It's obvious to me that once Judge Berman re-explained the bias intimidation instructions for Count 2, it gelled for the jury. On Count 2, he was found guilty for the 3rd reason, which was essentially that the invasion of privacy was due to the fact that TC was gay. The jury could decide that one or more of the rationales for bias crime applied, but it would take only one guilty among the three theories to be found guilty of the charge.
I didn't get all the details on the later charges of bias intimidation, but he was found guilty based on more than one theory. So, the first time he did it, it was just because TC was gay. However, the second attempt, there were guilty verdicts dealing with the fact that it was an attempt to intimidate TC.
The jury obviously believed (and I do to) that DR was not out to intimidte MB, who he didn't know.