop and back off which were ignored?

          Maybe if more of them got shot these stupid ass “prank” YouTubers will stop harassing people in public

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      202 years ago

      Just showing the gun is legally perilous. It’s a felony called brandishing and diminishes a self defense case. According to the laws and court rulings you are supposed to to keep it holstered until you need it.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        It’s legal to brandish your weapon in self-defense.

        If it’s legal to shoot someone in a certain self-defense situation, it would also be considered legal to brandish a firearm instead.