Chris - The Legal Issues - A Prosecutor's Perspective

[Some JERK]

As to the income issue - well, restitution is typically set based on an individual's income. And frankly Chris is capable of working many minimum wage jobs, but just won't. At least that's my suspicion.

Would his disability status not contradict that? Also, can his disability payments be touched in a judgement?

 

[Prester John]

I’m a Registered Nurse who used to work closely with many clients in group homes, adult family homes and the like.

I have always thought that something like that would make an excellent fit for Chris, insomuch that it would give him structure, meals etc. In my state, when a client enters into one of these, their SSI or whatever is taken by the state (save for a small amount per month for discretionary) which makes sense as room/board/utilities/hygiene items are completely provided for.

With Chris potentially having stipulations placed on him, I wonder if VA could impose something like this…..? Especially given that he wouldn’t be able to support a house in any way shape or form without Barb.

This makes the most sense to me.

Great questions.

As to the income issue - well, restitution is typically set based on an individual's income. And frankly Chris is capable of working many minimum wage jobs, but just won't. At least that's my suspicion.

Why bother? Well, that's very case dependent, but here are a few reasons we might do it even believing the Defendant will fail.. One, it still gives him a chance to succeed. It's not a rigged game, I just suspect he wouldn't be able to manage it. Sometimes it's the right thing to do. And sometimes it's a way to get a plea, avoid a trial (which are huge resource sinks and you never know what the jury will do), and still end up in the same place down the line as you would have been had you said 'Our offer is X years' and they rejected it and you won at trial.

Plea-bargains are what make the system work. For better or worse (and a lot of people think for worse, but that's a whole separate discussion), our system is built on the idea of the plea-bargain. I forget the exact statistics but upwards of 90% of criminal cases end in a plea-bargain of some type. Contrary to popular perception, trials are rare. If everyone in a given year went to trial, the system literally couldn't handle it. There's not enough money, not enough lawyers, not enough courtrooms and not enough time.

So can you plea-bargain him into an institution or some arrangement that gets him the help he needs?

 

[Plumdrop]

I've seen a couple of mentions of Chris's gender identity perhaps becoming a legal hurdle in making the incest charges stick.

Apparently, the state of Virginia doesn't recognise Mother/Daughter relationships as incest, so it's not illegal. Barb's mental state being an unknown as of right now, we don't know if this was consensual or if she is able to consent. The only thing we know for sure is Chris broke the EPO.

Would something like this require a Supreme Court ruling to decide if gender and biological sex can be considered legally distinct, or could a Judge just say "Fuck it" and set the precedent themselves?

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

Would his disability status not contradict that? Also, can his disability payments be touched in a judgement?

So, take this with a grain of salt, I'm not a disability law guy, but I'm under the impression that there are varying amounts of disability and disability status, and depending on how disabled you are - akin to VA ratings - determines how much, if at all, you can work without losing your benefits.

As far as a civil judgement goes, I have no idea how that works. But criminal restitution as a condition of probation isn't a collectable judgement, it's a do this or else (in some jurisdictions restitution can automatically convert to a civil judgment if the person goes to prison). I do know there is some case law restricting probation revocation for not paying fines and court costs when a person's only income is certain types of benefits - we don't want a return to debtor's prisons. I don't know to what extent, if at all, that applies to restitution.

 

[peach tea]

I've seen a couple of mentions of Chris's gender identity perhaps becoming a legal hurdle in making the incest charges stick.

Apparently, the state of Virginia doesn't recognise Mother/Daughter relationships as incest, so it's not illegal. Barb's mental state being an unknown as of right now, we don't know if this was consensual or if she is able to consent. The only thing we know for sure is Chris broke the EPO.

Would something like this require a Supreme Court ruling to decide if gender and biological sex can be considered legally distinct, or could a Judge just say "Fuck it" and set the precedent themselves?

I know that socially, people consider others that identify as the opposite gender to be that gender. But, at least in my experience with a trans friend, she wasn’t considered to be a female until she made legal changes to everything from her name down to her birth certificate. She had her gender changed on all legal documents and had to contact the social security administration to have her gender changed with them as well. She’s also had all the surgeries to transition from male to female, as well as hormone therapy.

Before all that, our state basically considered her to be a cross dresser. She has to appear as her male self for her ID and passport photos (prior to starting the process legally of course) because that’s what her legal gender represented. I don’t know about Virginia, but I’d assume it would be the same thing. Chris has done nothing aside from telling people he’s trans and dressing kind of feminine to change his identity. Everything else in his life says he’s a man. I’d assume that’s what the court would go by. But like I said, you never know.

 

[Iamthatis]

Standard Lawyer Disclaimer: I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. Nothing I post is legal advice. Nothing I post creates an attorney-client relationship.

So I've seen speculation (and some actual legal information from other lawyers) scattered throughout various threads, and I thought it might be useful/interesting to have a thread for legal issues.

I'm a prosecutor. Not in Virginia. That's about all I'm going to say on that, and you'll just have to take my word for it unless the admins care so much about me claiming that they demand to verify me somehow. And then I'll talk to them. This is my perspective on the legal side of this whole mess. If that's not something that's interesting to you, don't bother reading further.

POSSIBLE CHARGES

So, it looks like we've got multiple counts of some sort of rape and probably multiple counts of some sort of abuse/exploitation of an elderly person, and one count (so far) of violating an EPO.

What do I mean by some sort of rape? Well, as you're probably aware, the law doesn't actually treat rape as a single monolithic crime. And often the law has special rape laws for when someone appears to consent but is legally unable to, such as in the case of minors. You'll often see this referred to as statutory rape. Again, I'm not in Virginia and state laws are gonna vary.

Abuse/exploitation of an elderly person. At a bare minimum, it looks like financial abuse. Chris apparently has control of Barb's accounts and is liberal with them. It could be other kinds of abuse too, depending on what they can prove has been going on.

Violation of the EPO. The EPO forbids crimes against the protected person (Barb). A lot of the analysis I've seen has focused on theft, in terms of the $750.00. I don't love that charge for a few reasons. One is that the required elements may not be present if Chris had control of the accounts. The bigger reason is that theft of that sort of amount is typically a misdemeanor. Financial abuse/exploitation of the elderly is typically a felony.

The rapes, of whatever kind, are all going to be felonies also. In most jurisdictions that I am aware of, violating an EPO for the first time is a misdemeanor.

BUT ALEXANDER, IF THEY DON'T GET DNA CHRIS IS JUST GOING TO GET AWAY WITH IT AGAIN, RIGHT?

Well, actually, no. I've seen a lot of variations on this commentary. Assuming they can be authenticated, the various confessions are actually far and away the best evidence if this went to trial even if they got DNA. Why? Well . . .

The defense has many lines of attack on DNA evidence, none of which require Chris to testify and expose himself to cross-examination. You can attack the DNA expert the State will call. Attach the machinery. Attack the method. Argue for (admittedly really flimsy and stupid) alternative explanations for why that DNA got there.

The confessions, though? Your only line of attack is really that they were lies. So you have to get evidence out about that (the lawyers arguments/statements aren't evidence) and establish some sort of a motive for the lie. This is only really possible if Chris testifies, and that opens him up to cross-examination. Chris will definitely not hold up well under even a gentle polite cross.

OK, BUT WASN'T THIS ENTRAPMENT?

I've seen this one a lot too, and the answer is also no. Entrapment is only a defense when the government does it to you. Random trolls convincing you to do it doesn't meet the legal standard. Also, part of entrapment as a defense is that it's not something you would have done on your own. And based on some of Chris' past statements, that might be a reach.

FINE, BUT CHRIS IS CRAZY. THEY'LL JUST GET HIM OFF WITH AN INSANITY DEFENSE.

Not exactly. You see, legal insanity actually has a specific meaning. Again, it's gonna maybe vary a bit in Virginia but essentially the standard is that you were so insane at the time of the crime that you couldn't appreciate what you were doing and that what you were doing was wrong.

It's perfectly possible to be screamingly clinically insane and yet legally sane. I've seen it. A lot. This can mean you're not competent to stand trial and assist in your own defense, but all that means is the action is halted while we send you to an institution for treatment and once you're stabilized we get you back and finish it up.

Also, not guilty by reason of insanity wouldn't really be getting him off because despite being found not guilty he would then be committed to a mental institution indefinitely until he was no longer criminally insane and a threat to society. That can and often does mean the rest of a person's natural life.

Now, I'm told there's a Virginia law that allows someone to use their autism as a mitigating factor to avoid a custodial sentence. But that isn't the same thing as getting out of it entirely. Just means you're more likely to get probation, which brings us nicely to . . .

OK ALEXANDER, YOU'VE CONVINCED ME. SO THIS MEANS THE START OF THE PRISON SAGA, RIGHT?

Not. Yet.

You see, a prosecutor's job isn't just to slam everyone into prison as fast as possible. As the U.S. Supreme Court put it, a prosecutor "is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done."

What this looks like to every prosecutor is a little different, but there's a lot of considerations that go into what 'justice' looks like on a given case. A big one here is the victim - I suspect that it will eventually come out this $750.00 is a drop in the bucket in terms of how much of Barb's money Chris has spent. There's also the fact that Chris does have mental issues, and remember Virginia prosecutors may have to contend with autism mitigation. And this was a very unique set of circumstances that allowed this to happen - Chris isn't a high risk to reoffend in this manner as long as he's supervised, treated, and not allowed around Barb. And Chris' criminal history is negligible, although certainly proves he doesn't deserve any kind of probation that allows him to avoid conviction - not that I would offer it on these sort of offenses anyway.

So if this were my case, the proposed plea deal probably looks a little like this: A plea of guilty to a single count of rape, a single count of financial abuse of the elderly, and one count violating a misdemeanour. In exchange, what many jurisdictions call a suspended sentence - this is a form of probation, but it counts as a conviction. The incentive isn't to avoid being convicted, it's to avoid prison. So Chris would now be a convicted felon, and a registered sex offender. Also, there would of course be conditions to the probation. Meeting with a probation officer, sex offender therapy, regular therapy, no contact with Barb, and restitution (making the victim whole - so every month he's gonna give us a set amount to put back in her pocket until all the money he took is paid back) would be some of the conditions.

The other thing you have to understand about a suspended sentence is as part of the deal you agree to a sentence within the range from the crimes you pled guilty to. If you violate your probation and it's proven (and the burden at such a hearing is lower than the beyond a reasonable doubt needed to prove you guilty, and there's no jury right at such a hearing) the court will impose that agreed upon amount of prison time. I'd be asking for an agreement to something at the upper end of the range.

And, let's be honest, we all know Chris would spectacularly fail probation and get revoked within the first six months. And then the prison saga would finally begin.

BUT IF THIS DOES GO TO TRIAL, THEY'LL ALL HAVE TO WATCH THE DOCUMENTARY AND KIWIFARMS WILL BE PUT INTO EVIDENCE AND GENO AND NULL WILL BE EXPERT WITNESSES, RIGHT?

I'm sorry to disappoint you, hypothetical reader, but no.

For one thing, there's a rule called the hearsay rule. We can't just introduce whatever statements made out of court we want into evidence and essentially this is a rule about fairness and reliability of evidence.

There's an exception for statements of a party opponent, which in this case would be Chris, which would allow for the videos Chris made, without extra commentary, to be introduced. But they still likely won't be because . . .

Evidence has to be relevant. And also more useful for proving something than it is harmful to your opponent (we call this prejudicial versus probative). In a case where the charges are Chris raping barb, and Chris abusing Barb financially, 99% of all of this nonsense is not only irrelevant and doesn't prove anything, but it is also insanely prejudicial to Chris.

But there is a chance Null, for example, might be called in. If they want to show the jury the messages where Chris admits to taking the money, they would need Null to help authenticate that piece of evidence. But it's easier just to subpoena the bank records and so forth and show that Chris did it that way. And that's the reality for most of the evidence. The admissions by text? Subpoena the text messages from Chris' cellphone company and show they were sent by Chris.

And remember, by the time we're going to trial there's been at least one, maybe more, interrogation/interview. And there's no way Chris doesn't spill his guts, especially when faced with the texts and the call and everything the police tell him they have - he'll do what criminals have always done, and attempt to explain his way out of it.

And in reality, those are the tapes that will be played at trial. Not the calls, or the texts. All of that may very well be reduced to a byline in the direct exam of the police detective where he or she explains how the case came to their attention.

TL;DR

If this is real as it seems to be, Chris is pretty fucked. It's unlikely to go to trial, nor will Chris go to prison right away. More likely a plea-bargain for heavy probation, leading to eventually spectacular failure and revocation to prison. If this does somehow go to trial, rules designed to ensure the fairness of the process will prevent the jury learning 99% of the story that is Chris.

oh you’re a prosecutor that’s awesome! Would you happen to have a magic carpet I could borrow? I have a dinner appointment with the king of the potato people and I don’t want to be late. That would be rude!

 

[Prester John]

I've seen a couple of mentions of Chris's gender identity perhaps becoming a legal hurdle in making the incest charges stick.

Apparently, the state of Virginia doesn't recognise Mother/Daughter relationships as incest, so it's not illegal. Barb's mental state being an unknown as of right now, we don't know if this was consensual or if she is able to consent. The only thing we know for sure is Chris broke the EPO.

Would something like this require a Supreme Court ruling to decide if gender and biological sex can be considered legally distinct, or could a Judge just say "Fuck it" and set the precedent themselves?

Does the state of Virginia recognize Chris as a female?

 

[Unpleasant]

I've seen a couple of mentions of Chris's gender identity perhaps becoming a legal hurdle in making the incest charges stick.

Apparently, the state of Virginia doesn't recognise Mother/Daughter relationships as incest, so it's not illegal. Barb's mental state being an unknown as of right now, we don't know if this was consensual or if she is able to consent. The only thing we know for sure is Chris broke the EPO.

Would something like this require a Supreme Court ruling to decide if gender and biological sex can be considered legally distinct, or could a Judge just say "Fuck it" and set the precedent themselves?

That's just a dumb twitter take. VA will absolutely treat this as incest. Again- if it is provable.

In general VA statutes are still written rather old fashioned. Although the state is going woke as a whole, their law books are still bastions of relative sanity.

oh you’re a prosecutor that’s awesome! Would you happen to have a magic carpet I could borrow? I have a dinner appointment with the king of the potato people and I don’t want to be late. That would be rude!

Lawyers don't get magic carpets, they just magically appear wherever they are supposed to be 15-30 minutes late.

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

I've seen a couple of mentions of Chris's gender identity perhaps becoming a legal hurdle in making the incest charges stick.

Apparently, the state of Virginia doesn't recognise Mother/Daughter relationships as incest, so it's not illegal. Barb's mental state being an unknown as of right now, we don't know if this was consensual or if she is able to consent. The only thing we know for sure is Chris broke the EPO.

Would something like this require a Supreme Court ruling to decide if gender and biological sex can be considered legally distinct, or could a Judge just say "Fuck it" and set the precedent themselves?

So, there's a lot of moving parts here.

Firstly, pretty much that's how these things always start. A trial court judge makes a ruling. It's not precedent per se, because it doesn't control any future decision making, but it's a ruling. Judges writing other Judges to ask for a ruling on a legal issue before they make a decision is very unusual and generally only happens in the case of a Federal Court trying to understand a novel question of State law that's relevant to a case they have to decide - they can ask the Supreme Court of that State for an advisory opinion.

Once we have our trial court ruling, the appeals process is how you get to the point where somebody actually starts setting binding precedents.

But it would only go as far as the Virginia Supreme Court or whatever they call their equivalent. Virginia Courts get to say what Virginia law means. Federal Courts, and the US Supreme Court, only get to say whether that law violates Federal law.

So if the statute actually doesn't criminalize Mother/Daughter relationships, the only way the U.S. Supreme Court gets to way in is if whatever ruling is made in Virginia can be challenged on U.S. Constitutional/Other Federal issue grounds.

And that's one major way that can happen. You may have heard about the concept of ex post facto laws. Back when we wrote the Constitution, we didn't the government to one day start passing laws and saying 'Hey I know you did this yesterday and we only made it illegal today, but we can still punish you for the fact you did it yesterday because one you did it we realized we really didn't like it.' - in other words, we didn't want them acting like Kings.

So if it's not a matter of statutory interpretation but a fact that Mother/Daughter incest isn't illegal under Virginia law - then Chris and Barb didn't do anything illegal (absent something else like rape) if in fact Chris is considered legally female. And at that point? Yes, depending on what the Virginia Courts decide the Federal Courts might have to get involved.

I see that happening one of two ways, if Mother/Daughter incest is legal in Virginia:

Option 1) Chris gets convicted, Trial Court says you're not a real girl, and that is upheld at the Virginia Supreme Court.

Option 2) Chris gets convicted, Trial Court says you are a real girl but fuck it incest is nasty we're gonna apply this statute to you and your mother anyway, and that is upheld at the Virginia Supreme Court.

In either scenario Chris has something to run to the Federal Courts about and a good chance they listen, albiet two very different issues depending on the scenario.

But even then, there's several layers to go through before either side could ask the Supreme Court to hear the case.

This makes the most sense to me.


So can you plea-bargain him into an institution or some arrangement that gets him the help he needs?

Well, you could plea-bargain him into therapy on probation and so on. And if he plea-bargained for prison time the Department of Corrections will generally make them do some sort of treatment during their time inside.

But an institution? Not really. Civil commitment is a civil process.

It may be possible, I'm just unsure of how you'd handle it. I guess you could allow them to enter a blind plea to the court, which means a plea with no agreement, let them enter a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity, and then urge the court to accept it. But I'm not sure this would ever be done in practice but unless you're damn sure they're insane you run the risk of them getting to the institution, being out within the year because nothing is wrong with them that justifies ongoing commitment, and you can never go after them on those charges again.

 

[Unpleasant]

So, there's a lot of moving parts here.

Firstly, pretty much that's how these things always start. A trial court judge makes a ruling. It's not precedent per se, because it doesn't control any future decision making, but it's a ruling. Judges writing other Judges to ask for a ruling on a legal issue before they make a decision is very unusual and generally only happens in the case of a Federal Court trying to understand a novel question of State law that's relevant to a case they have to decide - they can ask the Supreme Court of that State for an advisory opinion.

Once we have our trial court ruling, the appeals process is how you get to the point where somebody actually starts setting binding precedents.

But it would only go as far as the Virginia Supreme Court or whatever they call their equivalent. Virginia Courts get to say what Virginia law means. Federal Courts, and the US Supreme Court, only get to say whether that law violates Federal law.

So if the statute actually doesn't criminalize Mother/Daughter relationships, the only way the U.S. Supreme Court gets to way in is if whatever ruling is made in Virginia can be challenged on U.S. Constitutional/Other Federal issue grounds.

And that's one major way that can happen. You may have heard about the concept of ex post facto laws. Back when we wrote the Constitution, we didn't the government to one day start passing laws and saying 'Hey I know you did this yesterday and we only made it illegal today, but we can still punish you for the fact you did it yesterday because one you did it we realized we really didn't like it.' - in other words, we didn't want them acting like Kings.

So if it's not a matter of statutory interpretation but a fact that Mother/Daughter incest isn't illegal under Virginia law - then Chris and Barb didn't do anything illegal (absent something else like rape) if in fact Chris is considered legally female. And at that point? Yes, depending on what the Virginia Courts decide the Federal Courts might have to get involved.

I see that happening one of two ways, if Mother/Daughter incest is legal in Virginia:

Option 1) Chris gets convicted, Trial Court says you're not a real girl, and that is upheld at the Virginia Supreme Court.

Option 2) Chris gets convicted, Trial Court says you are a real girl but fuck it incest is nasty we're gonna apply this statute to you and your mother anyway, and that is upheld at the Virginia Supreme Court.

In either scenario Chris has something to run to the Federal Courts about and a good chance they listen, albiet two very different issues depending on the scenario.

But even then, there's several layers to go through before either side could ask the Supreme Court to hear the case.

Let's go ahead and nip he/she speculation in the bud.

VA DUI statute-

Here

§ 18.2-266. Driving motor vehicle, engine, etc., while intoxicated, etc.​

It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train (i) while such person has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0.08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered as provided in this article, (ii) while such person is under the influence of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, (iv) while such person is under the combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, or (v) while such person has a blood concentration of any of the following substances at a level that is equal to or greater than: (a) 0.02 milligrams of cocaine per liter of blood, (b) 0.1 milligrams of methamphetamine per liter of blood, (c) 0.01 milligrams of phencyclidine per liter of blood, or (d) 0.1 milligrams of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine per liter of blood. A charge alleging a violation of this section shall support a conviction under clauses (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v).

For the purposes of this article, the term "motor vehicle" includes mopeds, while operated on the public highways of this Commonwealth.

If this gendered twittertalk were taken seriously, women would be immune to several types of DWIs in VA.

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

Let's go ahead and nip he/she speculation in the bud.

VA DUI statute-

Here



If this gendered twittertalk were taken seriously, women would be immune to several types of DWIs in VA.

Great. But that's the DUI statute. However, I agree, let's nip it in the bud. So for that we have to go to the Incest Statute.

§ 18.2-366. Sexual intercourse by persons forbidden to marry; incest; penalties

law.lis.virginia.gov

It . . . it does actually use gendered language in a way that the DUI statute doesn't. Specifically 'his', potentially modifying the 'any person'.

Huh.

 

[DiggieSmalls]

Zap to the extreme might take a new meaning.

 

[Unpleasant]

So, there's a lot of moving parts here.

Firstly, pretty much that's how these things always start. A trial court judge makes a ruling. It's not precedent per se, because it doesn't control any future decision making, but it's a ruling. Judges writing other Judges to ask for a ruling on a legal issue before they make a decision is very unusual and generally only happens in the case of a Federal Court trying to understand a novel question of State law that's relevant to a case they have to decide - they can ask the Supreme Court of that State for an advisory opinion.

Once we have our trial court ruling, the appeals process is how you get to the point where somebody actually starts setting binding precedents.

But it would only go as far as the Virginia Supreme Court or whatever they call their equivalent. Virginia Courts get to say what Virginia law means. Federal Courts, and the US Supreme Court, only get to say whether that law violates Federal law.

So if the statute actually doesn't criminalize Mother/Daughter relationships, the only way the U.S. Supreme Court gets to way in is if whatever ruling is made in Virginia can be challenged on U.S. Constitutional/Other Federal issue grounds.

And that's one major way that can happen. You may have heard about the concept of ex post facto laws. Back when we wrote the Constitution, we didn't the government to one day start passing laws and saying 'Hey I know you did this yesterday and we only made it illegal today, but we can still punish you for the fact you did it yesterday because one you did it we realized we really didn't like it.' - in other words, we didn't want them acting like Kings.

So if it's not a matter of statutory interpretation but a fact that Mother/Daughter incest isn't illegal under Virginia law - then Chris and Barb didn't do anything illegal (absent something else like rape) if in fact Chris is considered legally female. And at that point? Yes, depending on what the Virginia Courts decide the Federal Courts might have to get involved.

I see that happening one of two ways, if Mother/Daughter incest is legal in Virginia:

Option 1) Chris gets convicted, Trial Court says you're not a real girl, and that is upheld at the Virginia Supreme Court.

Option 2) Chris gets convicted, Trial Court says you are a real girl but fuck it incest is nasty we're gonna apply this statute to you and your mother anyway, and that is upheld at the Virginia Supreme Court.

In either scenario Chris has something to run to the Federal Courts about and a good chance they listen, albiet two very different issues depending on the scenario.

But even then, there's several layers to go through before either side could ask the Supreme Court to hear the case.

Let's go ahead and nip he/she speculation in the bud.

VA DUI statute-

Here

§ 18.2-266. Driving motor vehicle, engine, etc., while intoxicated, etc.​

It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train (i) while such person has a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 percent or more by weight by volume or 0.08 grams or more per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a chemical test administered as provided in this article, (ii) while such person is under the influence of alcohol, (iii) while such person is under the influence of any narcotic drug or any other self-administered intoxicant or drug of whatsoever nature, or any combination of such drugs, to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, (iv) while such person is under the combined influence of alcohol and any drug or drugs to a degree which impairs his ability to drive or operate any motor vehicle, engine or train safely, or (v) while such person has a blood concentration of any of the following substances at a level that is equal to or greater than: (a) 0.02 milligrams of cocaine per liter of blood, (b) 0.1 milligrams of methamphetamine per liter of blood, (c) 0.01 milligrams of phencyclidine per liter of blood, or (d) 0.1 milligrams of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine per liter of blood. A charge alleging a violation of this section shall support a conviction under clauses (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v).

For the purposes of this article, the term "motor vehicle" includes mopeds, while operated on the public highways of this Commonwealth.

If this gendered twittertalk were taken seriously, women would be immune to several types of DWIs in VA.

Great. But that's the DUI statute. However, I agree, let's nip it in the bud. So for that we have to go to the Incest Statute.

§ 18.2-366. Sexual intercourse by persons forbidden to marry; incest; penalties

law.lis.virginia.gov

It . . . it does actually use gendered language in a way that the DUI statute doesn't. Specifically 'his', potentially modifying the 'any person'.

Huh.

See also

§ 1-216. Gender.
A word used in the masculine includes the feminine and neuter.

Virginian law on the whole is written in a more antiquated fashion than many others.

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

See also



Virginian law on the whole is written in a more antiquated fashion than many others.

Boom. That's the final word on the subject. Chris absolutely can be prosecuted for incest, and it will be irrelevant whether the law recognizes him as female or not.

 

[Unpleasant]

Although not active yet, you can add Chris on Vinelink to be notified of changes in custody status. Although not immediate to update, it is quite quick. When he is transferred from Richmond to whatever court will service his charges it will reflect his movement then as well, if he doesn't post bond or receive a recognizance release. They may have a good point to hold him at least until he can be transported or be appointed an attorney though, given his mental state.

The Virginia courts system website has a thorough database of current and historical cases, although it is not likely that Chris' new charges are there yet. They will likely post sometime tomorrow.

Side note- who is going to pick up his car? Unless he is immediately released he will be quite a ways away from it and it will end up towed.

 

[LocalFireDept]

Very insightful post, @Alexander Hamilton, I always appreciate our expert Kiwis in the field giving informed opinions on complex matters. I speculated the outcome you may have offered as a possibility in the other thread as an educated guess, so I'm glad to see I wasn't too far off the mark. I'm not sure if it'll go down that course, but there's certainly going to be something fucky going on with Chris's defense since he was babbling about The Merge™ during his arrest.

In fact, this brings up a question: do you think it is likely Chris ends up appointed a public defender for this? I know the Chandlers have retained Rob Bell in the past, but without access to Barb's accounts I'm not confident at all that Chris can afford the fees out of pocket.

 

[McSneaks]

The amount of rambling about "insanity defense! He'll beat it!!" It's retarded and clearly have no idea how the law works which is scary. That's literally the hardest thing to prove, is almost never used, and would be disproven with literally a single text message...


He has to have had no idea what was going on AT THE TIME of the offense. Literally be completely out of touch with reality and not understand.


We have text messages of him describing how he slowly loosened barb up. There's texts to null telling null to keep it a secret and Chris won't name her because people won't understand. HE BOUGHT A SEX AND DISABILITY BOOK to help do it right. He explained they do it EVERY THREE DAYS and he's going to a doctor to make sure he has no STDs. He confirmed to dillon he KNOWS it's his mom and doesn't believe it's a sex doll or something.


So he knows who she is, he knows he has to keep it a secret, it preplans having sex, he gets checked/information, he slowly advanced it ("rubbing outside at first, then slipped a finger"). Literally all of the evidence directly shows he was attracted to his mom, slowly started plying her to have sex, researched it and did it then kept it a secret.


In which part of the PREPLANNING AND FORESIGHT was the insanity lol? The mom part? Literal schizophrenics hearing voices have been convicted of murder because that has absolutely nothing to do with "the insanity defense". Good luck an autistic that got super horny. Chris has had dozens of welfare checks, police run ins, court, counsellors, etc. He has never been considered "insane" before (not even from the people giving him money to fly across the country to a gay horse convention). But now suddenly he snapped and went insane either one specific time every three days, or for a couple months straight? Yea?

 

[GenociderSyo]

Are elder abuse and abuse of an incapicitated adult unable to be given at the same time? Figured if she has dementia they could get him on both.

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

Very insightful post, @Alexander Hamilton, I always appreciate our expert Kiwis in the field giving informed opinions on complex matters. I speculated the outcome you may have offered as a possibility in the other thread as an educated guess, so I'm glad to see I wasn't too far off the mark. I'm not sure if it'll go down that course, but there's certainly going to be something fucky going on with Chris's defense since he was babbling about The Merge™ during his arrest.

In fact, this brings up a question: do you think it is likely Chris ends up appointed a public defender for this? I know the Chandlers have retained Rob Bell in the past, but without access to Barb's accounts I'm not confident at all that Chris can afford the fees out of pocket.

Oh, he's absolutely getting a court-appointed lawyer I suspect. He has a right to one in a criminal matter, and I can't imagine he has the means to pay for one.

Are elder abuse and abuse of an incapicitated adult unable to be given at the same time? Figured if she has dementia they could get him on both.

So this really heavily depends on the exact wording of the statutes.

The way it's decided which crimes are the same and which aren't for the purpose of prosecuting multiple crimes from a single incident is by looking at the elements you have to prove. If each independently requires an element the other doesn't, then you're good. Otherwise the protections against double jeopardy kick in.

So in other words if elder abuse is made up of A B C D E and abuse of an incapacitated adult is made up of A B C D F you're good. But if it's made up of A B C D E F you can't prosecute both because elder abuse wouldn't contain an element that isn't also contained in abuse of an incapacitated adult.

 

[LocalFireDept]

In which part of the PREPLANNING AND FORESIGHT was the insanity lol? The mom part? Literal schizophrenics hearing voices have been convicted of murder because that has absolutely nothing to do with "the insanity defense". Good luck an autistic that got super horny. Chris has had dozens of welfare checks, police run ins, court, counsellors, etc. He has never been considered "insane" before (not even from the people giving him money to fly across the country to a gay horse convention). But now suddenly he snapped and went insane either one specific time every three days, or for a couple months straight? Yea?

I suspect most of these posts are made by people who weren't around for the time Chris tried to run over someone in his car or maced a GameStop employee completely unprompted. If Chris isn't legally "insane" for those he's not gonna be for this shitshow either.