I don’t know about the US, but here most of those evaluations for background reports on sex offenders are done by women.I think this is going to be the key fact that turns the decision of the court. Chris is an opportunistic predator, and there is no reason to believe he won't commit another sex crime again given opportunity.
For Chris, motive has never been in question. He's always been a highly motivated sexpest. I truly believe the only reason he hasn't raped or violated anyone else is because most women will not go near him. Consent is clearly no issue for him.
From that perspective, I don't think it'd be very similar to what the Animated Series did [in that episode where he tried to get a job], but he'd definitely try to convince her that he's not a threat to women anywhere by being a threat to women anywhere..I don’t know about the US, but here most of those evaluations for background reports on sex offenders are done by women.
Guess what: most of them don’t manage to behave normally enough around their evaluator to pull the wool over her eyes. Chris will absolutely not clue into the fact that although this woman is being nice to him and pretending to be interested in him and his Lovequest, he must absolutely in no circumstances touch her or hit on her. His behaviour now is significantly disinhibited with women.
On the off chance this does go to trial, wouldn't trying to find a jury that wasn't predisposed one way or another be a fucking nightmare? How hard would it be to potentially weed out weens or White knights trying to get on the jury to influence it for their own personal agenda?
This is not just his first rodeo, it's the first time he's potentially facing life ruining charges. If they decide to upgrade this from just incest level perversion to actual rape, he's looking at life. He's looking at the sex offender registry. He's looking at being absolutely utterly fucked and essentially forbidden from ever having a normal life (well as normal as it ever was) again.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.
I live in the USA, and I'm probably just over estimating Chris's notoriety.What country do you live in where people apply to be jurors?
A random selection of locals are unlikely to hit anyone who may be a ween, and the results aren't likely to be any more or less biased than anyone else who is featured in the news for pulling off a heinous crime.
Even then, the worst should be sorted out by both the defense and prosecution during voir dire, not that it will ever get that far.
I'm pretty sure most Ruckersville natives do not care remotely as much about Chris as the weirdoes on this site. He's just some local kook to them.I live in the USA, and probably just over estimating Chris's notoriety. It seems like it would be even worse in the area it loves in.
I live in the USA, and I'm probably just over estimating Chris's notoriety.
Inb4 a bunch of weens move to Ruckersville and hope to be selected. Trials take forever to happen, they've got time to find a place there.The chances of finding a bunch of weens in a randomly selected jury are very low.
...never mind.The chances of any of them surviving the jury selection process is essentially nonzero.
The Sun is the fucking British Chris-Chan of newspapers, a filthy Fleet Street (well until it moved) fish wrapper and anyone who works for them should be put against a wall.Fuck this paper. And since when was it an exclusive? The Sun only appeals to the lowest denominator, and have an awful reputation in the UK.
If Chris had been slightly less of a dumbfuck, he would have either lawyered up or denied everything and called it roleplaying or whatever.This is not just his first rodeo, it's the first time he's potentially facing life ruining charges. If they decide to upgrade this from just incest level perversion to actual rape, he's looking at life. He's looking at the sex offender registry. He's looking at being absolutely utterly fucked and essentially forbidden from ever having a normal life (well as normal as it ever was) again.
And an insanity defense on shit like this is far, far from being a magic wand. If anything, it would justify civilly committing him indefinitely. People don't cotton to this kind of shit that he did.
Question for the real attorneys. Could the prosecutor side step this whole shitball of a case by raising competency issues about Chris themselves? How do criminal proceedings against adults with guardians go in Va.?
I'm not a lawyer either, and not in the US, but I'm pretty sure their criteria for not guilty by reason of insanity is based only on the issue of if someone is unable to tell right from wrong based on mental defect or disease at the time of the crime, although, as mentioned before, this leads to incarceration in a psychiatric facility until someone is mentally healthy enough to be released.Disagree but I still love you. my assumption is that he is unaware, thus the word "mistake" in the term "mistake of law".
In *theory*, the law is the law, and its the law for a reason.
Part of the social contract when there is a society with laws, is that society therefore has a right to expect that the same base standard will be held to everyone for their behaviour, there will be a base level of safety guaranteed to everyone, and with their punishment within an accepted range.
If you rape someone, even if you were too dumb to realise it was rape, you have still traumatised them in an un-undoable way. Harm has still been done. That has to be taken into account.
In *practice*? This will come down to the judge's discretion and anything could fucking happen. People who are below average intelligence can and do get put in jail for breaking laws they didn't know about, all the time. They also get off, less often.
It depends on whether the individual judge focuses on society's right to safety from an opportunistic mother rapist, the need to uphold the integrity of the law, punishment in order to rectify harm, Chris's capacity to understand what he did wrong and reform, or something else.
Again IANAL and not in the US so someone please come in and let me know where I might be wrong.