It doesn't matter whether he's a good person or not. The law is the law. And I don't think the case was just built on the comments he made and the posting of the video online. The actions he did when he accosted the girl on the day can be seen as clearly violating the penal code.
I don't understand why he didn't just plead guilty. He didn't know that his actions were illegal at the time. It's a bit unfair in that respect as to Dan's credit he tends to be law abiding when he knows what the rules are. He hasn't accosted women since he was issued a court order to not film people without their consent.
But instead of citing ignorance of the law as his reason for his behavior, Dan tried to fight the charge and argue that would he did was normal and should be socially acceptable.
It's probably best for society that Dan went down this road though. There were a lot of complaints made about Dan when he was doing his accosting 'marathons' but, for a long time, law enforcement was powerless to do anything as Dan wasn't technically breaking any laws. Now though the people of downtown LA have had a win. In regards to the court order, whenever the official trial date kept being postponed I thought it may be so they can keep the order in effect for as long as possible.
The question is will any of this make Dan reflect on his behavior that was annoying a lot of people? Dan doesn't seem able to look a things from a different point of view besides his own. One case in point that sticks in my mind is when Dan refused to delete the footage he took of a couple kissing in the park. Dan doesn't tend to care as long as he is not being unlawful.
So, is this a wake up call for Dan or is he just going to cement himself further into his own world where he believes society is incapacitated by gluten?
