Undersideofcwcspillow
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2021
I'm such a fucking dumbass. The third question I forgot to ask was why they got a continuance.
She probably wouldn't have been able to tell me but man I can't believe I forgot that one.
11/18/2021 - Court case continued into the new year
- Thread starter Undersideofcwcspillow
- Start date
- Status
She probably wouldn't have been able to tell me but man I can't believe I forgot that one.
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2016
They got a continuance because they need to come up with 10,000,000 dollars to give to Chris since he's a fat trqnny that's brave and stunning.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2021
They can continue it as long as they have reasons to and as long as it's advantageous. Realistically it will not take more than a year.
Chris has the right to a speedy trial, but that right is rarely to your advantage and you should usually never ask for one.
That right is in the constitution because before the US came to be, authorities would often throw suspects in jail without trial and keep them there. This way they could punish innocent people, or punish guilty ones with jail time harsher than the crime they were guilty of. Prosecutors still did this to indigent people who didn't know their rights, but it became rare after Gideon v. Wainright, and even rarer in current year when there are massive efforts to end jail overcrowding.
When you are guilty as sin and are certainly going to be found guilty of *something* substantial, there's usually no advantage to speeding along your conviction and making it easier for the prosecution. Instead it's best to fight for the best deal you can get. Normally you would be out on bail, but if you are stuck in jail like Chris, you're racking up time-served anyway and getting the pain out of the way ahead of time.
Heilberg, Chris' attorney, does not have Chris as his top priority. Heilberg has top-dollar clients he needs to serve. He has plenty of reasons to ask for continuances as long as he shows some progress in preparing the case at each point along the way. This does not harm Chris, as even if Heilberg and the prosecutor reached an agreement tomorrow, Chris would still be in jail or prison, minus his monthly tugboat.
If you ever find yourself in jail, you know you're innocent, and have copious amounts of proof of that, that is the only time your attorney will have you demand a speedy trial 100% of the time. Your demanding a trial prevents the trial from happening and the charges get dropped, because the prosecutor will see that you have a strong case, and prosecutors don't want to take Ls. Even if you're not in jail, if your evidence is incredibly good you should still demand it just to make it go away faster. It's basically your way to tell the prosecutor that he needs to drop the charges.
The only other time you *might* demand a speedy trial is if you are guilty as sin, are unable to make bail, and the maximum punishment is a month in jail or less. There will still be no trial, because your attorney is still negotiating a hasty plea deal, or you just flat out plead guilty. You might stay in still is if the release conditions are potentially onerous, in which case you stay in longer than the sentence just so your attorney can get a better deal for your release conditions (shorter probation time, no mandatory appearances, etc.). Again, your only incentive to make this fast is if you can't make bail.
In Chris' case, a speedy trial -- or any trial, really -- would just fuck him. He's far better off racking up time-served and letting his attorney get the best deal he can.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
Of course the defense would not want people seeing the clown moments from both sides.
If it was not private it would surpass Rittenhouse in meme clips.
The Demon
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2017
you just know that someone is going to rush through to try and get chris to sign something, or to punch him or whatever. in this case, i completely understand why the courts would want to keep this relatively private. it just sucks that we didn't get chris's first tantrum in court on tape
UncleFezziesPantsPuppet
Cool it Sanchez, or you’ll get a knuckle supper
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2017
Undersideofcwcspillow
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2021
I've been thinking "i've called this same lady twice now. I should just ask for her email."
Oops. I'm not an investigative journalist, obviously. Rookie fucking mistakes.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2019
Honesty is key.
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2019
My take? while Ive said one reason may be because they wanna wait till the weens and orbiters lose interest in Chris and wont turn the downtown district near the courthouse into Tardfest
No the reality seems to be Heilburg working on a defense that involves convincing the prosecution Chris is only "dangerous" in that he's dangerously r-tarded and stupid but not skizo hearing voices dangerous. And that he simply will not survive a felony conviction in prison. Even if put in PC, prison will be much harsher and far more dangerous for a tarded oaf like him. So the defense is trying to reach a plea deal in which chris gets the maximum misdemeanor punishment, ergo a year back in regional with time served, then released under strict probation but not nessciacrily SOR. More like court appointed therapy, mandatory sexual rehab, possibly even house arrest for a few more months.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2016
Someone finally nailed it better than the rest of us.
Of course that has to be it. Or a big part of it.
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2020
Unless you're a ''''refugee''''', 99% of countries don't want leeches and will bounce you on your ass if you aren't either rich as feck or gainfully employed.
Canada already has too many leeches it should have left on the boats. It doesn't need leeches who aren't good PR.
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2014
We don't have video or audio recording, but we have at least one news article about him repeatedly correcting/interrupting a judge about his pronouns and also insisting that he be allowed back home to fetch his toys. In the middle of his first post-arrest hearing.
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
Weens are excepcional themselves so it won't work.
Wonder if Bella will be mentioned by the Defense and they will try to blame her for Chris raping his mom in spite of him already implying a Oedipus complex since 2016.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2021
I was into Christian and the Hedgehog Boys before it was mainstream
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2021
The defense will probably more generalize the extensive trolling that Chris has undergone, stressing that many people over many years have bullied Chris into doing disgusting things. This will not be in some grand speech, however, it will probably just be in a written document directly sent to the prosecution as part of negotiations. The defense attorney and the prosecutor might also meet in person to discuss it informally.
There are going to be very few oral arguments in the courtroom itself, because there will be no trial. Any oral arguments will be short summaries explaining the deal to the judge, who will have read them in paper form as well. The judge does not need to see every argument since the deal is between the defense and prosecution -- the judge isn't making a decision on all of the merits of the deal, only whether it is legal and appropriate.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2020
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2020
Interesting. What arguments the prosecution would bring up? All the deplorable behaviors admitted by Chris himself confirmed to not be done under influence of trolls, specially the Megan saga?
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2021
After having explained things over and over, it occurred to me that maybe I should drop a little educational advice, at least for the Americans here.
Go sit in at your local courthouse, COVID-permitting, and watch the proceedings that you can. Not trials, just hearings. Most are open to the public. People studying to be attorneys and paralegals do this all the time, but it's valuable for non-legal folks as well because we're all beholden to the legal system. There are also plenty you can watch online. Criminal cases are mostly resolved via procedural methods, not trials, and if you watch the boring hearings instead of the flashy trials, you'll gain a much better understanding of how the justice system works. If you or a friend ever wind up on the wrong side of the law, this could be invaluable in helping you resolve your situation. At the very least, you'll have a better understanding of what is happening to Chris the next time he fucks up.
That's not to say that you should ignore trials, people understand trials a lot better, because that's what people pay attention to, but they still usually watch them in snippets instead of understanding the process. One of the great things about our country is that you are given the opportunity to participate via jury duty. Sadly, most people consider it something to get out of, instead of doing their civic duty. You should still do it, as you will be forced to learn a lot more of the process. So the next time you get called in for jury duty, dress well and don't try to get eliminated. It will be a very educational experience, and you can do some good in the process. If you do it multiple times, you can also learn about the differences in how criminal and civil courts work.
For non-Americans, I don't know how your particular court system works, but I'd encourage you to do the equivalent. Most of the first world is nowhere near as litigious as the USA, but it's still important to care about the law, because the law is not going to forget about you.
Right now the prosecution is not trying to convince anyone. It's not a trial. The prosecution is mostly concerned with how to best deal with the Chris problem in terms of protecting the public. The prosecution holds most of the cards here, the only weapon the defense has is the threat of a trial. At this point the defense attorney and prosecutor are not in a very adversarial role. Unless they have some personal enmity for some reason, it's more like two people working together to solve a problem. Prosecutors and defense attorneys are sometimes good friends outside of court.
If you mean at trial (which is not going to happen), then arguments will have to be facts directly relevant to the case. The Megan saga is anchuent history. That *might* come up during sentencing to establish a pattern, but since Chris committed no crime with Megan they probably would not bring it up. Past sagas would mostly be brought up by the defense to establish reasons for Chris having diminished capacity (also during sentencing).
Go sit in at your local courthouse, COVID-permitting, and watch the proceedings that you can. Not trials, just hearings. Most are open to the public. People studying to be attorneys and paralegals do this all the time, but it's valuable for non-legal folks as well because we're all beholden to the legal system. There are also plenty you can watch online. Criminal cases are mostly resolved via procedural methods, not trials, and if you watch the boring hearings instead of the flashy trials, you'll gain a much better understanding of how the justice system works. If you or a friend ever wind up on the wrong side of the law, this could be invaluable in helping you resolve your situation. At the very least, you'll have a better understanding of what is happening to Chris the next time he fucks up.
That's not to say that you should ignore trials, people understand trials a lot better, because that's what people pay attention to, but they still usually watch them in snippets instead of understanding the process. One of the great things about our country is that you are given the opportunity to participate via jury duty. Sadly, most people consider it something to get out of, instead of doing their civic duty. You should still do it, as you will be forced to learn a lot more of the process. So the next time you get called in for jury duty, dress well and don't try to get eliminated. It will be a very educational experience, and you can do some good in the process. If you do it multiple times, you can also learn about the differences in how criminal and civil courts work.
For non-Americans, I don't know how your particular court system works, but I'd encourage you to do the equivalent. Most of the first world is nowhere near as litigious as the USA, but it's still important to care about the law, because the law is not going to forget about you.
Right now the prosecution is not trying to convince anyone. It's not a trial. The prosecution is mostly concerned with how to best deal with the Chris problem in terms of protecting the public. The prosecution holds most of the cards here, the only weapon the defense has is the threat of a trial. At this point the defense attorney and prosecutor are not in a very adversarial role. Unless they have some personal enmity for some reason, it's more like two people working together to solve a problem. Prosecutors and defense attorneys are sometimes good friends outside of court.
If you mean at trial (which is not going to happen), then arguments will have to be facts directly relevant to the case. The Megan saga is anchuent history. That *might* come up during sentencing to establish a pattern, but since Chris committed no crime with Megan they probably would not bring it up. Past sagas would mostly be brought up by the defense to establish reasons for Chris having diminished capacity (also during sentencing).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2021
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2021
(Reposting for Pepsiman)
It's best for the defense to humanize Chris for the sake of empathy. Conversely it's best for the prosecution to state cold, hard facts for the sake of cold, hard sentencing.
I imagine something along the lines of
- a pattern of increasing disregard for the law and other people
- a history of sexually inappropriate behavior
- serious anger issues which would terrify anyone weaker than him
- Status