Commonwealth v. A.Y.

A pizza delivery man in Germantown called 911 after allegedly being robbed at gunpoint while working. The victim claimed that he was given a fake 100 bill in exchange for pizza and the change on the bill. A.Y. then allegedly threatened the victim with a shotgun. Police were called immediately, and after tracing phone records, A.Y. was identified as the perpetrator in a photo array, and again in court. At trial the defense produced detailed call records that showed that the victim called A.Y 13 times after the alleged robbery offense, and after 911 was called, which belied his claim that he was scared of A.Y. and that anything was taken at gunpoint. On cross examination at trial, it was revealed that the delivery man had been duped by counterfeit bills on more than one occasion, and his boss had warned him that if it happened again he would be responsible for the total loss. The victim acknowledged that since he was able to produce a police report to his boss he was not required to cover the loss. Philly’s top defense lawyer argued that the phone records of numerous calls showed that he tried unsuccessfully to get the money back, and that if he had truly been robbed at gunpoint he never would have called A.Y. back. A.Y. was found guilty only of misdemeanour theft and received a sentence of probation, which was a huge reduction from the 5 to 10 year sentence the DA had “offered” pre-trial.