No. You called it right that this would be victim blaming, but another word for it is gaslighting. Van Wyck instigated the incident, and Van Wyck escalated it into a physical confrontation on his own. Full stop. Nippard having his guy record as Nippard went to get clarification from Van Wyck as to what he meant was prudent as it guaranteed Nippard had an accurate record of the interaction for law enforcement if it were needed.I'm going to do a little "victim blaming" here. Not that I think Wyck's actions are excusable. Isn't Nippard—by tellling his camera man to keep filming "in case... funny business"—essentially admitting whatever he planned was going to result in an altercation?
Van Wyck is an abusive, toxic individual who relies on verbal and physical bullying and intimidation. Van Wyck's apologists are in fact enabling his bad behavior and every bit as much of the problem as Van Wyck himself. People who are abusive to others only feel empowered to be abusive when others around them help them blame their victims.
For fuck's sake! Is having a dash cam going during a traffic stop demonstrating intent to escalate the situation? Is having home security cameras demonstrating any intent other than protecting oneself, one's family and one's property? No! That's tantamount to telling someone that if they defend themselves in any way from an aggressor, they are just as guilty for the incident as the other person.