A YouTuber in Beverly Hills was shot by a security guard while filming in front of a synagogue yesterday.
The YouTuber, a self-described first-amendment activist, was apparently confronting the security guard after he pulled out a weapon for reasons that remain unclear from the video.
What transpires is little more than an assault with a deadly weapon. After questioning from the YouTuber, Zhoie Perez, security guard Edduin Zelayagrunfeld discharged his weapon and grazed the streamer with a bullet that caused a wound requiring medical attention.
After shooting the YouTuber outside of Etz Jacob Congregation/Ohel Chana High School, the security guard can be heard saying that it was only a warning shot.
Word to the wise: In the United States, a warning shot is typically not legal, but especially when it actually hits someone. That’s called a shooting.
Zhoie Perez claims that, “The guard came out and just started freaking out, started putting his hand on his gun,” and that, further, a gate separated the guard from the YouTuber so it wasn’t like he was in imminent danger.
According to the Sacramento Bee, the guard said, “I shot at the floor.”
Following the shooting, the guard can either be heard saying “You are nothing” or “You are a Nazi,” though the Internet commentariat is divided as to what Zelaygrunfeld is saying. Regardless, neither one will sound good in court.
Initially, police questioned the YouTuber and seemed to side with the guard but, after investigation, the guard was placed under arrest.
If you’d like to watch the video (it’s almost 40 minutes long), you can do so here on YouTube (warning: someone does get shot though it’s nearly impossible to see anything).
Naturally, if you’ve got some thoughts on this, we’d love to hear from you in the comments.
After the attack on an Oakcreek Sikh Temple here in Wisconsin, security is pretty serious business. Filmmaking or picture taking around a facility is one of the things guards are taught is a sign of terrorist surveillance. Testing the guards’ reaction is another. I think the you tuber should go have his fun somewhere else, especially after the Pittsburgh shooting. Maybe he should try the navy base down the road once he gets patched up unless he’s learned a lesson about Darwin’s theory of nature weeding out the stupid.
I agree that the actions of the filmmaker weren’t very wise. Thank you for your comment :).
The full video is not posted! Like most one sided stories the video does not show what happened before the confrontation. Just because you can yell “FIRE” does not mean you do it in a crowded theater. Same logic is applied here. Since filming a potential target has been a pre-incident indicator of terrorism for over 40 years, Filming a school any where should result in someone asking what are your doing? A true “first amendment activist” would be looking for examples of the government or the media infring on our free speach. In this case, the activist (read person trying to create controversy so they can feel important) exposed their own ignorance and lack of sensitivity given to protecting children these days. Yes guards every where will receive more training about “warning shots” I guess we can thank you for that. Well I wish this activist well and hope they enjoy the rest of their life on severial watch lists. Good luck trying to fly any place, down load information, get a FAA permit for a drone. The men in black will be watching you for years to come. But in the end, that’s what you really wanted anyway. What a shame you had to involve children in your selfishness.
Yes – I noticed that when I watched it that it definitely seems captured mid-action. Likely if any court action ensues the full video – if it exists – will be part of the evidence. Thank you for your comment :).
I am a former US Marshal and graduate of two police academies, etc.
While what this photographer was doing was completely legal, it was not wise. Just because I CAN do something doesn’t mean that I SHOULD. The whole idea of these “first amendment auditors” is to provoke a reaction, positive or negative. I understand that they claim they are just seeing whether others are aware of the auditor’s constitutional rights— but instead of trying to provoke a reaction, why not leave the camera at home and just hand out a flyer explaining the law?
While the actions of the auditor were within the law, the actions of the guard were not only equally stupid but also plainly illegal. By pulling out his weapon without there being any obvious clear and present danger, an immediate threat to anyone’s life, he committed an assault and by firing a shot he committed a battery. I will be very surprised if he does not get some jail time out of this.
Bottom line, when you have two people, both of whom are acting stupid, and one of them is armed, this is the kind of result that is likely. to happen.
Thank you for your insights Paul. I agree, restraint is probably wise when firearms are involved. 🙂