F.A.Qs about Jail, State Hospital, and Court

[Whaler]

Hence my qualification with a hypothetical. Consider the following list in decreasing order of likelihood of being present at the trial, should we get there:

1. Porcine ragemachine grunting into a cameraphone <--- Def gonna be there
2. Someone's buddy with a decent videocamera and a steady hand <--- not out of the question
3. A small time media company who would do it for $10K <--- also not out of the question
4. CNN with top end TV equipment <--- Def not gonna be there

I'm wondering, realistically, what is the best and most comprehensive footage we can hope to get, assuming a moderate amount of effort eg crowdfunding a bag and then contacting locals who are competent enough to capture courtroom proceedings and the aftermath.

Probably slim to none, since nobody competent enough is going to risk getting into trouble recording a court room for a tard who raped his mom, and anybody dumb enough to do it will probably end up tripping going up/down the stairs and killing themselves.

 

[Stupidface]

Due to the seal, are we just in the dark for an unknowable amount of time going forward? Possibly years, with only insight through letters from Chris that are obviously unreliable? I saw the minimum sentence for the current felony charge is five years, and so much of this seems up in the air with deferred disposition only just now being presented. So, I'm wondering if there's any use in (or anyway to do so reasonably) guessing how long the road may be now?

 

[TruthSeekingDaimon]

Its Barb.
Can she testify that Chris shoved his penis in her?
Is she in any condition to do that?

 

[Pointless Sperg]

Due to the seal, are we just in the dark for an unknowable amount of time going forward? Possibly years, with only insight through letters from Chris that are obviously unreliable? I saw the minimum sentence for the current felony charge is five years, and so much of this seems up in the air with deferred disposition only just now being presented. So, I'm wondering if there's any use in (or anyway to do so reasonably) guessing how long the road may be now?

Given the recent explanation from Heilberg, it looks like we'll be mostly in the dark until jury selection, if that ever happens.

The minimum sentence for felony incest is 1 year, the maximum is 10 years.

As for how long, I imagine the case will either have a plea bargain or set for trial within a few months. It could be next week if there's a plea deal. Even with delays it should be over by the end of the year, with a trial in early 2023 at the absolute most-absurd latest.

This would only change if the charges are upgraded to rape, in which case the battle could be over very quickly, or take another 2 years depending on how hard Heilberg wants to fight it. Court cases where there is a long minimum sentence can take multiple years if the defense is willing to fight it out through every maneuver they have.

Given that incest effectively has no minimum sentence (since it's a wobbler), and even as a felony the minimum is one year, there's less incentive to fight it out. The goal is to get some sort of suspension (in this case Heilberg is trying for deferred disposition, but failing that he will try for a suspended sentence), where all but time served is suspended.

Given that Chris seemed to be thinking he was going home after 6 months, I imagine the first thing Heilberg tried was 6 months time served, 6 months suspended, on a misdemeanor conviction, but it didn't work out, either because Chris fucked it up or because the prosecution decided they wanted more.

Its Barb.
Can she testify that Chris shoved his penis in her?
Is she in any condition to do that?

If she can communicate, she can testify. Her testimony will be important, and Chris has the sixth amendment right to demand the ability to confront her if she testifies -- if not in person then in video conference. That right is part of the leverage they have for a plea deal -- sparing the old lady from having to testify.

That leverage is used in a lot of plea bargains for child molestation cases, even when they are determined to zap the accused to the extreme.

 

[ThatOneAsshole]

Given the recent explanation from Heilberg, it looks like we'll be mostly in the dark until jury selection, if that ever happens.

The minimum sentence for felony incest is 1 year, the maximum is 10 years.

As for how long, I imagine the case will either have a plea bargain or set for trial within a few months. It could be next week if there's a plea deal. Even with delays it should be over by the end of the year, with a trial in early 2023 at the absolute most-absurd latest.

This would only change if the charges are upgraded to rape, in which case the battle could be over very quickly, or take another 2 years depending on how hard Heilberg wants to fight it. Court cases where there is a long minimum sentence can take multiple years if the defense is willing to fight it out through every maneuver they have.

Given that incest effectively has no minimum sentence (since it's a wobbler), and even as a felony the minimum is one year, there's less incentive to fight it out. The goal is to get some sort of suspension (in this case Heilberg is trying for deferred disposition, but failing that he will try for a suspended sentence), where all but time served is suspended.

Given that Chris seemed to be thinking he was going home after 6 months, I imagine the first thing Heilberg tried was 6 months time served, 6 months suspended, on a misdemeanor conviction, but it didn't work out, either because Chris fucked it up or because the prosecution decided they wanted more.



If she can communicate, she can testify. Her testimony will be important, and Chris has the sixth amendment right to demand the ability to confront her if she testifies -- if not in person then in video conference. That right is part of the leverage they have for a plea deal -- sparing the old lady from having to testify.

That leverage is used in a lot of plea bargains for child molestation cases, even when they are determined to zap the accused to the extreme.

With his previous charges all knocked down to misdemeanors what are the chances the wobbler will be knocked down too? If I'm absorbing this correctly

 

[Pointless Sperg]

With his previous charges all knocked down to misdemeanors what are the chances the wobbler will be knocked down too? If I'm absorbing this correctly

Just getting lowered right away? Probably not, as it would make probation difficult since he's already served the entire year. What they could do is do the deferred disposition, with his reward for succeeding being it lowered to a misdemeanor rather than a felony, after years of probation. They could also just drop the charges with successful probation, but a misdemeanor would still let them say they convicted him of something, while still not sending him to prison.

The deferred disposition really is a good solution. The other option would be suspended felony sentence with similar probation rules, which would still leave him with a felony conviction without sending him to prison.

It depends on what the prosecution is willing to accept as a compromise from Heilberg. I doubt they'll accept a simple misdemeanor conviction at this point, otherwise they wouldn't have sent him to circuit court in the first place.

They are going to want some way to keep Chris under control, and maybe a way to send him far away from Greene County.

 

[papaya]

I remain convinced that Barb isn't cooperating with the prosecution, either due to dementia and genuinely not knowing what happened to her, or else out of a twisted sense of duty to "protect" her son. The fact that Chris keeps complaining in his letters about "Barbara's statements are not being considered because they deemed her too senile" makes me think that she probably tried to tell the cops/courts nothing happened and to not press charges. It is EXTREMELY common for abuse victims to not want to press charges.

The fact that the charges haven't been upgraded, in spite of ample probable cause to believe Chris committed additional crimes (rape, financial abuse, etc) only adds to my belief Barb is either too out of it to communicate at all, or if she is communicating it is in favor of her son.

Even if we go with the "Barb is the worst mother on the planet" line of thinking, there's the selfish reason that she doesn't want to be alone, doesn't want the household to lose the tugboat, etc.

If Barbara Chandler actually ever testifies on a stand or even in a deposition or something, AGAINST Chris, I will gladly eat my hat.

 

[Pointless Sperg]

The fact that the charges haven't been upgraded, in spite of ample probable cause to believe Chris committed additional crimes (rape, financial abuse, etc) only adds to my belief Barb is either too out of it to communicate at all, or if she is communicating it is in favor of her son.

The most likely explanation is that she's too lucid to be ruled incapacitated, and refused to say anything that would indicate that it was rape (either that she refused consent and he did it anyway, or that she was temporarily incapacitated at the time).

Without either of those things, it would be impossible to convict Chris of rape.

 

[Hepativore]

Is there a such thing as a "conditional" sentence as opposed to a straight-out deferred sentence...I.e. you are being punished with "x" along with conditions, but depending on how things go later, you will also be punished with "y" if you fuck up before then? I suppose that is what parole is like, but the sentence handed down would not necessarily be prison time with parole, just a conditional sentence in general.

 

[Pointless Sperg]

Small update to the blurb at the top. Still not updating FAQ until we get a little more info about if he is being transferred or released, or something else.

 

[Senior Citizen Virgin]

Yes, but no. Since the contents were never examined by the jail, the people who received them would pretty much have to be there to testify that it was in fact a letter they received in the mail from Chris.

Technically couldn't they submit the letters/photographs of the letters and ask Chris during cross-examination if those are indeed letters he wrote and sent out? Because then he'd either have to say that, yes, he did, or lie (commit perjury) and say that no, he didn't write them. That just seems like a much easier and more economical way to submit the letters as evidence without having to fly out a bunch of weens to testify at a fairly low-level trial in Buttfuck, Virginia.

 

[ScaliasGhost]

Technically couldn't they submit the letters/photographs of the letters and ask Chris during cross-examination if those are indeed letters he wrote and sent out? Because then he'd either have to say that, yes, he did, or lie (commit perjury) and say that no, he didn't write them. That just seems like a much easier and more economical way to submit the letters as evidence without having to fly out a bunch of weens to testify at a fairly low-level trial in Buttfuck, Virginia.

One problem with that is it depends on Chris testifying, which he has a right not to do.

 

[Senior Citizen Virgin]

One problem with that is it depends on Chris testifying, which he has a right not to do.

Definitely, I just mean assuming that it even goes to a full-on trial or if he would even be willing to testify at one.

 

[Pointless Sperg]

Technically couldn't they submit the letters/photographs of the letters and ask Chris during cross-examination if those are indeed letters he wrote and sent out? Because then he'd either have to say that, yes, he did, or lie (commit perjury) and say that no, he didn't write them. That just seems like a much easier and more economical way to submit the letters as evidence without having to fly out a bunch of weens to testify at a fairly low-level trial in Buttfuck, Virginia.

This is what the 5th amendment is for. He cannot be compelled to give testimony that could incriminate him, even if the answer itself does not incriminate him directly. SCOTUS upholds this interpretation.

In Blau v. United States (1950), it was ruled that you can refuse to answer a question that could merely lead to a "chain of evidence" that could lead to incrimination. This was further clarified in Hoffman v. United States (1951).

This is assuming he retardedly even agrees to take the stand and for some ungodly reason wants to keep answering questions, instead of just shutting it down.

(In civil court, or if you are not the defendant in criminal court, you can be compelled to answer questions, but you can still plead the 5th on questions that could be incriminating *to you*)

One problem with that is it depends on Chris testifying, which he has a right not to do.

Exactly.

 

[ttm33]

Do we know if he's been found to be competent yet? That's the only part of the case I ever found interesting; I don't think there's a court in the US that would've found him competent as of this time last year. It would've been unthinkable if anything happened other than treatment + new competency evaluation.

 

[Neo-Nazi Rich Evans]

Do we know if he's been found to be competent yet? That's the only part of the case I ever found interesting; I don't think there's a court in the US that would've found him competent as of this time last year. It would've been unthinkable if anything happened other than treatment + new competency evaluation.

the problem is while all of us have seen his letters, videos, and everything else about him and we know how mentally unhinged he is, chris is able to behave himself to the bare minimum needed in order to get a judge or psychologist to call him high functioning. some other kiwi adroitly pointed out that he is basically on the edge between insane and sane enough to function, and when he is evaluated he is able to sit down and shut up well enough to pass as sane.
this of course falls apart if it is true that he had a tard rage moment at western and needed to be restrained. but that by itself may not be enough to get him listed as incompetent as you could put it down to a rare outburst due to stress or something. even sane people have occasional moments.
other kiwis have also pointed out the low standard of the justice system when it comes to being declared competent to stand trial. from what i gathered of the discussion you have to be nearly a literal drooling retard to be struck as incompetent to stand trial.


then there is my personal non legal opinion that i say the actions he took to conceal and later walk back the claims he had sex with barb show he understands well enough his actions and the consequences to stand trial.he might not think what he did is wrong and he might honestly think he is jesus, but that doesnt mean he shouldnt go to trail/jail for it.

 

[Shovelbird]

if he gets the chair it will be an euthanasia.

 

[hambeerlyingnreed]

Just speculating, but based on the Care homes in his area that cater to His needs - Not short term or for addictions based Care - this Home might be where Chris is headed. Its called Meadowcreek and has options for living with just one other person versus a larger group Home or care in your own residence, in addition to a regular style group home.

 

[Ophelia]

Just speculating, but based on the Care homes in his area that cater to His needs - Not short term or for addictions based Care - this Home might be where Chris is headed. Its called Meadowcreek and has options for living with just one other person versus a larger group Home or care in your own residence, in addition to a regular style group home.

View attachment 3598820View attachment 3598821
View attachment 3598824
View attachment 3598822
View attachment 3598827

Chris will go somewhere his tugboat can pay for. That place might be outside his price range.

 

[hambeerlyingnreed]

Chris will go somewhere his tugboat can pay for. That place might be outside his price range.

It appears it might be covered by state funds.


https://regionten.org/dap-forms/ for more Info