Chris - The Legal Issues - A Prosecutor's Perspective

[waffle]

Everyone has been speculating on when his arraignment will be, and I had a memory from some Ralph shit of "family and domestic" court being its own thing in VA. Sure enough, from a cursory search it looks like this is likely to be in the family court ( http://www.courts.state.va.us/courts/jdr/jdrinfo.pdf ). In that document they state "adults charged with committing felonies against children or family or household members are brought into juvenile and domestic relations district court after arrest, for a preliminary hearing". I have also found the Greene County page about their court, ( https://www.greenecountyva.gov/county-services/court/junenile-domestic-relations-court ) which makes it sound like Chris is going to have court Wednesday morning.

It doesn't procedurally make sense to have a preliminary hearing before an arraignment and bail hearing though, so IDK if they do that all at the same time or if you have to make at lest two appearances in the juvenile court if you don't waive prelim. If he waives or they do it all at once then it sounds like he should have a court date posted to the computer by tomorrow afternoon/night, and if not then he'll probably just be arraigned without our knowledge tomorrow and stuck in limbo without a publicly viewable court date until they get him a prelim date or he gets a PD who has him waive.

 

[FriendshipBunny]

Thank you to all the lawyers (even prosecutors, haha) who are taking time out to give us insight into the legal workings of a case like this.
As was said in a previous post, cases like this take a very long time. Since Chris doesn't really have anyone to bail him out (if/when it's issued), is there a possibility he can be released on his own recognizance? Or will he likely have to spend the duration of the investigation and case in jail?

 

[Treblinkachu]

If in fact they find CP then yes

That's one place I could see trolls independently trying to ruin Chris's life enough to cause real trouble. There are enough underage mega spergs on the internet that he has to have gotten nudes from at least one sometime in the last few years. Though, that's flimsy at best.

They'll never use the Bluespike calls to prosecute him for anything but pardon me for imagining it just a moment. Think I'm going to die laughing.

 

[waffle]

Thank you to all the lawyers (even prosecutors, haha) who are taking time out to give us insight into the legal workings of a case like this.
As was said in a previous post, cases like this take a very long time. Since Chris doesn't really have anyone to bail him out (if/when it's issued), is there a possibility he can be released on his own recognizance? Or will he likely have to spend the duration of the investigation and case in jail?

It is an on paper possibility that he could get ROR'ed, sure. But, it's never going to happen on a sex crime where the only place he has to go back to is the victim's home.

I think the only way Chris ever sets foot outside unescorted by deputies in the next 5-10 years is if someone like his half brother from Bob's side (David, I think? The eye doctor who has money), who's an actual family member ponies up big cash to hire a lawyer for him and applied for guardianship. If that happened and it doesn't look like things were forceful (I've seen conflicting stuff on Chris "putting her in the hospital") then there's probably an outside chance they could get him some kind of probation that's contingent on him going somewhere where he will have a full time tard wrangler.

 

[Thomas Talus]

Past trolling sagas are at best tangentially relevant, but I have good money on them not being in any way relevant to the proceedings considering they are irrelevant to the facts of Chris having sex with or raping his mother, it would maybe be character evidence at best, which is only useful in establishing the personal propensities of a party or witness, and generally only available on cross-examination. I doubt that a sensible judge would admit almost any of the moments of christory. Also there's basically no chance of there being a jury because again, I don't think that this is going to trial barring chris adamantly demanding a trial and refusing pleas because of merge bullshit.

I think nearly anything that isn't directly related to the alleged sex or the (monetary) withdrawal is going to be more prejudicial than probative, because a trier of fact seeing Chris do anything other than sit there and not talk is going to increase their desire to lock him up and throw away the key. I'm only mostly joking when I wonder if the prosecution might be able to suppress defense exhibits on the grounds of "no, that's still going to make him look worse than any benefit to his case that might be gained."

Thank you to all the lawyers (even prosecutors, haha) who are taking time out to give us insight into the legal workings of a case like this.
As was said in a previous post, cases like this take a very long time. Since Chris doesn't really have anyone to bail him out (if/when it's issued), is there a possibility he can be released on his own recognizance? Or will he likely have to spend the duration of the investigation and case in jail?

That's going to be down to the jail's internal matrix system, but sex crimes are not going to be at the front of the line for release, and there's a strong likelihood that he has nowhere to go except the one place they least want him to go. Maybe if Barb were to be put in protective custody in a care facility, but if she's home and Chris is likely to go home I don't see it happening.

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

Thank you to all the lawyers (even prosecutors, haha) who are taking time out to give us insight into the legal workings of a case like this.
As was said in a previous post, cases like this take a very long time. Since Chris doesn't really have anyone to bail him out (if/when it's issued), is there a possibility he can be released on his own recognizance? Or will he likely have to spend the duration of the investigation and case in jail?

For sex crimes? Especially with prior violence in your criminal history? A PR bond is technically possible. Is any Judge who enjoys being a Judge going to give someone in Chris' position a PR bond? I highly doubt it. This is either one of the strengths or weaknesses of an elected judiciary depending on your point of view.

In most cases, people have the right to a reasonable bond..most states also have a list of offenses for which bond may be denied entirely or for which a presumption against bond exists.

The key thing about the idea of a reasonable bond is reasonable means in light of all the factors of the case, of which the defendant's financial condition is only one. Reasonable does not automatically mean a bond you can actually post. And any bond in this sort of case will come with conditions.

So either Chris sits because he can't post bond or Chris posts bond somehow and gets it revoked later, I predict.

There is one jurisdiction I know of where of you don't get the indictment before the grand jury within a certain amount of time after the defendant is locked up and bond set, the defendant automatically gets a PR. But even if Virginia has a similar law, no prosecutor who likes being a prosecutor is going to miss that deadline on a sex case.

 

[Treblinkachu]

sex crimes are not going to be at the front of the line for release

well this isn't california or oregon we're talking about, true. but there's still some ridiculous shit that happens in early release programs. chris can be pretty cooperative when he has to be--he's enough of a sociopath to know when to shut up and do what he's told while he sharpens the knife behind his back, so to speak. the fact that the victim was one of convenience is a legal ticket to an earlier release compared to, say, if he was trawling actively for a target. he'll be seen as less of a predator and more of a desperate, deviant idiot with no clue what he's doing.

chris, of course, displays predatory behaviors. he's just so timid most people always assumed he was the equivalent of a mosquito, not realizing mosquitos can give you fucking malaria if you sit in a hoard full of them for years.

He's insidiously monstrous, but not on purpose. His own cowardice and stupidity have allowed him to survive this long, ultimately. "Sex pest" is the perfect way to describe him.

 

[robobobo]

Seeing as this is 90+% likely to end in a plea deal, I wanna know about plea deals. Do the attorneys actually meet, have a good laugh about how guilty Chris is, then negotiate what's in the public's best interest? Or does the prosecutor just email the offer over to the defense and call it a day? I've never known whether plea bargaining was an actual back and forth between the lawyers or a take it or leave it from the prosecution.

 

[Learned Hand]

Seeing as this is 90+% likely to end in a plea deal, I wanna know about plea deals. Do the attorneys actually meet, have a good laugh about how guilty Chris is, then negotiate what's in the public's best interest? Or does the prosecutor just email the offer over to the defense and call it a day? I've never known whether plea bargaining was an actual back and forth between the lawyers or a take it or leave it from the prosecution.

The prosecutor says, "I will do X, Y, and Z for you if you plead guilty." (In cases like this, there are other things the prosecutor can ask for in return in complex litigation, such us derivative and the coveted transactional immunity)

Defense counsel has a rules obligation to present all such offers to their clients, and may advise, but ultimately only the client themselves may decide whether to take a plea or not. Accepting a plea usually involves pleading guilty to the offenses, and sets forth a number of stipulations in order to avoid a trial or other circumstances.

Pleas are made by prosecutors weighing public interest, judicial efficiency, general welfare, and other interests. A plea may be more or less generous depending on how motivated a prosecutor is to avoid trial, usually.

Defense may respond after consulting with their client with some additional asks or considerations. It's not unheard for the defense to also set forth some general asks that a prosecutor might acquiesce to. Often they meet in the middle, but a prosecutor can also just put the screws in a defendant and says "you can take my first and only deal or go to trial. Delay, and go to trial, and I won't give you another deal." The implication being that if the defendant goes to trial, the prosecution will recommend harsh penalties.

 

[TheMockTurtle]

Sorry if this has been asked before, I’ll finish reading the thread after work:

If Chris takes a plea and has to stay away from Barb what might happen with his living situation since he’s disabled and dependent? Would the court/social workers place him somewhere or would they just tell him to fuck off and figure it out himself?

 

[Learned Hand]

Sorry if this has been asked before, I’ll finish reading the thread after work:

If Chris takes a plea and has to stay away from Barb what might happen with his living situation since he’s disabled and dependent? Would the court/social workers place him somewhere or would they just tell him to fuck off and figure it out himself?

He'd likely be referred to a social worker. It would no longer be the court's problem though.

Even with a plea, you may still serve jail time, so keep that in mind.

 

[failson-lawguy]

Defense may respond after consulting with their client with some additional asks or considerations. It's not unheard for the defense to also set forth some general asks that a prosecutor might acquiesce to. Often they meet in the middle, but a prosecutor can also just put the screws in a defendant and says "you can take my first and only deal or go to trial. Delay, and go to trial, and I won't give you another deal." The implication being that if the defendant goes to trial, the prosecution will recommend harsh penalties.

this. I can understand prosecutors who are super overworked, because yeah, fucking a lot of prosecutors are overworked even though they have an insane degree of discretion over charging and trial conduct but goddamn does it make my job infinitely harder when there's a finality stipulation and the terms are still largely disagreeable. I am not disclosing client information but one of the couple times this happened was one of the worst moments of my life consulting with a client. I don't know how likely a finality clause is here, but who knows man

 

[Thomas Talus]

well this isn't california or oregon we're talking about, true. but there's still some ridiculous shit that happens in early release programs. chris can be pretty cooperative when he has to be--he's enough of a sociopath to know when to shut up and do what he's told while he sharpens the knife behind his back, so to speak. the fact that the victim was one of convenience is a legal ticket to an earlier release compared to, say, if he was trawling actively for a target. he'll be seen as less of a predator and more of a desperate, deviant idiot with no clue what he's doing.

I'd still say that the likelihood that he returns to the same environment where he had that convenience in the first place is going to be the stumbling block here. Until that changes, there's no way he's just matrixed out or recog'd. A secured bond with proof of where he's going to be staying and an ankle monitor is a possibility, but unless some poop-touching happens or some non-profit steps in I doubt he'd be able to muster the resources, so he's back to jail, where they'd have to be jam-packed with murderers and violent rapists before he'd get released to keep the population down.

If anyone wants to immerse themselves in the details of the bail policies and procedures of the Commonwealth of Virginia, knock yourselves out.

 

[TheMockTurtle]

Even with a plea, you may still serve jail time, so keep that in mind.

HEY

I didn’t rape Barb

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

Seeing as this is 90+% likely to end in a plea deal, I wanna know about plea deals. Do the attorneys actually meet, have a good laugh about how guilty Chris is, then negotiate what's in the public's best interest? Or does the prosecutor just email the offer over to the defense and call it a day? I've never known whether plea bargaining was an actual back and forth between the lawyers or a take it or leave it from the prosecution.

So @Learned Hand (big fan of your formula, Your Honor) has covered the technicalities pretty well.

To go to your question about how this works in practice, we prefer to issue our offers in writing. Sometimes a letter, sometimes an email.

Negotiations from there will depend on the relationship between the prosecutor and the defense attorney. They might be via email, in office, at an announcement docket...and yes, I absolutely have had cases where defense counsel and I sit there and laugh and shake our heads and meet in the middle with a plea that's acceptable to everyone and serves justice. That's the ideal.

I don't generally issue 'this or trial' offers..my offers generally have some built in room for negotiation. This is important because the defendant needs to feel like they got something/their lawyer worked for them. Even if it's the most open shut case in the world, defendants rarely want to plead guilty and accept punishment, but if they know they're going to have to sooner or later getting to negotiate a better offer can help the medicine go down more smoothly.

Another thing we can sometimes agree with to do is have them enter a blind plea - in other words a guilty plea with no offer - and we both get to argue punishment to the judge. Often an agreement of this type will include some sort of promise not to ask for more than a certain amount of punishment, thus giving them some safety in terms of the range they face compared to going to trial with the full range.

 

[Kornula]

You're certainly not wrong about any of this. It's entirely possible there is mixing of funds going on. The issue is that Chris seems to acknowledge it's not his money - he told Null he intended to pay it back, not 'Oh that's mine' and acknowledged having control of Barb's account. Also from what I've seen he has his own. A big thing this turns on will be whether both their names are on the account or just hers.

In terms of Barb's lucidity . . . yeah, it's possible. I just don't see it. And Chris' purported statements that she was reluctant and confused and came around don't help him at all. If she is actually mentally competent to consent and tells investigators she did AND Chris holds up under an interview or refuses to do one, it's possible this becomes a mutual incest case with no rape. The chances of both of those things seem slim, but we only have what's been revealed to us and on the balance of that I'm leaning toward some sort of rape charge.

"I intend to pay it back" can that be used as a legal term for intent? Or does there need to be an actual legally notarized contract?

 

[RodgerDodger]

Hmm... Yeah... His new “girlfriend


Dude, people have been trying to “help” Chris for decades. Ironically, that’s how many get sucked into his insanity.

Oh professional help? He’s been receiving that on and off for decades as well.

This isn’t Chris’s first rodeo with the legal system, and as I recall he’s seen court ordered psychiatrists before.

I like this idea some people seem have of the psychiatric system, that some magical wand gets waved and you “get better”.

The reality is that Chris is 40. He’s far too gone, far too stubborn, far too autistic and far too lazy to change.

At this point “getting help” isn’t an option.

(Unless possibly some sort of CIA skunkworks combination of LSD, electroshock and cattle prods.)

“Getting help” for someone like Chris, and those who are far worse off, usually means keeping them doped and compliant through heavy duty psychdrugs.




“As your public defender, the best advice I can give you right now, is to start throwing feces at the guards.”

I don’t think any of the prior court ordered psychiatrists have wired up his cock and balls to perform psychosexual testing on him? Granted he might just view this as part of his “Love Quest”

 

[Treblinkachu]

Spoiler: Words

The prosecutor says, "I will do X, Y, and Z for you if you plead guilty." (In cases like this, there are other things the prosecutor can ask for in return in complex litigation, such us derivative and the coveted transactional immunity)

Defense counsel has a rules obligation to present all such offers to their clients, and may advise, but ultimately only the client themselves may decide whether to take a plea or not. Accepting a plea usually involves pleading guilty to the offenses, and sets forth a number of stipulations in order to avoid a trial or other circumstances.

Pleas are made by prosecutors weighing public interest, judicial efficiency, general welfare, and other interests. A plea may be more or less generous depending on how motivated a prosecutor is to avoid trial, usually.

Defense may respond after consulting with their client with some additional asks or considerations. It's not unheard for the defense to also set forth some general asks that a prosecutor might acquiesce to. Often they meet in the middle, but a prosecutor can also just put the screws in a defendant and says "you can take my first and only deal or go to trial. Delay, and go to trial, and I won't give you another deal." The implication being that if the defendant goes to trial, the prosecution will recommend harsh penalties.
[/SPOILER

Spoiler: More words

So @Learned Hand (big fan of your formula, Your Honor) has covered the technicalities pretty well.

To go to your question about how this works in practice, we prefer to issue our offers in writing. Sometimes a letter, sometimes an email.

Negotiations from there will depend on the relationship between the prosecutor and the defense attorney. They might be via email, in office, at an announcement docket...and yes, I absolutely have had cases where defense counsel and I sit there and laugh and shake our heads and meet in the middle with a plea that's acceptable to everyone and serves justice. That's the ideal.

I don't generally issue 'this or trial' offers..my offers generally have some built in room for negotiation. This is important because the defendant needs to feel like they got something/their lawyer worked for them. Even if it's the most open shut case in the world, defendants rarely want to plead guilty and accept punishment, but if they know they're going to have to sooner or later getting to negotiate a better offer can help the medicine go down more smoothly.

Another thing we can sometimes agree with to do is have them enter a blind plea - in other words a guilty plea with no offer - and we both get to argue punishment to the judge. Often an agreement of this type will include some sort of promise not to ask for more than a certain amount of punishment, thus giving them some safety in terms of the range they face compared to going to trial with the full range.

Wait so @Learned Hand is an actual judge? Well holy shit, we have the Judge, the Prosecutor, and the shitty bargain paralegal with suspect credentials all in one thread. Now we just need... literally the rest of the court.

Null is bailiff.

Edit: Defense lawyer found

Null is still bailiff.

 

[Thomas Talus]

Defense may respond after consulting with their client with some additional asks or considerations. It's not unheard for the defense to also set forth some general asks that a prosecutor might acquiesce to. Often they meet in the middle, but a prosecutor can also just put the screws in a defendant and says "you can take my first and only deal or go to trial. Delay, and go to trial, and I won't give you another deal." The implication being that if the defendant goes to trial, the prosecution will recommend harsh penalties.

One of the very rare occasions I've actually gone to trial on a criminal case was when the offer from the prosecutor was just the presumptive sentence. There's supposed to be bait on the hook! My client was a lady in her 80s with no criminal history, as well.

Oddly enough, the jury found my client not guilty of the primary charge, but guilty on the "did the primary charge because of perception of victim's membership in protected class" charge. LOL juries. I think the judge was much less impressed by the prosecution's case, so my client didn't get any jail time when the prosecution was asking for several weeks.

To go to your question about how this works in practice, we prefer to issue our offers in writing. Sometimes a letter, sometimes an email.

Negotiations from there will depend on the relationship between the prosecutor and the defense attorney. They might be via email, in office, at an announcement docket...and yes, I absolutely have had cases where defense counsel and I sit there and laugh and shake our heads and meet in the middle with a plea that's acceptable to everyone and serves justice. That's the ideal.

I don't generally issue 'this or trial' offers..my offers generally have some built in room for negotiation. This is important because the defendant needs to feel like they got something/their lawyer worked for them. Even if it's the most open shut case in the world, defendants rarely want to plead guilty and accept punishment, but if they know they're going to have to sooner or later getting to negotiate a better offer can help the medicine go down more smoothly.

Out here the offers are done on standardized forms included in the initial discovery packet, with check boxes for things like Anger Management or Substance Abuse packages. It's very hard to negotiate any concessions unless you can introduce something major like a serious mental health diagnosis that would make them eligible for mental health court, or making a decent argument that the complainant's version of events is physically improbable (managed to get work release for the client on that one, he'd already confessed to the actual crime of strangulation, but it's highly likely that the complainant was the one who initiated the fight and advanced on the client even though the client ended it with a defensive chokehold, both had martial arts training).

 

[Alexander Hamilton]

this. I can understand prosecutors who are super overworked, because yeah, fucking a lot of prosecutors are overworked even though they have an insane degree of discretion over charging and trial conduct but goddamn does it make my job infinitely harder when there's a finality stipulation and the terms are still largely disagreeable. I am not disclosing client information but one of the couple times this happened was one of the worst moments of my life consulting with a client. I don't know how likely a finality clause is here, but who knows man

Finality stipulations are stupid. Trial taxes are stupid. Prosecutors that rely on them need to git gud. Craft good plea offers and/or just accept that some cases are going to trial - you're supposed to be a trial lawyer anyways, you should relish those cases.

One of the reasons they're so stupid is that we're not in fact omniscient. Defense counsel may in fact know something you don't that would cause you to change your offer. And we're only human. More than once I've had a defense lawyer tell me my offer was unreasonable and I went back and looked and was like "Wow why I was so angry about this case?" We know factors like being hungry, fighting with your spouse, being tired etc play into people's ability to be rational and make good judgments.

Oliver Cromwell said "I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken." I've always liked that quote. Finality clauses make that very hard to do


Prosecutors who rely on crutches such as finality clauses and trial taxes to close their cases need to go re-read the decision in Berger and think about what they are supposed to be and why they became a prosecutor in the first place.