I know....oh! When I mentioned "wobbler" to my mom's fiance, he asked "What's a wobbler" despite him knowing some lawyer terms and is a holder of a SC law book. He says "Chris ain't right" and predicted that if Chris was in general population and the inmates discovered what his crime was he would've either been a prison bitch or hurt by normal mom-loving criminals.
The term "wobbler" for a criminal penalty that can be varied between a felony and misdemeanor comes from California I believe, but the term is now used nationwide, since this kind of prosecution/sentencing is pretty common, although how many crimes it can be applied to varies state-by-state. Virginia's system has a lot of them since every Class 6 and Class 5 felony is a wobbler, as well as a few non-classified felonies that have an explicit wobbler option.
One interesting California term that doesn't seem to have spread elsewhere is a "woblette", which is a violation that can either be a misdemeanor or an infraction. (i.e. it can be a criminal or a non-criminal violation). Lots of places have them but the term isn't generally used.
Nobody has bought up the fact that Barb's brain was confirmed by Chris to have been turned into a raisin, which ultimately means she could NOT consent.
The criteria are pretty strict for this. The default assumption is that someone can consent. The measure is not if they are incapable of consent, but if they are incapable of *refusing* consent.
In the case of mental infirmity, the prosecution would have to prove that Barb did not know what was happening, or what the consequences were. So basically if Barb knew that she was fucking Chris, and if she knew that Chris (or her) could be charged with a crime for that, then she was not incapable of refusing consent, mentally.
If he gets back into 14BC, I will be furious. I just can't see how this is possible even if Barb is not there (someone should take legal pics of the place in the evening to see if lights are on) because a family member would likely have POA and I'm sure the whole side of Barb's family has washed their hands of Chris from this.
Well yeah, he can't go back unless whoever is in charge of the house is okay with it. That's up to them, not the court. The court might have an interest in keeping Chris away from Barb -- and if they have the ability, they might enforce that. 14BC itself is not the victim.
(And, arguably, Barb is not really a victim either in the way Chris is being charged. It's a crime against decency/public morals.)
