If he's videotaping, and not actively trying to stop them, then he's as guilty as they are, in my opinion.
Its one thing, if they start doing it, and he's in the car. And there's not much he can do about it. But the one I saw the videographer was very gleeful as they shot people with paintball guns (there's been more than one time its happened).
Just videotaping?
Not just videotaping, but participating, and not attempting to stop the others - apparently that *was* a function of his plea bargain, he didn't shoot anybody himself, and he'd testify, and get a reduced sentance.
On the other hand, if they shot someone in the face and (say) injured someone's eyes, then I'd throw the book at them.
But if he *just* videotaped them doing that?
See, you're making a distinction on what happened. If he'd videoed them when they did severe damage, then throw the book, but if it was a harmless prank..
It was also luck that they *didn't* (I don't thnik they did), but that's the sort of thing that VERY easily could have had a problem, with exactly that. I don't know the extent of the damage, but I don't have a problem with ignoring that they got "lucky" and didn't hurt anybody severely, in order to make DAMN SURE that everybody else knows that you're ass is grass if they catch you doing it.
The solitary... Well, that's somewhat justified, because of his own safety. I mean, they *could* toss him into GenPop...
Addison