7/23 Court Date

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Status
Not open for further replies.
@lipitor shows up, but doesn't post about it. Some lurkers show up, and don't notice any of the other Kiwi people at the court date. Chris shows up early and waits in his car. @lipitor and one other Kiwi lurker spot it, but only the lurker posts about it on a new account named after a CWCism. Chris goes in, gets a continuance, and leaves. The 2nd lurker sees Chris leave, records it in a shaky vertical video and posts it to the forum. The entire Kiwi Farms CWC board experiences simultaneous letdown as they scramble to look up the next court date. @lipitor posts about how he knew it would just be another continuance.
 
JUDGE: After seven months of continuances, I've finally have read every page of the evidence (a website named "Sonichu.com") and I'm ready to give my verdict...
 
John Wilkes Booth shoots Chris in the head with a single shot Derringer Pistol and shouts "Sic Siempre Autismus" and spends the next two weeks on the run until he's tracked down and cornered in a barn that's set on fire. That or another continuance.
 
qld said:
Who is his "accuser?" The complainant listed on his court case info is a local cop, not the employee that Chris took aim at. Was Chris not banned from Gamestop when he did this? Not only have we all seen the video, but I'm sure the cop(s) and prosecutor looked at the store's surveillance. I don't think this crime needs a witness, cops got called, they made an arrest and there's evidence of the offense. Even if no person was willing to testify, there's video evidence that Chris committed a crime. And the way the crime is phrased, there doesn't have to be a "victim" of Chris's action, he released a noxious gas in public. But there's no way this will go to trial anyhow.
Click to expand...
JFKdestroyer said:
His "accuser" in this case is the government, which he will face a representative of.

If it actually goes to a trial, they will probably have to summon the police officer who's named on the case. This is where people get out of traffic citations, because most of the time the cop isn't going to bother showing up (especially if they work overnight) to fight about someone going 7 over the speed limit.

I would imagine a cop would show up for Chris' case, simply because it didn't happen at a weird time (the cop will probably be working at the time) and it's not a minor crime.
Click to expand...

I am a lawyer, I'm not licensed in VA and I don't have time to look up their hearsay rules, but I can tell you right now if I were to prosecutor in this case I'd subpoena Gamestop guy for trial a hundred times out of a hundred. I should rephrase what I said earlier a bit; Who you rely need isn't the guy Chris sprayed but the guy that called the cops. It is possible that they'll try and go forward without Gamestop guy and base things off the cop, but I don't think it's wise on the State's part though.

Unless the cop actually saw Chris spray pepper spray in person Chris has at least a non-frivolous argument under Crawford that the person who called the cops has to be available in court to cross examine. The cop could try and testify based off of the video, but there's a risk that the court will buy the argument that the videotape is inadmissible hearsay and the cop's testimony from it is just double hearsay. The risk on the other side is that they'll deem the 911 call and tape nontestimonial, not hearsay, or hearsay within the exceptions of a rule. it largely depends on local rules and hearsay rules are a bit different in practice in every jurisdiction, even if they're the same on paper. (I just looked as I wrote this and there appears to be at least some case law in VA to support the idea that the video is not hearsay, but I don't know how well established the case law is. I'd probably still give it a shot if I were the PD and it went to trial, especially if there's no Va supreme court case on it. The worst thing that can happen is the judge disagrees.)

The right way to think about it isn't like a traffic ticket, but more like domestic violence. When you get a ticket the cop is swearing that her personally saw you commit the offense, that's why he has to show up in court. On the other hand in a DV cas 99 times out of a hundred things have cooled off by the time the cop gets their and even thought the cop arrests you and gives you a summons with his name on it as complainant he isn't the accuser, that's who you allegedly domestic voilenced, he's just the guy who filed the papers. So then, at trial even if the cop shows up if he didn't see you hit anyone the case gets dismissed unless someone who actually saw you do it shows up. The rub here is that there's a video of it happening, but the prosecutor still has to at a minimum authenticate the video and provide foundation for it. He probably can, but you never know. Paperwork gets fucked up all the time
 
SnergenFlergen said:
Can any armchair lawyers with us explain what is with all these continuances?

This is a very, very minor case that is fairly open-and-shut (complete with video evidence of the incident). Dragging Chris to court time and time again is not only massively inconvenient for everyone involved but also expensive and time-wasting. The judge probably doesn't want to be in a room with Chris any more times than is necessary, and perpetuating this tedious pantomime time and time again will not alter the facts.

I cannot see how continuing the trial even once, let alone 4 times, is even remotely a good idea for anyone.
Click to expand...

Fatty is using the fuck out of his Get Out Of Jail Free Card.
 
If Chris wanted this over with, it would have been over with. I really don't think he cares, or that it even really registers with him very much what all these stupid adults are talking about with grownup words in the big judge house. I guarantee that Chris is not working with his lawyer to find a reasonable outcome. As ever, he lives as a child and is awaiting the severity of his timeout punishment.
 
Brother, the Hulkster's prediction is that it will be another continuance. Next court date (in a month) will have it be settled and all Chris will get is probation.
 
waffle said:
I am a lawyer, I'm not licensed in VA and I don't have time to look up their hearsay rules, but I can tell you right now if I were to prosecutor in this case I'd subpoena Gamestop guy for trial a hundred times out of a hundred. I should rephrase what I said earlier a bit; Who you rely need isn't the guy Chris sprayed but the guy that called the cops. It is possible that they'll try and go forward without Gamestop guy and base things off the cop, but I don't think it's wise on the State's part though.

Unless the cop actually saw Chris spray pepper spray in person Chris has at least a non-frivolous argument under Crawford that the person who called the cops has to be available in court to cross examine. The cop could try and testify based off of the video, but there's a risk that the court will buy the argument that the videotape is inadmissible hearsay and the cop's testimony from it is just double hearsay. The risk on the other side is that they'll deem the 911 call and tape nontestimonial, not hearsay, or hearsay within the exceptions of a rule. it largely depends on local rules and hearsay rules are a bit different in practice in every jurisdiction, even if they're the same on paper. (I just looked as I wrote this and there appears to be at least some case law in VA to support the idea that the video is not hearsay, but I don't know how well established the case law is. I'd probably still give it a shot if I were the PD and it went to trial, especially if there's no Va supreme court case on it. The worst thing that can happen is the judge disagrees.)

The right way to think about it isn't like a traffic ticket, but more like domestic violence. When you get a ticket the cop is swearing that her personally saw you commit the offense, that's why he has to show up in court. On the other hand in a DV cas 99 times out of a hundred things have cooled off by the time the cop gets their and even thought the cop arrests you and gives you a summons with his name on it as complainant he isn't the accuser, that's who you allegedly domestic voilenced, he's just the guy who filed the papers. So then, at trial even if the cop shows up if he didn't see you hit anyone the case gets dismissed unless someone who actually saw you do it shows up. The rub here is that there's a video of it happening, but the prosecutor still has to at a minimum authenticate the video and provide foundation for it. He probably can, but you never know. Paperwork gets fucked up all the time
Click to expand...
Let me stop you right there. There is no need for any evidence in this case. Chris already confessed and admitted he did in fact pepper spray that guy. All that's happening here is they're trying to come up with some sort of plea where Chris goes to tard day care a couple times and this gets knocked down to a misdemeanor with probation. Chris is willing to take any plea that doesn't include jail time, because in his mind a record and probation aren't real punishments that have any affect on his life.
 
lipitor said:
Let me stop you right there. There is no need for any evidence in this case. Chris already confessed and admitted he did in fact pepper spray that guy. All that's happening here is they're trying to come up with some sort of plea where Chris goes to tard day care a couple times and this gets knocked down to a misdemeanor with probation. Chris is willing to take any plea that doesn't include jail time, because in his mind a record and probation aren't real punishments that have any affect on his life.
Click to expand...

I'd genuinely love to know what you know about the specifics of this.

I know you have done a court report, and are more in the know than most of us as we have to experience this at arms length.
 
lipitor said:
Chris is willing to take any plea that doesn't include jail time, because in his mind a record and probation aren't real punishments that have any affect on his life.
Click to expand...

If Chris has learned anything in life, it's that if he refuses to put forth any effort, grownups will do it for him. Autism + Pure bred white trash = Absolutely no fucking shame.
 
lipitor said:
Let me stop you right there. There is no need for any evidence in this case. Chris already confessed and admitted he did in fact pepper spray that guy. All that's happening here is they're trying to come up with some sort of plea where Chris goes to tard day care a couple times and this gets knocked down to a misdemeanor with probation. Chris is willing to take any plea that doesn't include jail time, because in his mind a record and probation aren't real punishments that have any affect on his life.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. The whole sub-thread of having witnesses, I think, came from someone wondering if all these people that were at Gamestop that day will be paraded in to testify about what happened. Never mind that this hasn't even been scheduled for trial.

From this VA law firm's page entitled "A Quick Primer on VA Criminal Procedure," I gather that we have the following options:

1. Chris pleads to the felony charge,
2. Chris won't accept and it goes to trial, thus causing it to be moved to Circuit Court,
3. They lower the charges to a misdemeanor in order to keep the case in District Court (don't know how this could be, since there is only one charge and it is a felony).
4. Yet another continuance, where the courts shits itself and does nothing.

But I think something is going to happen tomorrow, because his 6/11 Hearing is listed as a "Preliminary."

http://www.snookandhaughey.com/prac...-quick-primer-on-virginia-criminal-procedure/
 
They find Chris guilty and give him the chair.

It'll be another continuance.
 
lipitor said:
Let me stop you right there. There is no need for any evidence in this case. Chris already confessed and admitted he did in fact pepper spray that guy. All that's happening here is they're trying to come up with some sort of plea where Chris goes to tard day care a couple times and this gets knocked down to a misdemeanor with probation. Chris is willing to take any plea that doesn't include jail time, because in his mind a record and probation aren't real punishments that have any affect on his life.
Click to expand...

He hasn't plead guilty yet, right?

Suppose they can't agree on a plea deal, or Chris' lawyer is thinking about contingency plans.

I would assume any not gulity plea he would make would not be based on a claim that he didn't pepper spray the GameStop employee. It would be some combination of claiming reduced mental capacity, claiming that it was part of an altercation, etc. I am not arguing for any of these points, just thinking about what I would argue if I were defending Chris.

Do you know if a fine is being considered? My guess Chris would feel that as a real punishment. In the Snyder case he seemed to brush it off with "my mother is handling that" and not think about it much, but I don't think Barb is able to bail him out at this point. Given his fairly tight finances, even a few hundred dollars would be quite noticable for him.
 
Chan the Wizard said:
They find Chris guilty and give him the chair.
Click to expand...
Under Virginia's Criminal Code, the following offenses carry the possibility of death:
  • Treason against Virginia [...] or establishing [...] any government within its limits, separate from the existing government, holding or executing in such a usurped government, any office, place or appointment...
Like declaring yourself Mayor-for-Life of one of its cities.
 
Last edited:
timtommy said:
He hasn't plead guilty yet, right?

Suppose they can't agree on a plea deal, or Chris' lawyer is thinking about contingency plans.

I would assume any not gulity plea he would make would not be based on a claim that he didn't pepper spray the GameStop employee. It would be some combination of claiming reduced mental capacity, claiming that it was part of an altercation, etc. I am not arguing for any of these points, just thinking about what I would argue if I were defending Chris.

Do you know if a fine is being considered? My guess Chris would feel that as a real punishment. In the Snyder case he seemed to brush it off with "my mother is handling that" and not think about it much, but I don't think Barb is able to bail him out at this point. Given his fairly tight finances, even a few hundred dollars would be quite noticable for him.
Click to expand...
I don't know the details of the plea, but we'll all see them when/if it's accepted. I just know that they were giving Chris a chance to prove he's not a shitty person (which is why they needed a lot of continuances). He's been on good behavior since his arrest, at least in their eyes. They're likely to accept a plea that just lets everybody shit their pants and do nothing.
 
Donald Duck said:
He'll park in the judge's spot again and get out of his car... right at the exact moment a male judge pulls in to park. An argument ensues and Chris then proceeds to mace the judge in front of the court house
Click to expand...

Hilarity ensues...
 
As Chris walks out of the courthouse with yet another continuance, a lone gunman fires at him from atop a nearby building. Chris dies from the injuries. Two weeks later the killer is found, and Anthony Logatto is charged with murder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom