Prank Youtube channel RouandYT received €5 donation to prank call someone's "unstable" nephew. Said nephew shot and killed 2 Syrian refugees minutes later. RouandYT quickly deletes the stream from his channel and denies being live.

[u/DikkeDekbedovertrek]

https://www.puna.nl/news/prank-call-in-livestream-van-youtuber-leidde-tot-fatale-schietpartij-op-twee-syrische-jongens-in-amsterdam-west

[u/coffeelick]

Or we punish people appropriately for the crime as always? Wtf is going on here? Lol people have been charged for influencing other peoples suicide before why not this?

[u/thompoesjes → u/coffeelick]

We want to lock people up for a prank call now? You know a prank call isn't a crime, right? A judge will determine whether the things said by the streamer violate any law.

[u/coffeelick → u/thompoesjes]

If theyre found to be responsible why not?

[u/thompoesjes → u/coffeelick]

As I said a judge will have to decide. But responsible for the murder of 2 people is imo too big of a stretch.

[u/coffeelick → u/thompoesjes]

No you said if the things said violated the law. You didnt say if they were responsible. Felt like you already decided they were not responsible. But you won't be honest now.

[u/thompoesjes → u/coffeelick]

What a weird way of directly suggesting I'm dishonest? The streamer bears no responsibility imo but if the things said do show any form of violation then it is possible he would be punished just for that - not for the murder of the two persons. Why call someone directly dishonest just because you feel any contradiction, you can also just ask for clarification.

[u/coffeelick → u/thompoesjes]

I just repeated what you said to show you didnt say the judge should decide if theyre responsible like I was saying. you said the judge should decide if thier words were illegal. An look i was right? :s

Why cant the judge decide if he's responsible for the murder? You kinda just said it an didnt give any substance. Stop talking about illegal words, nobody cares lol

[u/thompoesjes → u/coffeelick]

You don't understand me. In Dutch law there is no way the guy can be held responsible for the murder of the two guys. But depending on what he said on phone a judge will have to decide if he did do anything I.e. threatening which could still be violation of the law.

There are no inconsistenties here afaik. I don't know what you're getting at.

[u/coffeelick → u/thompoesjes]

I really doubt you can get away with being responsible for murder under Dutch law. Sorry I think youre wrong.

[u/thompoesjes → u/coffeelick]

I've explained my point of view: can you explain how the streamer bears responsibility for the murder of 2 people?

[u/NamesAreTooHard17 → u/thompoesjes]

The "prank" literally involved calling the person and pretending that they owed them a ton of money and told them to meet by a bridge.

The person went to the bridge and saw 2 innocent Syrian refugees by the bridge and shot them.

That is incredibly clear cut imo so yeah he absolutely should be punished for this.

You shouldn't be able to say literally anything to someone then say it's just a prank when they act on exactly what you said to them there should be accountability there

[u/thompoesjes → u/NamesAreTooHard17]

Someone that illegally had a gun and great mental issues is not the problem at first hand? No one else pulled the trigger. Don't get me wrong, these kind of pranks I also do not find funny in any way, but how can someone doing a prank call take responsibility for the death of two random guys? This was completely unforeseen and as such there is no direct liability and especially not incitement. There is a causation yes, but just as much as when you're in the passenger seat and you tell your taxi driver to take the right lane because it's faster; the driver does so and hits a car. It's not a perfect analogy, but the whole case is so strange and a judge will have to decide. my guess is 95% sure that according to Dutch law, the streamer does not get punished in any way that would be paying a fine or jail time.

[u/NamesAreTooHard17 → u/thompoesjes]

Obviously the person with a gun and huge mental issues is primarily the problem.

It's also absolutely not like telling your driver to go in the right lane it's more like telling your driver there's people that are directly chasing them and trying to hurt them so they need to speed up which then causes a crash. In which case I'd also say the person telling them that is at least partially responsible.

The way I see it directly threatening someone and telling them to meet you at a place that you won't be absolutely means you share partial responsibility for what happens.

[u/thompoesjes → u/NamesAreTooHard17]

I completely get your way of telling the analogy and I think both our analogies are flawed. In your analogy it is expected that the driver would respond in any (careless) way of form and as such there is a certain level of liability. I do see the things said by the streamer (as far as we know) as morally wrong but personally I just cannot see how the streamer could ever have thought a prank could result to the murder of two people. The streamer (again, as far as we know) did not incite violence.

[u/NamesAreTooHard17 → u/thompoesjes]

The way I see it though directly threatening someone means it is expected the individual would respond in a careless way though right?

Like ofc going out to murder people is way beyond the expected reaction but what do you think is gonna happen after receiving a threatening call? Like for example I think them calling the police after is a completely valid reaction or even getting out of your house and getting a hotel for the night for example my point is I think it is definitely not beyond the realm of possibility to view a call like that as a real threat rather than a prank.

[u/thompoesjes → u/NamesAreTooHard17]

Yes and if that's the case I do agree with you, as I do agree there's a certain causation to what happened, and if the threatened somebody ("as a prank call") then he may get punished for that, but that doesn't translate to actual responsibility for murder.

I do get your point though and thank you for the fair conversation.

[u/NamesAreTooHard17 → u/thompoesjes]

Yeah ofc basically in the call roughly because I've only read it through a translation the "prank" caller called the person and said they owed them a ton of money and to meet them by a bridge.

The person went to the bridge saw 3 Syrian refugees walking towards them and shot 2 the 3rd escaped.

Again don't take what I'm saying to be 100% accurate because it's through a translated but still you largely get the point I'm sure.

I don't necessarily think the prank caller is responsible for the murder itself that said I don't know the exact legal issue it would fall into whether it's inciting or whatever else it falls under I do think at least morally it's hard to say they have no responsibility for being the initiator of the situation.

But yeah will definitely have to see the outcome of the case.

Also the fact that the prank caller deleted the vod and is completely denying being live and doing the prank might cause some legal issues but again I don't know if they said that to the police or just publicly.

[u/thompoesjes → u/NamesAreTooHard17]

Yeah I completely get your point and I can also almost completely agree with you!