More post-jail sightings megathread

You can't collect benefits while incarcerated, or receive it as backpay once you're released either.
Does that apply to jail? I know you cannot receive benefits while in prison but I could've sworn Chris was still able to collect from jail. Otherwise where'd all his commissary money come from for him to buy Fantas and ramen with?
 
Does that apply to jail? I know you cannot receive benefits while in prison but I could've sworn Chris was still able to collect from jail. Otherwise where'd all his commissary money come from for him to buy Fantas and ramen with?
Jail and prison, same thing in the eyes of the DOL. The logic of disability payments (and unemployment to some extent) isn't that it's an unconditional reward for being an exceptional individual. It's more like, "This person can't work for reasons out of their control, so let's give them an imaginary income as if they were able to work because it's likely they do want to be employed." This is why in many states, you're required to prove you're going to job interviews and being rejected in order to continue receiving unemployment. It shows you want to work, but can't. Also the same reason why you can't receive unemployment benefits when you leave the country for the month.

When you're incarcerated, you won't get disability benefits because it's no longer solely your disability preventing you from being employed, but your choice to do shit that landed you in jail. Retarded or not, you can't get a job in jail, so why supplement them with that imaginary income anymore?

I have no idea where he got commissary money from. Maybe Barb or some weens? Also possible, and this is just a guess, that Chris's lawyer promised to give him commissary money in exchange for behaving in prison/court and ignoring weens.
 
You can't collect benefits while incarcerated, or receive it as backpay once you're released either. Doesn't matter that he wasn't convicted, being in jail for longer than 30 days is the criteria for stopping payment.
This has been gone over over and over and over and over and fucking over.
Screenshot 2023-09-08 215601.png
I think the Social Security Administration knows their own criteria.

@Pointless_Sperg explained all these things in exquisite detail with sources over a year ago:
 
I think that he never was that interested in Fiona. I think he heard the term “mommywife” and thought “that sounds not so bad.”
Yeah, I remember the threads when this was going down. Fiona was definitely interested in Chris, but Chris did not reciprocate, probably because she admitted to being autistic, making her a slow-in-the-mind to Chris.
 
Yeah, I remember the threads when this was going down. Fiona was definitely interested in Chris, but Chris did not reciprocate, probably because she admitted to being autistic, making her a slow-in-the-mind to Chris.
That's really the problem with both Chris in the old days and his "descendants." Incells today. They can never settle for what they deserve. Chris couldn't get it through his thick skull he was not a slender dreamboat out of anime and always set his standards for a "boyfriend free girl." Way out of his league. I'm not gonna pretend Fiona was the perfect girl for Chris but she was ironically almost everything Chris wanted from the ideal sweetheart. Young (but not too young cause of those "dumb laws") mostly average looking or at least wasnt a bloated hog with danger hair, and genuinely had a thing for him. And Chris threw it all away simply because barb was there with him already and was an easy mark that just needed a little coaxing.
 
This has been gone over over and over and over and over and fucking over.
View attachment 5325247
I think the Social Security Administration knows their own criteria.

@Pointless_Sperg explained all these things in exquisite detail with sources over a year ago:

That's from a pamphlet that's written for prisoners with a 70 IQ to be able to understand, it doesn't really cover all the intricacies of how it actually works.
https://www.ssa.gov/reentry/benefits.htm?tl=0
We cannot pay benefits to someone who, by court order, is confined in an institution at public expense in connection with a criminal case if the court finds that the person is: guilty, but insane; not guilty of such an offense by reason of insanity or similar factors (such as a mental disease); or incompetent to stand trial for such an alleged offense.

Also, we cannot pay benefits to someone who, immediately upon completion of a prison sentence for conviction of a criminal offense (an element of which is sexual activity), is confined by court order in an institution at public expense. The confinement must be based on a court finding that the individual is a sexually dangerous person or sexual predator (or a similar finding.) However, if a person is not confined in prison or other similar place, benefits may be paid to an eligible individual.
If you are eligible for Supplement Security Income payments and you live in a public institution (jail, prison, detention center, etc.) over a calendar month, we cannot start your benefits until the institution releases you.
I did this as a job for years. I've seen a lot of cases that were deferred/dismissed, and they were never eligible for backpay due to being confined in prison. I am fairly certain that Chris was not still receiving payments.
 
That's from a pamphlet that's written for prisoners with a 70 IQ to be able to understand, it doesn't really cover all the intricacies of how it actually works.
Was he found guilty, but insane, not guilty of such an offense by reason of insanity or similar factors or incompetent to stand trial?

Did he complete a prison sentence for conviction of a criminal offense?

Did he attempt to start benefits while living in a public institution (jail, prison, detention center, etc.)?

AFAIK the answer to all of these questions is "no".
 
That's from a pamphlet that's written for prisoners with a 70 IQ to be able to understand, it doesn't really cover all the intricacies of how it actually works.
https://www.ssa.gov/reentry/benefits.htm?tl=0
That's why I linked to a vastly more detailed set of FAQs on this very site, that go into these intricacies.

Here's another simple tip from the SSA, which you are insisting is wrong about its own benefits:
When you initially applied for Social Security (retirement, survivors, or disability (RSDI, also known as Title II) benefits or Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Social Security advised you about certain changes that could affect your ability to continue to receive payments.

For SSI benefits, the law states that you cannot live in a public institution (for example, a jail, prison, penal facility, etc.) for a full calendar month or more, and continue to get your SSI benefits.

Note, Chris is not on SSI benefits.

For Title II benefits, the law states that if you commit a crime and a court convicts you, and you serve more than 30 continuous days in jail following the conviction, you cannot get your Title II benefits.

Chris is on Title II benefits, which require a conviction and then serving more than 30 continuous days.

And again, @Pointless_Sperg goes into vastly more detail throught a lengthy set of FAQs on this and other issues.

For instance, you may wonder how Chris is collecting Title II benefits when the fucker has barely worked a day in his life. Bob Chandler arranged to get him on permanent disabiltiy during childhood while he was alive and got Chris grandfathered into it as an adult.

The difference between SSI and Title II is the first is a needs-based program. If you are in jail, your needs are taken care of at least legally adequately. Title II is an insurance, based on your contributions to the program (or in this case his dad's because of how Bob gamed it).
I did this as a job for years. I've seen a lot of cases that were deferred/dismissed, and they were never eligible for backpay due to being confined in prison. I am fairly certain that Chris was not still receiving payments.
You sure you weren't dealing with SSI people, like most criminals would be?

You don't get back pay if they properly switch your benefits off, because you weren't entitled to them in the first place. Chris wouldn't get back pay either because he never qualified for discontinuation in the first place.
 
So I added Chris as friend on Xbox years ago and I noticed that ever since he popped back online he hasn’t gotten off. I actually was up till 3am last night and I noticed he was still at the Home Screen. I think Chris turned his Xbox on and forgot to turn it off.
CA619E3F-8705-4498-AFF3-BC87CA63A718.jpeg
Edit: a day later and he still has not left his Home Screen. Since he was first spotted online on the 1st this means he has left his Xbox on for over a week!
 
Last edited:
So I added Chris as friend on Xbox years ago and I noticed that ever since he popped back online he hasn’t gotten off. I actually was up till 3am last night and I noticed he was still at the Home Screen. I think Chris turned his Xbox on and forgot to turn it off.
View attachment 5325427
So either dumbass has left his console on for days and it's still on (possibly while he's not even around it) or he's kept it running for days weeks even non stop to do god knows what with it. He'll blow out the ac adapter on it and then the hard drive will start to go if he's done that.
 
What family? Cole doesn't want to get near either of them. Chris and Barb have also alienated any family member or friend that didn't buy into their delusions. Chris has also alienated outside help like :null: who has his tard wrangler for a time. These two are completely isolated from anyone that could actually help them.
Cole and whoever else is still alive on Barb's side of the family, yes. Of course we're all pretty sure they're not gonna do shit to stop this. My point was that it is their responsibility now that the state abdicated its responsibility to institutionalize Chris and/or Barb. It's obvious what Cole and all are going to do, which is what they've been doing since Bob croaked - ignore the situation and wait for things to sort themselves out. The primary moral agent in all of this was Chris, in that he could have chosen not to do it in the first place, then to turn himself in, and finally to stay away from his mother when he got away with the crime mostly scot-free. But as it turned out, he's completely insane/morally bankrupt and didn't do any of the things somebody with a functioning conscience would have done in his shoes, and then the state did nothing, so now that puts the responsibility on their remaining family to deal with it before anybody else gets it in their heads to intervene extralegally. That's what I meant. There's still time for Cole/everybody else to do the right thing, which is to put Barb in some kind of assisted living home and get a restraining order against Chris. When they likely fail to do so, I don't know who else is in a moral position to deal with it. Some ween wanting to end Christory the hard way is pretty low down on that list, I'm pretty sure.
 
Regarding putting Barb in a facility:
I suspect the reason that won't happen is that Medicare will sell the house to pay her bills upon her death. That is my understanding from a hospice nurse, and confirmed by Google. ETA: the family may be willing to sacrifice Barb/tolerate the situation to prevent the loss of any profits from the sale of the house. Cole specifically could be waiting for Barb to die, and unless she has a will, he is the inheritor as closest relative.

This might have been covered in the house thread, but after Medicare recovers their expenditures, someone would have to deal with Chris and the homeless saga could begin.
 
Regarding putting Barb in a facility:
I suspect the reason that won't happen is that Medicare will sell the house to pay her bills upon her death. That is my understanding from a hospice nurse, and confirmed by Google. ETA: the family may be willing to sacrifice Barb/tolerate the situation to prevent the loss of any profits from the sale of the house. Cole specifically could be waiting for Barb to die, and unless she has a will, he is the inheritor as closest relative.
Pretty evil, but if half the shit Cole says about his childhood is true, I can't say I don't understand the pragmatism behind that.
 
Cole specifically could be waiting for Barb to die, and unless she has a will, he is the inheritor as closest relative.
Chris is also her son. They inherit equally unless she disinherits them. I doubt it will matter. I don't think there's much equity in that house because she hocked it to the hilt buying hoard Barbage. Applicable rule in Virginia is: "2. If there is no surviving spouse, then the estate descends and passes to the decedent's children and their descendants."

One exception might be if Barb dies in the near future and Cole ties to snatch Chris's half by having him found a slayer under the slayer statute because his rapes somehow killed her.
 
But what if Cole tried to make Chris his ward? Example: Ethan Ralph.

Not a lawyer, defer to your superior knowledge. Just have some experience with VA law.

Edit- oh shit, got distracted and double-posted. Mea Culpa

Edit2: Real Estate in Southern VA is insane. There will be money from the sale.
 
But what if Cole tried to make Chris his ward? Example: Ethan Ralph.
Apparently Ralph's brother is pretty profoundly retarded. I doubt Chris qualifies, although he did get away with fucking his mom by playing a tard card. I can't imagine him wanting to do that, or there being even enough money to fight over. That's also assuming she doesn't have to sell it off to qualify for medical care under Medicaid.
 
Medicaid will track income (including attempts to ditch assets). Barb qualifies for Medicare, which is age-based, primarily. My understanding is that Barb is covered by Medicare and qualifies for Social Security as the surviving spouse of Bob. I don't know what Bob's highest earning year #'s are, but I will guess that as his widow she collects $1500 a month. At least.
We need to get the DSP accountants in here to help.
 
Yeah, I remember the threads when this was going down. Fiona was definitely interested in Chris, but Chris did not reciprocate, probably because she admitted to being autistic, making her a slow-in-the-mind to Chris.
Good point on the slow-in-the-mind factor. I also think the revelation from watching Geno's documentary that every single one of his online sweethearts was a troll (even after years of trolling he seemed to think at least a couple of these "hypothetical girlfriends" were true&honest) made him brush Fiona off and focus on the Barbussy at hand.
 
Medicaid will track income (including attempts to ditch assets). Barb qualifies for Medicare, which is age-based, primarily.
And doesn't cover long-term nursing care home if she needs that, so she'd have to spend down to qualify for Medicaid if she needs that (and doesn't have other insurance of some kind that does).

If you have higher income than lets you qualify for Medicaid, you can subtract money for non-covered medical expenses and other qualifying expenses to get below the needs requirement.

Assuming she needs long-term care that is, and isn't already getting it from some other relative (one hopes not Chris).
 
Back