Chris - The Legal Issues - A Prosecutor's Perspective

[Learned Hand]

PD here

My condolences.

doubtful considering the high bar that is a defendant proving they were too insane to understand that what they were doing was wrong or that they literally couldn't resist the impulse to do it. This would entirely have to be on chris to prove, and from text messages that could be subpoena'd that we already know about, he was fully aware of the fact that what he was doing was wrong, attempts to conceal the act, lies regarding it, etc. Best case for Chris is a diminished capacity guilty rather than NGRI.

I know insanity keeps getting thrown around but I don't think any PD or defense attorney would ever consider throwing that hat in the ring in a case like this if they really grasped the entire picture. I also, generally, find the chances of a trial exceedingly low. A PD will advise Chris he should consider whatever (probably reasonable) deal the prosecution will offer and he'll probably take it. I don't expect much fanfair procedurally.

I can envision Chris spending a period of time in some kind of minimum security or secure mental facility, and even then not very long. He'll be homeless in a couple years is my guess.

 

[failson-lawguy]

My condolences.


I know insanity keeps getting thrown around but I don't think any PD or defense attorney would ever consider throwing that hat in the ring in a case like this if they really grasped the entire picture. I also, generally, find the chances of a trial exceedingly low. A PD will advise Chris he should consider whatever (probably reasonable) deal the prosecution will offer and he'll probably take it. I don't expect much fanfair procedurally.

I can envision Chris spending a period of time in some kind of minimum security or secure mental facility, and even then not very long. He'll be homeless in a couple years is my guess.

Lmao thanks, also you're completely right, I don't think I know a single PD who would be comfortable doing a full NGRI plea or its subsequent insanity hearing bullshit barring incredibly obvious mens rea defect shit or if it's a capital case. Besides the identity of the defendant, this entire thing is both substantively and procedurally tame and I cannot imagine any possible appellate review of it that doesn't come out with the same outcome of guilt absent some severe fuck-up in evidence, jury instruction, or prosc. misconduct. I will say however, and posit to the other lawyers here, do you guys think that the weens could possibly fuck up the proceedings? Obviously not really an issue if its pleaded out before trial but I worry that dipshit christorians will somehow create disconduct bad enough to create appealate issues.

 

[Learned Hand]

Lmao thanks, also you're completely right, I don't think I know a single PD who would be comfortable doing a full NGRI plea or its subsequent insanity hearing bullshit barring incredibly obvious mens rea defect shit or if it's a capital case. Besides the identity of the defendant, this entire thing is both substantively and procedurally tame and I cannot imagine any possible appellate review of it that doesn't come out with the same outcome of guilt absent some severe fuck-up in evidence, jury instruction, or prosc. misconduct. I will say however, and posit to the other lawyers here, do you guys think that the weens could possibly fuck up the proceedings? Obviously not really an issue if its pleaded out before trial but I worry that dipshit christorians will somehow create disconduct bad enough to create appealate issues.

There is always the usual potential for plain error, sloppy police work, or dumb jury instructions, but that's a fig leaf twisting in the wind. I'm going to stake heavy on the possibility that Chris takes a deal.

From the perspective of the prosecution, I wouldn't want to touch this shit either. It's not like Chris is in NYC, he's in a district with limited financial and court resources so the pressure to cut a fair, maybe even favorable deal, will be enormous, especially given the "publicity" surrounding events. The only way I could ever see a trial is if Chris, for whatever reason (and we can't rule it out because he's not a typical defendant) digs his feet in and demands one. To my mind, that truly would be the most profound expression of his mental illness. Not to be too tongue in cheek, but if you wanted to make a NGRI argument based on that alone, I'd hear it were I the judge.

 

[Fareal]

Re bail:

In my jurisdiction, you have to be bailed to a specific address. Chris is excluded by court order from his own address and has at this point nowhere else to be bailed to. He wouldn‘t be bailed here as a result. Is this different in VA or is he really behind the eight ball on that?

 

[Learned Hand]

Re bail:

In my jurisdiction, you have to be bailed to a specific address. Chris is excluded by court order from his own address and has at this point nowhere else to be bailed to. He wouldn‘t be bailed here as a result. Is this different in VA or is he really behind the eight ball on that?

Generally speaking, most courts will only release you on bail if, on top of whatever funds that need to be secured, you have an address that it is reasonably likely you can be found at any time. Chris would almost assuredly have to secure that, but by then the TRO or whatever he actually has against him may be dissolved or some other circumstance may arise that would allow his release back to his home.

 

[robobobo]

So law types, I've been mildly curious, I know that "insanity defense" is up there with RICO for things that TV shows made people think are common when they actually almost never fly, but could the PD try to get the judge to consider his tardism to be an extenuating circumstance for a lighter sentence? Could it fly if the lawyer stood and said, "Your honor, I know this idiot isn't legally insane, but he's clearly fucked up and dumb as dirt, please have some mercy." Or is it like some lawyer faux pas to ask the judge to amend the sentence without a clear justification for it in the law books?

 

[failson-lawguy]

So law types, I've been mildly curious, I know that "insanity defense" is up there with RICO for things that TV shows made people think are common when they actually almost never fly, but could the PD try to get the judge to consider his tardism to be an extenuating circumstance for a lighter sentence? Could it fly if the lawyer stood and said, "Your honor, I know this idiot isn't legally insane, but he's clearly fucked up and dumb as dirt, please have some mercy." Or is it like some lawyer faux pas to ask the judge to amend the sentence without a clear justification for it in the law books?

diminished capacity is an affirmative defense that kind of bridges the gap between complete culpability and being too jokerfied to understand you're committing crimes. It's an affirmative defense and a very imperfect one that basically requires you to bring forward that you are severely incapacitated in the processing and understanding of the consequences of your crimes. In my experience even with pretty incompetent D's, juries don't really care about this if the crime is bad enough, like, lets say raping your own elderly mother for a month and then stealing money from her to flee from the area.

 

[Fareal]

In my experience, everything and anything can and will be offered in mitigation at sentencing. Being a fucking retard is pretty solid as mitigation goes, but fucking your mom is a pretty serious crime, so it can only go so far.

I was once present in court (watching brief) when it was offered in mitigation that sure, the guy had raped both his stepdaughters, but he hadn‘t touched his bio daughters, so this was evidence of insight and the capacity to control his urges. I can say the judge was highly unresponsive to this line of argument.

 

[robobobo]

In my experience, everything and anything can and will be offered in mitigation at sentencing. Being a fucking retard is pretty solid as mitigation goes, but fucking your mom is a pretty serious crime, so it can only go so far.

I was once present in court (watching brief) when it was offered in mitigation that sure, the guy had raped both his stepdaughters, but he hadn‘t touched his bio daughters, so this was evidence of insight and the capacity to control his urges. I can say the judge was highly unresponsive to this line of argument.

Isn't that worse? "Your honor, the fact that my client didn't fuck his actual daughters proves that he knows fucking your daughters is wrong. Very, very wrong. He clearly knew that. So... I don't know where I was going with that. Um. Can I get that stricken from the record?"

 

[DonaldJTrump]

In the 2015 gamestop case In Cville the courts coddled him and treated him like the tard he is, I could see that happeningnagain

 

[cow-wannabe]

@Alexander Hamilton

I have a few questions here, and it doesn't seem to really be being addressed, and I'd love to hear a prosecutor's take on them

1. There seems to be a lot of riding on the assumption that Barb is senile, but even if she is, if someone grooms their mentally handicapped adult child with the intention of engaging in sexually inappropriate relations, but then subsequently becomes senile either during the sexual relationship or prior to its consummation how does that effect the potential judgement? There seems to be a great deal about the way Barb raised CWC and the pressures she continued to place on him during his adult life that are being ignored. Likewise, during the majority of their life together she was in the dominant, competent, caregiver role, and incidents like her prolonged demands for sleeping together and spooning were something CWC was unhappy about (up to him buying his own bed.)

2. If Barb is senile, from the leaks it seems clear that CWC believed that his incestuous activities were somehow reversing that condition. He talks about how his actions are restoring her memories, making her less confused, and, post-coital, more capable of engaging in communication at a level she was previously. CWC has a detailed history of believing all kind of rubbish and it has lead to him injuring himself and allowing himself to suffer financial losses. Is this likely to effect the outcome?

3. Connected to 2. If these beliefs of CWC are, after his full chat logs are seen by prosecutors, based on trolls feeding him misinformation or encouraging him into believing this is a way for him to save Barb, will they have any legal culpability?

 

[Enoby Way]

@Alexander Hamilton

I have a few questions here, and it doesn't seem to really be being addressed, and I'd love to hear a prosecutor's take on them

1. There seems to be a lot of riding on the assumption that Barb is senile, but even if she is, if someone grooms their mentally handicapped adult child with the intention of engaging in sexually inappropriate relations, but then subsequently becomes senile either during the sexual relationship or prior to its consummation how does that effect the potential judgement? There seems to be a great deal about the way Barb raised CWC and the pressures she continued to place on him during his adult life that are being ignored. Likewise, during the majority of their life together she was in the dominant, competent, caregiver role, and incidents like her prolonged demands for sleeping together and spooning were something CWC was unhappy about (up to him buying his own bed.)

Already answered in this thread. The grooming is irrelevant. If you have sex with someone who doesn't or can't consent at the time, it is rape. You may have had sex with them before and they may have consented at that time, but in this instance it is rape.

This is why marital rape is a thing, "I do" at the altar is not a lifetime consensual sex pass. They look for what happened at the time of the incident.

My question - what does NGRI stand for?

 

[easy]

It would be awesome if there was a defense-side Kiwi out there who could speak on exactly how much it would suck to be assigned as Chris' public defender, but I suspect there might not be too many of those around here

Not public defender, and not America, but I can share my two bits, why not. blah blah blah not ur lawyer not advice etc etc

It would suck fucking big time. I'm not going to get into the particularities of the case, cuz as far as criminal cases go, I've worked with fellas who were in even more legally indefensible positions than Chris is in right now; the fact that the best optionis to admit guilt and hope for a nice deal isn't even that bad from a lawyer perspective, that is just the job. You don't expect to win everything.

The main problem is Chris as an individual, and having to work with him, oh my god I'd drink myself to death. I've worked with clients who were absolute boneheads before (one who comes to mind was this dude embroiled in vexatious litigation against his wife. love that guy), and it is the most unplleasant and constantly baffling experience ever. The layperson doesn't know the law, and oftentimes - after some googling - thinks they know it better than their lawyers, and because they essentially can determine the trajectory of their case, they'll kneecap themselves so often. Chris no doubt will be the kind of client with that uncanny 6th sense for making the decisions most prejudicial to their case. That said, I highly doubt Chris would insist going to trial
And then comes the client interactions; imagine talking to Chris to try and gauge the exact series of events, and timeline and the approach one should take. At this point, most of the sentences Chris constructs can barely be considered english; imagine some 50 year old PD trying to decipher what the fuck a "magichan sonichu" is, or being told that "the CPU goddesses" led Chris to Barb. I've never worked with mentally ill clients, so no doubt there are other lawyers can deal with it better than I could, but safe to imagine that for most, it would be a nightmare.

On the bright side, it would make for one hell of a weird story to tell down the line.

 

[TheBigZee]

In the 2015 gamestop case In Cville the courts coddled him and treated him like the tard he is, I could see that happeningnagain

Being treated like a tard for Chris on these charges means a guardianship hearing.

 

[Work]

I'm no criminal lawyer, but based on my experience with Zazef's arrest, I can shoot a few shots in the dark about his fate

Zazef was also extremely autistic, and also arrested for a sex crime, and was sent to a psychatric hospital for a year or so, then he was told to have become "mentally fit" and began his normal jail sentence (of one year). This means that he spent more than twice his sentence in confinement for no gain.

I'd assume something similar happens to Chris, no matter how much time he stalls in psychiatric treatment, either he is never released or transferred to a jail after some time.

 

[Orkeosaurus]

The worst mistake Chris made was specifically stating how many times he fucked her. He's not going to see the light of day.

 

[easy]

My question - what does NGRI stand for?

not guilty (for) reason of insanity

 

[cow-wannabe]

Already answered in this thread. The grooming is irrelevant. If you have sex with someone who doesn't or can't consent at the time, it is rape. You may have had sex with them before and they may have consented at that time, but in this instance it is rape.

This is why marital rape is a thing, "I do" at the altar is not a lifetime consensual sex pass. They look for what happened at the time of the incident.

I think comparing previous abuse to marriage isn't that useful, as that is an instance of previous consent not justifing future consent not, previous abuse of consent leading to not being able to understand or recognise consent.

If CWC is following the rules for consent taught to him and practiced upon him by Barb, isn't it possible that he doesn't properly understand what consent is (in the same way we all do) in his interactions with Barb?

 

[Crusader King 1]

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.

Maybe it's been mentioned in this thread somewhere, but what are the chances he will be put on the sex registry?

 

[AnOminous]

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.

I'm going to disagree on this one. I really like this charge. I probably have a good deal of bias but seriously, this is pretty unambiguous. There is no need for emotional arguments, or arguing about consent and all kinds of nonsense. If I were a prosecutor in this case I would want Chris to plead to some unambiguous financial crime rather than argue about sex and consent and all kinds of complicated shit like that.