Chris-Chan Sighting at Gamestop (With Video)

Status
Not open for further replies.
What ironic is that Chris is going to get into allot of trouble over the one thing he loves the most, sonic.
 
You Tube refused to publish the video because it was longer than 15 minutes (my Abby Normal account isn't in good standing for a few months because I dared to publish the "Kim Jung Un Death scene" from The Interview), so I'm re-attempting a new upload from an alt account.

 
I don't think the insanity defense can be invoked for every crime in the US, but I'm fairly certain it's allowed for cases of assault, which would cover Chris's macing of the employee. The problem for Chris is, as mentioned up-thread, it's very hard to pull off successfully; at the very least you have to convince the judge that not only are you stark raving mad, but you're literally incapable of telling the difference between what is right and what is wrong. They made the defense far harder to use - and some states just got rid of it altogether - after John Hinckley successfully used it after his attempt to kill Reagan.

The other way of pulling the insanity defense is to convince the judge that the defendant is unable to stand trial, but if anything that'd be even harder to pull off since Chris has stood trial before.
The fact that CWC has stood trial before is irrelevant. 18 U.S.C.A. §4241, which is U.S. Federal Code, elaborates on a motion to determine the competency of a defendant. It basically says, " At any time after the commencement of a prosecution for an offense and prior to the sentencing of the defendant, or at any time after the commencement of probation or supervised release and prior to the completion of the sentence, the defendant or the attorney for the Government may file a motion for a hearing to determine the mental competency of the defendant."

Most statues take the federal language and transcribe it to whatever suits them. Virginia doesn't delineate too much from the standard. § 19.2-169.1 of the Virginia code is more or less the same, "If, at any time after the attorney for the defendant has been retained or appointed and before the end of trial, the court finds, upon hearing evidence or representations of counsel for the defendant or the attorney for the Commonwealth, that there is probable cause to believe that the defendant, whether a juvenile transferred pursuant to § 16.1-269.1 or adult, lacks substantial capacity to understand the proceedings against him or to assist his attorney in his own defense, the court shall order that a competency evaluation be performed by at least one psychiatrist or clinical psychologist who is qualified by training and experience in forensic evaluation."

The old trial is not at play. His current issue is what matters. If a competency issue is brought up, the competency evaluation is what matters. As an outsider, I would say CWC is crazy, especially now (dressing up in women's fashion, piercing his anus, hiding his wiener, etc.) when compared to his old self. But is he competent? Probably.

I want to add that you are right by saying that some states have narrowed the insanity defense and some might argue that it violates the Constitution's guarantee of due process of law, as well as the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. It's supposed to be up for debate in the Supreme Court but I am unsure if the issue has been decided.
 
I'm mildly curious to know if he went through the emergency room at some point. Occasionally someone will claim that they were roughed up, have chest pains, or something like that to where the police have to take them through the ER for a medical clearance. Sometimes if someone seems particularly mentally unstable (ie, more of a psych issue than a legal issue) they'll bring them to the ER to ensure that they're stable enough to be safe in basic lockup, but the "I have chest pains, take me to the ER" people are more likely.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Scribbler
Some people have discussed the issue of Chris having a public defender and how he might not qualify for one. He could still try legal aid (does UVA have a law school? Usually law students will take cases to gain experience) or try and get a lawyer to do it pro bono work for them. My understanding is most state bars suggest that practicing attorneys do a certain number of pro bono work, but I'm not sure if a mentally deficient manchild macing a store clerk for asking him to stop defacing a sign for a video game would be done pro bono. I get that technically Chris owns a house and a car, but he's also receiving government aid and I pretty sure on top of the "tugboat" he gets food stamps and Medicare.

Ignore me if I'm talking out of my arse, but in the UK, insanity is only a complete defence to murder. You can't get off any other charge with it, so every time somebody mentions that Chris could plead insanity I sperg-foam at the mouth. Over here, his autism would be a mitigating factor to any sentence he received, undoubtedly, but he can't just 'get off' on a plea of insanity because he didn't murder anyone.

Someone else has probably said this but the US does do things differently than in the UK, though we do have the same common law tradition. Again, this is from my INTERNET LAWYER experience but it's extremely difficult to pull off an insanity plea and there's a high criteria that needs to be met. I don't think Chris spazzing out over a Sonic Boom would meet that criteria. I've heard some jurisdictions have a verdict of "guilty but mentally ill" where you're still found guilty but the fact you're mentally ill is taken into account and you're sent to a psych hospital.

I've mentioned this before but I think he got the whole "sensory overload" idea from that Temple Grandin talk he went to. It's sad that she probably talked about how she faced a lot of adversity due to her autism but she managed to use her autism to become a brilliant academic in her field, when all Chris seemed to get from it was "sensory overload" is a thing and he seems to think it's an excuse for vandalizing private property. I know quite a few people on the autism spectrum and for them, sensory overload just means that they're being overwhelmed and might need to go somewhere quiet for a bit or do something soothing. Chris seems to think that suffering from sensory overload means going into a rage and going apeshit on people.

Someone else mentioned that he's going to try and claim discrimination on the basis of being transgendered. I had a feeling that when he was asking people from HRC for help, he was playing the transgendered thing to get their help. Obviously I don't see this playing out at all in court but I could see Chris expecting that because he's transgendered, that means if someone does something mean to him, it's automatically discrimination.
 
Last edited:
Some people have discussed the issue of Chris having a public defender and how he might not qualify for one. He could still try legal aid (does UVA have a law school? Usually or try and get a lawyer to do it pro bono work for them. My understanding is most state bars suggest that practicing attorneys do a certain number of pro bono work, but I'm not sure if a mentally deficient manchild macing a store clerk for asking him to stop defacing a sign for a video game would be done pro bono. I get that technically Chris owns a house and a car, but he's also receiving government aid and I pretty sure on top of the "tugboat" he gets food stamps and Medicare.



Someone else has probably said this but the US does do things differently than in the UK, though we do have the same common law tradition. Again, this is from my INTERNET LAWYER experience but it's extremely difficult to pull off an insanity plea and there's a high criteria that needs to be met. I don't think Chris spazzing out over a Sonic Boom would meet that criteria. I've heard some jurisdictions have a verdict of "guilty but mentally ill" where you're still found guilty but the fact you're mentally ill is taken into account and you're sent to a psych hospital.

I've mentioned this before but I think he got the whole "sensory overload" idea from that Temple Grandin talk he went to. It's sad that she probably talked about how she faced a lot of adversity due to her autism but she managed to use her autism to become a brilliant academic in her field, when all Chris seemed to get from it was "sensory overload" is a thing and he seems to think it's an excuse for vandalizing private property. I know quite a few people on the autism spectrum and for them, sensory overload just means that they're being overwhelmed and might need to go somewhere quiet for a bit or do something soothing. Chris seems to think that suffering from sensory overload means going into a rage and going apeshit on people.

Someone else mentioned that he's going to try and claim discrimination on the basis of being transgendered. I had a feeling that when he was asking people from HRC for help, he was playing the transgendered thing to get their help. Obviously I don't see this playing out at all in court but I could see Chris expecting that because he's transgendered, that means if someone does something mean to him, it's automatically discrimination.

He has to play his autism card with it as well. I can see that happening. His public defender can also claim his depression and upbringing is what made him like that but that would even screw Barb's reputation further. Speaking of her, the cops probably have inticed her wrath and she's gotta do something to save her speshul snowflake from the stress he's going through. The judge is going to have a field day over this since it's over Sonic's blue arms.
 
Why was Chris banging on a MALE's car out in the parking lot? Please tell me the dipshit wasn't actually trying to play Grand Theft Auto carjacking for reals and was trying to make his getaway in a car that the cops won't recognize. Remember how he thought he was so clever getting out of the mall the last time in a car that wasn't SONICHU?
 
What ironic is that Chris is going to get into allot of trouble over the one thing he loves the most, sonic.

That doesn't seem ironic. People tend to get in trouble over things they care about, since they care about them and are willing to do more for them.
3) Insanity defense: Both my parents have law degrees (my dad practices, still no details) and I can tell you that insanity is an INCREDIBLY hard thing to plea, unless you're shooting a gay San Fransico Mayor after eating Twinkies (heh, law humor). Jeffery Dahmer tried to plea insanity, and it didn't fly, so Chris has a snowball's chance in hell of pleading it.

5) Pepper spray? Mace? Perfume?: It's been confirmed by a couple of sources that it's pepper spray. At this point it doesn't matter, it is legally assault no matter what, and what exactly it was is semantics.
It is not just a question about whether he can be found "not guilty" because of insanity. A judge who sees or hears Chris is likely to conclude he has some issues. Autism is a well-recognized, but poorly understood name that can be put on these issues. This may mitigate sentencing if he is found guilty, or encourage the judge to substitute some "hard time" for some community service, probation, or counselling.

I think it makes a big difference what he sprayed. If it was perfume, maybe it is technically assault, but it makes it a lot more severe. A weird transvestite sprays perfume in the face (and to be honest, it seemed to be more the chest) of an employee, and the justice system is much less likely to pursue it, or to pursue lesser or different charges than if he goes around pepper-spraying people.

As for self-defense, after watching the video, it looks like the sprayed employee had just been walking from a place where he was in Chris way to a place out of Chris way. So he was not physically engaging him, in fact he seemed to be trying to avoid engagement. On the other hand, he did spin around so he was facing Chris. This seemed to be for the purpose of verbally engaging him or at least to make eye contact.

So I have no idea what is going to go down legally. My pulled it out of my asss guess he will mostly end up with counselling or community service. But I would suggest that those of you who are pouring over Virginia law and saying "oh look, he violated this statute, he must be going to jail" are probably barking up the wrong tree. That is not usually the best way of understanding the justice system unless you are trying to answer questions like "What is the worst case scenario?" or "What could prosecutors threaten him with in order to convince him to plead guilty to lesser charges"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back