(07/29/2022) - New Chris Jail Letter - Barb is described as being "zombie-like" and like a "scared deer in a headlight", Chris shit talks jail staff, Chris adamant about the fundraiser

[troon patrol]

Doesn't that mean Null could verify his "older girlfriend" thing with the information that matches Barb? Does that mean Null could technically testify against Chris? Does that mean the Judas arc has truly arrived?

I'm waiting on an expert to chime in here, or what passes as one but, my layman legal mind thinks Null could be called to testify, probably via Zoom or something.

 

[Whaler]

I'm waiting on an expert to chime in here, or what passes as one but, my layman legal mind thinks Null could be called to testify, probably via Zoom or something.

While I'm not 100% positive on what Chris told Null that lead him to realize in hindsight that it was Barb he was banging, I would say it would fall under speculation if Chris never flat out said who it was and Null simply came to the answer all on his own.
Edit: Forgot to add, I doubt Null will be called to testify because of it. The only thing Null really knows for sure is that Chris took/stole money from Barb (or a joint account) to get a room and some toys to play with, and that has very little, if anything, to do with the case at hand.

 

[troon patrol]

While I'm not 100% positive on what Chris told Null that lead him to realize in hindsight that it was Barb he was banging, I would say it would fall under speculation if Chris never flat out said who it was and Null simply came to the answer all on his own.
Edit: Forgot to add, I doubt Null will be called to testify because of it. The only thing Null really knows for sure is that Chris took/stole money from Barb (or a joint account) to get a room and some toys to play with, and that has very little, if anything, to do with the case at hand.

See I would argue that text of Chris saying he was sleeping with someone is admissible, and if it came to an actual trial the prosecution would need to establish where this documentation came from, I think Null saying "I heard Chris talk about banging some lady" is hearsay, however. IIRC Null was the one who blew the whistle on Chris' theft, I really can't imagine a trial where the complainant or reporting party wasn't asked at one point to testify, I have to imagine Chris is still facing a charge of violating the EPO?

 

[Pointless Sperg]

Once again this is horrifying Perfect Blue shit. For those of you who haven't seen Perfect Blue, in it a stalker's favorite pop idol takes her image in a less squeaky clean direction, so he hallucinates his favorite version of her telling him, "I'm the real Mima, that Mima is a fake. She's ruining my good name. She needs to die! Will you kill her for me? Thank you, you're the only one I can count on!" Accept Chris is doing this with his own mother (minus the virginity). Alternatively, you could call this a reverse Norman Bates where instead of believing his dead mother is alive and talking to him, he believes his living mother is dead and talking to him.

If I recall correctly, it wasn't just a hallucination -- he was actually being fed bad information from another party.

Doesn't that mean Null could verify his "older girlfriend" thing with the information that matches Barb? Does that mean Null could technically testify against Chris? Does that mean the Judas arc has truly arrived?

Yes, but they have better messages than the "older girlfriend" one. Plus Null is a lot harder to bring in as a witness given that he's in Serbia. Chris sent a similar message to PsychicEspeon and it would be easier to subpoena him.

In terms of flat out confessions, though, the two that come to mind are the incest call with Bella, and the simple Yes answer to Dillin Thomas.

So, in order, the most likely people to be subpoenaed are Bella, then Dillin, then Sean, then Jawrsh, with WCT and Null reversed in order if they were both in the US.

Which ones are actually called to testify would depend on if the leaks are verifiable (with Bella's being the easiest to verify since it's not text).

See I would argue that text of Chris saying he was sleeping with someone is admissible, and if it came to an actual trial the prosecution would need to establish where this documentation came from, I think Null saying "I heard Chris talk about banging some lady" is hearsay, however.

Correct. A recorded call or a text message is not excluded as hearsay, but you have to follow procedures to determine its provenance. The procedures for audio recordings are as old as dirt, and the ones for text messages, while relatively new, are fairly well established.

It would also depend on what service was used for the text messages and what records could be obtained to prove that they aren't just fabricated screenshots.

Bella is all they really need though for a confession. If it goes to trial, we will almost certainly see her in court. She will probably enjoy it, since she can portray herself as the person who took the evil Chris Chan down.

 

[Debbie Macomber]

Pretend that Bob was still alive and it was BOB fucking Barb. If Barb was so far gone that it counts as rape, it would still be rape if it was Bob who fucked her. It would still be rape if her new boyfriend she met at Sheetz was fucking her.

I don't think this analogy stands. In that scenario, Bob would probably be as mentally impaired or even more so than Barb. Who would the police arrest? Bob for raping dementia ridden Barb, or Barb for raping dementia ridden Bob? If two Alzheimer's patients fuck at an old folks home who do the police arrest? Nobody!

But if a 40 year old fucks an Alzheimer's patient twice his age, he almost certainly did NOT have Alzheimer's, and can and will be arrested for taking advantage of an elderly mentally handicapped person.

Flip the ages around to the other extreme. If Chris statutory raped a 14 year old girl, he could and should be arrested. But would a 14 year old boy get arrested for having sex with the same 14 year old girl? This may be more of an ethical philosophical argument than a legal one, but makes sense as to how this sort of thing SHOULD be judged.

 

[The Whore of Babylon]

If I recall correctly, it wasn't just a hallucination -- he was actually being fed bad information from another party.



Yes, but they have better messages than the "older girlfriend" one. Plus Null is a lot harder to bring in as a witness given that he's in Serbia. Chris sent a similar message to PsychicEspeon and it would be easier to subpoena him.

In terms of flat out confessions, though, the two that come to mind are the incest call with Bella, and the simple Yes answer to Dillin Thomas.

So, in order, the most likely people to be subpoenaed are Bella, then Dillin, then Sean, then Jawrsh, with WCT and Null reversed in order if they were both in the US.



Correct. A recorded call or a text message is not excluded as hearsay, but you have to follow procedures to determine its provenance. The procedures for audio recordings are as old as dirt, and the ones for text messages, while relatively new, are fairly well established.

It would also depend on what service was used for the text messages and what records could be obtained to prove that they aren't just fabricated screenshots.

Bella is all they really need though for a confession. If it goes to trial, we will almost certainly see her in court. She will probably enjoy it, since she can portray herself as the person who took the evil Chris Chan down.

couldn't null attend via teleconference? I recall some places doing that for covid

 

[Whaler]

It would also depend on what service was used for the text messages and what records could be obtained to prove that they aren't just fabricated screenshots.

Bella is all they really need though for a confession. If it goes to trial, we will almost certainly see her in court. She will probably enjoy it, since she can portray herself as the person who took the evil Chris Chan down.

IIRC, Chris said Null had him use an app called Signal and I've never used it, so Null would have to answer if that's possible. Or somebody more familiar with the app than I am.

 

[GoGoNoJo]

I mean, she's ok to live by herself and have an active drivers license, but not quite enough to say "Keep your dick away from me"? Or is this just a very selective form of dementia that gets really really bad when she's forced to make extremely simple judgement calls? How do you suppose that works? Very peculiar.

The fact that Barb is (presumably) living by herself doesn't mean that she is "ok" to do so. America places a lot of value on personal freedom, and declaring someone incompetent is a very difficult thing to do. As the story of Chris himself proves, the American government has no problem with letting obviously unwell people go about their lives with minimal state interference. In addition, the fact that Barb has a drivers license is a pretty weaksauce example of cognitive stability given the fact that she got into a serious car crash only a few months after Chris was arrested.

And, even if we pretended this was actually rape, A) she made chris what he is today, B) she's had unacceptable boundaries with him for years training him to see her this way, and C) the whole family is a blight, and the option that costs way, WAY less money is to just let them do whatever so long as it stays away from the public.

Was Barb was a shitty parent and a lousy person? Yes. Did she engage in seriously inappropriate behavior with Chris? Yes. Did she have a huge role in making Chris who he is today? Yes. Does that matter in regards to Chris's rape of her? NO.
Chris is an adult now, and he has been for some time (he's 40 years old for christ sake!). He may be a fucked up moron, but he's not mentally disabled; he is capable of understanding the concept that "raping your 80 year old mother is wrong" (as evidenced by the fact that he hid the identity of his "over 50 girlfriend" from Null ). He can, and should, be held responsible for his actions.
At the end of the day, Chris made the decision to rape his elderly, dementia ridden mother, and that is the only thing that matters here.

This literally nothing except dumping hundreds of thousands of dollars of taxpayer money down the drain in a situation the government and public had no need to be involved in, and would never have been involved in had Chris shut his mouth about it.

This is very much a situation that the government (or, more specifically, the judicial system) has need to get involved in. When you strip away all the soul bonding and dimensional merge nonsense, what you have is a 40 year old man forcing himself on his elderly, cognitively impaired mother. What you have is a man who is willing to abuse even the most helpless and vulnerable of people in order to fulfill his twisted desires. What you have is a man who is sociopathic enough to rape his own mother. What you have is a man who is dangerous, especially to the weak and infirm. Sure in this instance you might not be particularly concerned with all that because the person he decided to abuse was kind of a bitch.......... but what if he decided to abuse someone else? What if he decided to go after somebody else who was helpless and vulnerable? What if he decided to go after a child? Now I already know what you're going to say: "Chris wouldn't do that, he wouldn't go after a kid, he's too weak, too cowardly, there's no way he'll ever be alone with a child, etc"......... but are you sure of that? Absolutely certain? Are you certain enough to bet on it with the life of an innocent? Because that's what we're doing if Chris gets let go; we're betting that he won't rape anybody else again, and if that bet is wrong then some poor woman gets raped.
I guess what I'm trying to ask is this: Are you willing to risk somebody getting raped for the sake of Christian Weston Chandler?

 

[troon patrol]

IIRC, Chris said Null had him use an app called Signal and I've never used it, so Null would have to answer if that's possible. Or somebody more familiar with the app than I am.

Signal is a texting app that deletes messages after a certain amount of time IE 2 minutes. It's used to buy dope with and not have a text trail in the event you are arrested. I'm 99% certain this is why Null used it to contact Chris, no text trails.

 

[Spangled Drongo]

The exorcism story is disturbing on so many levels. Seems to imply Chris has started truly believing his make believe cope fantasies, and is pushing it on some poor unsuspecting nuthouse resident. I've very little idea of how those establishments are run, but was Chris so irredeemably bonkers that there was really nothing they could do for him? In the past he's been known to hide his wackier beliefs from therapists and the like so as to avoid being challenged on them - the court mandated therapy sessions from his previous cases clearly didn't work as he's only gotten worse since then.

 

[Pointless Sperg]

I don't think this analogy stands. In that scenario, Bob would probably be as mentally impaired or even more so than Barb. Who would the police arrest? Bob for raping dementia ridden Barb, or Barb for raping dementia ridden Bob? If two Alzheimer's patients fuck at an old folks home who do the police arrest? Nobody!

OK, for the purposes of the thought experiment, assume no crippling cognitive decline in Bob. Never mind that he'd be 94, so let's also assume that he was the same age as Barb.

It's not the exact specifics I'm arguing here. Bob is dead so obviously he can't fuck Barb. It's just an illustration of a concept.

But if a 40 year old fucks an Alzheimer's patient twice his age, he almost certainly did NOT have Alzheimer's, and can and will be arrested for taking advantage of an elderly mentally handicapped person.

Flip the ages around to the other extreme. If Chris statutory raped a 14 year old girl, he could and should be arrested. But would a 14 year old boy get arrested for having sex with the same 14 year old girl? This may be more of an ethical philosophical argument than a legal one, but makes sense as to how this sort of thing SHOULD be judged.

My whole point though is that it's the law that's important, not the ethics. The rules for statutory rape are clearly spelled out, just as are the rules for rape.

Barbs incapacity is not determined by who she had sex with, or what the other person's capacity is. Even in your scenario with Alzheimer's Bob, it would not change the determination, all that would change is Bob's culpability if he was also incapacitated.

Now, moral issues do have a *huge* impact on sentencing, or whether the prosecutor decides to show mercy and declines to bring the charge in the first place, but not on the legal question itself.

For instance if (non-incapacitated) Bob were found guilty, they'd still almost certainly go easy on him. Like I mentioned there's already a carveout in the law for just that situation. It would not change the determination of Barb's incapacity though, which is what is in question.

 

[Whaler]

Signal is a texting app that deletes messages after a certain amount of time IE 2 minutes. It's used to buy dope with and not have a text trail in the event you are arrested. I'm 99% certain this is why Null used it to contact Chris, no text trails.

Well, apparently he also used that app to tell Bella about the incest stuff, as he directed her towards it because Null had him use it because of how secure and private it was.
Edit: Fuck, hit post too soon. It seems like (in my opinion) the best person to get to testify would be Bella, and Null if they decide to chase after the EPO business, which I'm not sure if they will. Rate me optimistic, but I'm actually leaning towards Heilberg convincing Chris to take a plea deal so I expect them to only bother with the incest charge.

 

[AnOminous]

For the grand jury? Sure. They just need probable cause. They could just play Bella's call and that would be sufficient.

While it's true that the strict rules of evidence don't apply to presentments to a grand jury, so hearsay and other things that wouldn't be admissible at trial can be admitted (part of the reason grand jury proceedings are not just dumped into the record in the trial itself), there generally has to be some basis to believe it to be true.

I'd think they'd probably present any statement confirming sex from either Chris or Barb, any piece of physical evidence, and stop at the minimum that establishes probable cause, rather than reveal their entire case up front.

 

[Smleman303]

Well, apparently he also used that app to tell Bella about the incest stuff, as he directed her towards it because Null had him use it because of how secure and private it was.
Edit: Fuck, hit post too soon. It seems like (in my opinion) the best person to get to testify would be Bella, and Null if they decide to chase after the EPO business, which I'm not sure if they will. Rate me optimistic, but I'm actually leaning towards Heilberg convincing Chris to take a plea deal so I expect them to only bother with the incest charge.

You're not factoring in one thing... Chris being way more far gone than before, what makes you think Chris didn't turn down a plea since he's bent he can't go back to shitting his pants and doing nothing at 14 BC?

 

[Pointless Sperg]

While it's true that the strict rules of evidence don't apply to presentments to a grand jury, so hearsay and other things that wouldn't be admissible at trial can be admitted (part of the reason grand jury proceedings are not just dumped into the record in the trial itself), there generally has to be some basis to believe it to be true.

I'd think they'd probably present any statement confirming sex from either Chris or Barb, any piece of physical evidence, and stop at the minimum that establishes probable cause, rather than reveal their entire case up front.

Sorry, what I meant is that in terms of "confessions" all they would need is to play the Bella call, without having to strictly prove its authenticity. Obviously they'd present some other form of evidence to show that they do in fact have a viable case.

Well, apparently he also used that app to tell Bella about the incest stuff, as he directed her towards it because Null had him use it because of how secure and private it was.
Edit: Fuck, hit post too soon. It seems like (in my opinion) the best person to get to testify would be Bella, and Null if they decide to chase after the EPO business, which I'm not sure if they will. Rate me optimistic, but I'm actually leaning towards Heilberg convincing Chris to take a plea deal so I expect them to only bother with the incest charge.

Even if Chris used Signal for the voice call, they wouldn't need strict records to prove that it's Chris' voice. Bella's testimony, plus an expert witness would be sufficient to show that it was in fact Chris talking, and that the relevant sentences were not a deepfake cobbled together out of sound bites (even if the call itself was edited). They don't have to disprove any possible doubt, just *reasonable* ones.

Screenshots of text messages are relatively easy to throw out if the metadata has been lost. In the case of SMS/MMS, metadata that you can cross reference with phone company records. In the case of an encrypted signature, you can show that it matches the public key of the sender, or the private key of the device that sent it.

If both Chris and Null had autodelete turned on in Signal, then it's not very useful.

Any idea what Chris used in his confession to Dillin?

 

[TestTubePuppy]

It's most likely that no one is going to be called to testify, because it isn't in the best interests of anyone to take this case to trial. The defense is saddled with a client who if given the opportunity in open court, would misbehave enough to convince any jury to sentence him to a firing squad. And the prosecution has a case that is strong, but deeply sordid. Unpacking all of it in court would be unsavory and a lot of work.

The prosecution is going to put together a plea deal of their choosing. Whatever it is, Hellman is going to go to Chris and tell him to accept it. Chris will be told in no uncertain terms what the consequences of not taking the plea will mean. There is no "plan B" for him. He's a wimp, so he will probably back down after throwing a fit and accept it.

If he is dumb enough to not take the deal, it will be the fastest trial and conviction and sentencing that any defendant ever got, and Chris will be locked up for years. They won't need Null's testimony to do that.

 

[Ophelia]

What we do know is Chris is not being charged with rape. There has to be a reason for that. I mean if I could charge Chris for rape instead of just incest, I definitely would. I have to assume the prosecution would as well, so something is just not right there.

Is it possible it was consensual, but they chose to not charge Barb simply because she’s an old lady and it’s a hillbilly crime?

 

[AnOminous]

I'm waiting on an expert to chime in here, or what passes as one but, my layman legal mind thinks Null could be called to testify, probably via Zoom or something.

Unless Null wanted to cooperate for whatever reason, the process for international service and enforcement of a subpoena is arcane and involves the filing of something called letters rogatory. It's pretty unlikely this will happen when Null knows very little if anything that's actually relevant to the case, since Chris mostly lied to him anyway.

It would be a significant chunk of change to a small rural jurisdiction that can't even afford an actual public defender department.

 

[MrShekelstein36]

Chris must have chipped out in order to be restrained and then offering to exercise a crazy person.

I am genuinely curious what Chris meant by exercising someone, like, did he try the "soul bonding" exorcism or what? If so, I am honestly not surprised he got restrained.

 

[Pointless Sperg]

I am genuinely curious what Chris meant by exercising someone

He gave Barb plenty of exercise.