Chris - The Legal Issues - A Prosecutor's Perspective

[AnOminous]

I think that's reaching. Doesn't the US Government consider a case as "RICO" when it's on a large scale.

No. They consider it a RICO case when they have several million dollars and an incredibly unpopular defendant. Because it takes six figures even to PLEAD a RICO case without it just getting thrown out immediately for failing to meet the heightened pleading requirements for such a case.

Have you got something like a million bucks just to PLEAD a case at the most preliminary of stages? If not, then go away. Or pay a bunch of money to lolyers who are laughing at you.

What filing a RICO means, in most cases, is just a very expensive way of saying "I am a lunatic, please hand me my ass."

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

No. They consider it a RICO case when they have several million dollars and an incredibly unpopular defendant. Because it takes six figures even to PLEAD a RICO case without it just getting thrown out immediately for failing to meet the heightened pleading requirements for such a case.

Have you got something like a million bucks just to PLEAD a case at the most preliminary of stages? If not, then go away. Or pay a bunch of money to lolyers who are laughing at you.

What filing a RICO means, in most cases, is just a very expensive way of saying "I am a lunatic, please hand me my ass."

Well, Chris is half way there.

 

[Lurk Moar Fag]

I think that's reaching. Doesn't the US Government consider a case as "RICO" when it's on a large scale. 1. There was no real extortion going on. Chris was dumb enough to leak his bank account information, and he chose to rape his own mother. The 500 dollars would be great for Judge Judy.

I suppose I am reaching a bit. This has been one hell of a shit rollercoaster.

 

[AmnasLord]

Here is a Legal Question for those in the know. How likely is the defender going to point out to the years of abuse Chris has suffered/been inflicted by as a reason for his downfall into such a state as he is now in? Not that it justifies or excuses the rape of Barb, but what we have here is complete documented proof of individuals like BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, and others forcefully abusing and taking advantage of Chris, with incidents of actual bodily harm in the case of BlueSpike. I mean this is now hidden and is well documented in CWC, countless YouTube videos and such.

Could the defender simply say "Well my client was forcefully propositioned into shoving his medallion into his anal cavity and we have evidence that it might have been the same for the rape unless there is solid proof that Chris acted out on his own."?

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

Here is a Legal Question for those in the know. How likely is the defender going to point out to the years of abuse Chris has suffered/been inflicted by as a reason for his downfall into such a state as he is now in? Not that it justifies or excuses the rape of Barb, but what we have here is complete documented proof of individuals like BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, and others forcefully abusing and taking advantage of Chris, with incidents of actual bodily harm in the case of BlueSpike. I mean this is now hidden and is well documented in CWC, countless YouTube videos and such.

Could the defender simply say "Well my client was forcefully propositioned into shoving his medallion into his anal cavity and we have evidence that it might have been the same for the rape unless there is solid proof that Chris acted out on his own."?

I'm sure there's ample evidence of Chris also trying to take advantage of others like when he was caught stealing money from his parents and all those sex pest stories. Chris deserved everything he got and more.

 

[robobobo]

Here is a Legal Question for those in the know. How likely is the defender going to point out to the years of abuse Chris has suffered/been inflicted by as a reason for his downfall into such a state as he is now in? Not that it justifies or excuses the rape of Barb, but what we have here is complete documented proof of individuals like BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, and others forcefully abusing and taking advantage of Chris, with incidents of actual bodily harm in the case of BlueSpike. I mean this is now hidden and is well documented in CWC, countless YouTube videos and such.

Could the defender simply say "Well my client was forcefully propositioned into shoving his medallion into his anal cavity and we have evidence that it might have been the same for the rape unless there is solid proof that Chris acted out on his own."?

The defense can absolutely say that. But a jury of southerners from nowheresville, Virginia is not going to cotton to some creepy-looking dude who says he's a woman and raped his mom. If it goes to trial, the jurors are liable to be asking the judge if they can just get a rope and a sturdy tree outside to handle it themselves. It is absolutely a losing play for this to go to trial, the defense would be insane to let that happen unless Chris forces it to.

 

[AmnasLord]

The defense can absolutely say that. But a jury of southerners from nowheresville, Virginia is not going to cotton to some creepy-looking dude who says he's a woman and raped his mom. If it goes to trial, the jurors are liable to be asking the judge if they can just get a rope and a sturdy tree outside to handle it themselves. It is absolutely a losing play for this to go to trial, the defense would be insane to let that happen unless Chris forces it to.

I most likely think it will not go to trial but Chris will be committed for a number of years. However, I am sure the documented history of abuse that Chris incurred, whether it be by his own hand or on the hands of BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, etc, will play a part.

Another interest question that will spawn from this trial is that if/can the prosecutor/justice department of Virginia (not American apologies if its not the right department) go and prosecute trolls like BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, or others if the defense presented these people as contributing factors to Chris-Chan's actions?

 

[Learned Hand]

I most likely think it will not go to trial but Chris will be committed for a number of years. However, I am sure the documented history of abuse that Chris incurred, whether it be by his own hand or on the hands of BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, etc, will play a part.

Another interest question that will spawn from this trial is that if/can the prosecutor/justice department of Virginia (not American apologies if its not the right department) go and prosecute trolls like BlueSpike, IdeaGuys, or others if the defense presented these people as contributing factors to Chris-Chan's actions?

Chris isn't going to be committed.

This has been gone over time and again, but it's amazing the state of Virginia runs as many (five, at last count) mental institutions as it does, and they are reserved for FAR worse than Chris. Chris is not going to become a ward of the state, he's not going to a psychiatric hospital. At best he will get a mildly interested case worker to monitor him for the next 10 years, if/when he gets out of jail.

There will almost certainly be no dragnet, no troll hunt, no movie deal. The state doesn't have the resources, and even if they did, they don't care. Chris isn't Jon Benet Ramsay. No one sympathizes with him, at this point not many even like him in an unironic sense.

 

[AmnasLord]

There will almost certainly be no dragnet, no troll hunt, no movie deal. The state doesn't have the resources, and even if they did, they don't care. Chris isn't Jon Benet Ramsay.

I understand and agree with most of your post, but coming from Canada, I am reminded of a situation where a girl in one of our Atlantic provinces was trolled and bullied to commit suicide and we now have laws that are considered more stringent and if reported can be arrested, to the best of my knowledge and since I have no legal training whatsoever, I have no idea if they have or have not been. While the US handles state laws differently, it might just be an interesting thought process to think about.

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

I understand and agree with most of your post, but coming from Canada, I am reminded of a situation where a girl in one of our Atlantic provinces was trolled and bullied to commit suicide and we now have laws that are considered more stringent and if reported can be arrested, to the best of my knowledge and since I have no legal training whatsoever, I have no idea if they have or have not been. While the US handles state laws differently, it might just be an interesting thought process to think about.

The thing is, the general public is not sympathetic toward Chris. He's not a young girl full of life, vigor, and potential. The people who treat him like a sacred cow take him way too seriously, and like other autistics are left wondering why other people don't as well.

 

[Learned Hand]

I understand and agree with most of your post, but coming from Canada, I am reminded of a situation where a girl in one of our Atlantic provinces was trolled and bullied to commit suicide and we now have laws that are considered more stringent and if reported can be arrested, to the best of my knowledge and since I have no legal training whatsoever, I have no idea if they have or have not been. While the US handles state laws differently, it might just be an interesting thought process to think about.

Unlike Canada, we aren't (yet) serfs of our government and have Constitutional protections and rights enshrined by our founding documents and defended by, even today, a SCOTUS and common law that is absolutely recalcitrant for the most part in infringing on those rights. The first amendment being the most sacred, since it serves almost all political ideologies on some level.

The enumerated rights and codified rights of the United States and Canada are wildly different, and for all our faults, ours are so much stronger.

You can do a LOT under First Amendment protections, and a lot of the bullying laws states have tried to pass have been crushed in the courts.

 

[Chazzed Up]

Could the defender simply say "Well my client was forcefully propositioned into shoving his medallion into his anal cavity and we have evidence that it might have been the same for the rape unless there is solid proof that Chris acted out on his own."?

The prosecution only needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chris acted of his own accord. I'm not a lawfag but I don't think it flies for the defense to demand that the prosecution proves a negative. They can't prove that Sonichu didn't tell Chris to do it but that doesn't mean that they have to in order to present a compelling case. Chris's defense would have to present compelling evidence that Chris was forced against his will, if that evidence does not exist then the case that Chris made his own decision, based on communications with several different people, becomes stronger.

 

[Mason Verger]

I understand and agree with most of your post, but coming from Canada, I am reminded of a situation where a girl in one of our Atlantic provinces was trolled and bullied to commit suicide and we now have laws that are considered more stringent and if reported can be arrested, to the best of my knowledge and since I have no legal training whatsoever, I have no idea if they have or have not been. While the US handles state laws differently, it might just be an interesting thought process to think about.

Furthest they’d go is Bella’s most recent involvement. They’re not going to subpoena internet ghost from 14 years ago. I don’t think Molvania even extradites to the US.

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

Furthest they’d go is Bella’s most recent involvement. They’re not going to subpoena internet ghost from 14 years ago. I don’t think Molvania even extradites to the US.

But then, several other factors come up...then they're going to ask.....
"Did she hold a gun to your head?"
"Did you have ample time to contact us after she supposedly threatened you?"
"What could she conceivably do to coerce you all the way from Texas?"
"Why are we even entertaining a 20-year-old girl who weighs 110 at the most threatening a 39-year-old man who weighs over 250 lbs?"

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

The prosecution only needs to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chris acted of his own accord. I'm not a lawfag but I don't think it flies for the defense to demand that the prosecution proves a negative. They can't prove that Sonichu didn't tell Chris to do it but that doesn't mean that they have to in order to present a compelling case. Chris's defense would have to present compelling evidence that Chris was forced against his will, if that evidence does not exist then the case that Chris made his own decision, based on communications with several different people, becomes stronger.

It really depends, where I'm from its for the prosecution to prove that the accused committed the crime and for the defense to either argue this isn't the case, or to put forward and prove a defense. However, there can be specific instances which are usually explicitly put forward that specify otherwise in a given case - though these are to my knowledge primarily rebuttal presumptions for the defense to overturn.

With that said, Chris' problem is that the Virginia rape statute is pretty clear that there isn't any defenses that can be put forward if Barb didn't consent. So even if Chris genuinely believed she did, and did so reasonably (hypothetically speaking) he would still be guilty.

Chris' best shot would be for his lawyer to argue that while he did commit the crime and be is culpable, he is a vulnerable, and suggestible individual, as a means of going for diminished responsibility since he's a retard. He wouldn't get off on the charges, but the outcome might be less severe.

 

[TaterBot]

"Your Honor, we will show that my client can /was held at gunpoint over the internet."

Chris is so stupid he can be outwitted by most animals and some plants.

 

[Chazzed Up]

It really depends, where I'm from its for the prosecution to prove that the accused committed the crime and for the defense to either argue this isn't the case, or to put forward and prove a defense. However, there can be specific instances which are usually explicitly put forward that specify otherwise in a given case - though these are to my knowledge primarily rebuttal presumptions for the defense to overturn.

Yeah, I was just responding to the implication that the prosecutor has to prove that every possible alternative scenario didn't occur. Sure they may need to address plausible alternative possibilities to make their case better, but it would be dumb in court to say that it needs to be proven that a troll didn't put him up to raping his mother on the basis that over a decade ago a kid got him to shove some clay up his ass. They could show he has a history of being gullible, but given the seriousness of the crime I think a more airtight explanation would need to be given. If they found Chris's DNA and can confirm he sexually abused his mother, the best his lawyer can really do is mitigate the sentence in any case.

As long as substantial proof exists that Chris acted upon his own will, and as long as the defense can't credibly counter that proof or introduce something to muddy the waters on what happened, then they have a good chance of getting him on at least some kind of charges.

 

[Mr E. Grifter]

As long as substantial proof exists that Chris acted upon his own will, and as long as the defense can't credibly counter that proof or introduce something to muddy the waters on what happened, then they have a good chance of getting him on at least some kind of charges.

I think even if the defense could offer up the fact Chris was convinced into doing this that he would still be culpable. The Virginia statute basically says that if you have sex with someone, and they didn't consent, you're guilty of rape. There's no defense for intent, or reasonable assumption of consent nothing.

You might get a mitigation because he's a retard, but he'll still get some kind of punishment - probably a decent amount of jail time.

 

[Cuntflaps]

Not sure if this has been asked or if this is even the appropriate thread to ask, but I don't want to shit the forum up with a new thread so... If Barb is found to be incapable of consent or even caring for herself, would the creditors and other businesses who are suing her for debts pretty much be shit out of luck? It seems like those debt hearings are pretty useless if someone has such severe dementia. Is it even legal for them to attempt to take her to court if she's declared incompetent by a medical professional?

 

[Mariposa Electrique]

"Your Honor, we will show that my client can /was held at gunpoint over the internet."

Chris is so stupid he can be outwitted by most animals and some plants.

Out witted maybe, but not coerced. ILJ taking 500 dollars was out witting Chris because of his malignant ego. He genuinely believed he needed a photographer to take photos of him with the peasants and maybe capture evidence of a three way. But when trolls tried to coerce him into losing weight, getting a job, or cleaning his room, it was like pulling teeth.