User talk:Champthom

2012-10-22T13:52:28Z

Kengel1021:

Talk:This is how the Trial went

2012-07-16T03:16:04Z

Kengel1021:

This is how the Trial went

2012-07-12T14:01:44Z

Kengel1021: /* Chris's confirmation */

[[Image:Court-screenshot.png|thumb|[[Charlottesville]] Circuit Court]]

'''This is how the Trial went''' is an account from two CWCki Forum users, Cyan and Indigo, on what happened during the 10 [[July 2012]] arraignment of [[Chris]] and [[Barb]] in regards to the [[28 October 2011]] charges. The text presented here is as it was posted on the CWCki Forums on 10 July, with slight modifications for wiki styling and linking.

==Cyan's account==
Imma be nice and give you guys a darker colour for this wall of text.

Sorry for taking so long. Youtube was being Autistic and couldn't get a minute-long video uploaded very quickly...

First I'd like to prove we were there. The video isn't that exciting, just a newspaper with the date, the courthouse, and a little greeting for you guys. We are keeping ourselves anonymous. I know some of you somehow came under the impression that the video might be of Chris or the Trial. Sorry. Between being called a troll and an attention whore, I really just don't feel like getting arrested for you guys. =T

Anyways, our little drive-by video. (No, the driver isn't holding the camera. We aren't Chris.)
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jja-xjhLmsQ&feature=youtu.be]

Better detail of the newspaper. My camera's shitty and it made the date fuzzy. Luckily it's still easily recognizable as the same newspaper.
[http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o551/CyanandIndigo/100_1210.jpg]

And a screenshot of passing the courthouse, so you can clearly see where we are. Should be at 15-16 sec
[http://i1147.photobucket.com/albums/o551/CyanandIndigo/Court-screenshot.png]

===The Trial.===
It was quite unlike what the majority speculated. There were some humorous moments, Chris got to speak, and both he and Barbra pleaded guilty.

Barbra was the first to go. When the Judge began asking the usual questions, (such as "do you fully understand the charges you face?") Barbra asked if she could have Bell answer for her. The judge wasn't very patient with her, and Barbra seemingly attempted to protest. The Judge sharply told her, "These questions are between you and me, you have to answer the questions yourself."

Barbra simply answered "Yes" to all of his standard questions, plead guilty, and sat back down. On an unrelated note, she seems to have lost some weight. She isn't a very large woman.

The prosecution got to have a speech before it was Christians turn to take the stand. I can't remember everything they said, but the important parts were that Snyder didn't want Chris and Barb to be stuck with a felony charge, there was another witness that called the police, (the manager of the nearby Staples), and that he hoped that the plea bargain would be accepted by the judge.

Bell took a turn to speak, and wanted to formally introduce Chris to the Judge. He surprisingly introduced Chris as "[[autism|High-functionally Autistic]]" which is an outdated term and not part of the Autism spectrum. He also briefly told the Judge about Chris and Barbra's lives, and tried to explain the situation with the game place from the Chandlers' perspective. At one point he called Chris an "Adult-autistic-child", which Chris scowled at. He also made note that if the plea bargain was accepted, Chris would be assimilated into the world, taught how to contribute to society, and would get psychiatric evaluations and treatment. Chris mumbled something and seemed really distressed by all of this.

When Chris was brought to the stand, he stress-sighed first thing. He then repeated his mother's earlier question, in hopes to get Bell to speak for him. The judge shot him down the same way he did his mother, and proceeded to ask the questions.

This is where things got amusing.

"Is your full name Christian Weston Chandler?"

"Yes, but my birthname is [[Christopher's name change|Christopher Weston Chandler]]. Now it's Christian."

"So your full name is Christopher Weston Chandler?"

"N-no. My name is Christian. My birth name was Christopher, but we changed it years ago."

"Do you understand that you are to be charged the court fees, should you accept the plea bargain?"

"Yes. My mother will be taking care of that."

"Do you understand that you are to pay [[Michael Snyder|Michael John Snyder]] for his medical expenses?"

"Yes, but I don't think that THIEVING LIAR deserves a ''red cent''!"

The Judge dismissed this.

And finally, when asked if he willingly pleaded guilty and was his own conscious choice, Chris hesitated for a good five seconds.

"...Yes."

There was more discussion from both Bell and the prosecution, mostly trying to convince the Judge to accept the guilty plea. The Judge did, and Barbra Chandler and Christian Chandler were both found guilty of fail to stop at the scene of an accident, and Barbra was charged with assault on an officer. Barbra was sentenced with community service and two years of probation, and Chris was sentenced with community service, one year of probation, and must comply with all psychiatric treatment and evaluation. If he fails to do so, he faces jail time.

There's more details jotted down, and Indigo remembers more than I do, so you can expect a more detailed post from her. Probably on page six. I'll update with some detail of the October 28 incident (assuming the [[CWCki]] doesn't have it) tomorrow when I find my notes.

A few answers to other questions:

*If I paid the bill that comes with phones that access the internet every month, I probably would never have left-over money, and couldn't afford this trip. Also, like ''hell'' I'm taking my laptop to VA to leave it unattended in my car while I sat in a courthouse. (My car is also not equipped with internet access, I don't know of many cars that are.)
*I couldn't get photos of Chris or his car. The Charlottesville area around the courthouse is actually quite busy, and there aren't any parking lots adjacent to the courthouse itself. Chris and Barbra could have parked anywhere. Besides, getting photos or video of him or his car could have put us at risk of being charged for stalking. The court members KNOW of his internet infamy.
*The Charlottesville Circuit Court doesn't keep real-time transcripts, and the ones they make upon request cost money. If somebody else wants to contact them and get the transcripts, I'm sure they'll eventually have them available.

EDIT!: I totally forgot that most of you guys don't know this. Snyder did get hit with the Chandler vehicle. Not once, but twice. Once by Chris, and then again by Barb when they switched places. That's why they both have the fail-stop felony charge.

==Indigo's account==
As Cyan writes the master post, I will type this out: my account of what occurred. We felt that both of us should describe it, as we both noticed different details just as we noticed the same ones. When put together, both of our stories should give you a fairly clear image of the trial.

===Initial Observations===
Our dear CWC looked absolutely miserable to be there, his face set in an almost cartoonish pout. He was only sporting ''some'' of his now-signature Tomgirl look: the hair and make-up (restricted to light lipstick and eyeshadow) were present, but the clothes he sported were slacks and an unremarkable flannel shirt. I would probably be right in guessing that his subdued physical appearance was at the insistence of his lawyer.

Barbara looked as though she had lost significant weight, and another older woman was with them. ((It's been confirmed that she's Rocky.))

===The Pleas===
This may surprise you, but Barbara and Chris did the smart thing for once and pleaded guilty . . . ah, but that's not quite all. Their lawyer explained that while they were choosing this course of action, they maintain that their version of events (their TRUE and HONEST account of what occurred between themselves and Mr. Snyder) is the accurate story. In other words: "we're guilty but not really lol."

The judge has the option of denying this type of plea-bargaining based on what occurs next. Keep this in mind.

===Barbara's Turn===
This portion was mostly unworthy of note, aside from Barbara nearly getting uppity at the start. She calmed down pretty quickly, though, and conducted herself rather politely through the judge's questions.

Meanwhile, Chris was busy completely disassociating himself from the situation. He fiddled around with his sunglasses (making a few noises when they collided with the table every now and then), played with his ring, and didn't seem like he was paying much attention to dialogue he probably ought to be listening to.

===Chris's Turn===
Before Chris had his turn to speak, their lawyer stepped in to provide context to Chris's situation. It's all stuff we've heard before, though there were a couple of quotes worth noting:

* He used "high-functioning autistic" to describe Chris, most likely at Chris's request. This is no longer used as any sort of technical term, so it sounded rather silly coming from a professional lawyer.
* Not long afterward, he goes on to describe Chris as an "adult autistic child." ''This'' drew a notable reaction out of Chris. He went so far as to change his facial expression from severe pouting to as close to outrage as he dared show; he nearly interrupted his lawyer, but must have though better of it and quieted whatever he was going to say into an intelligible mumble.

Finally, it was Chris's turn to answer the routine questions given by the clerk and the judge. Chris, due to not paying attention earlier, asked if his lawyer could answer on his behalf. He was met with a reminder that no, in fact, you ''have to'' answer these questions ''all by yourself''. Perish the thought.

After the clerk finished her segment, Chris had the gall to interrupt the judge just as he was getting started with his round of questioning. Despite the rough start, Chris got the hint and kept his responses to "yes" and "no" and did fairly well answering them quickly . . . that is, until he was asked if he had pled guilty completely of his own free will. There was a LONG pause before he finally remembered that the "correct" answer was yes. Looks like he needed more rehearsal time to me.

Oh, and that's not all! Things got interesting when Mr. Snyder was brought up . . .

Chris was asked something along the lines of, "do you understand that, by pleading guilty, you MUST pay the agreed amount to Mr. Snyder in damages?" Chris confirmed that he understood . . . and then went on to say that, in HIS opinion, "that thieving liar doesn't deserve a red cent!" Oh, yes, folks, I kid you not: our beloved Mayor of CWCville committed ''public slander'' in a COURT OF LAW.

I expected a harsh reprimand for such egregiously bad behavior (or, perhaps, even for his plea bargain to be denied) but alas, the judge pretty much let it go and continued on. Welp, another free pass for Chris, brought to you by The Autism Card!

===The Aftermath===
The rest is pretty straight forward: the prosecutor, defense lawyer, and judge discuss the conditions that Barbara and Chris must comply with, whilst Chris gives an exaggerated, disapproving shake of his head whenever Mr. Snyder is brought up.

At one point, the lawyer suggests that Chris could start giving back to the community in an effort to reintegrate himself into society. The look on Chris's face is ''priceless''.

((That's pretty much it. We couldn't obtain transcripts, as they don't provide them on the day of a trial if the trial in question is not a major trial or an appeal. If you want to obtain your own copies, you'll have to send in a request to the Circuit Court of Charlottesville and pay a fee.))

==Chris's confirmation==
On a 11 July 2012 [[Facebook]] note, Chris confirmed their account:

{{quotebox| Wednesday July 11, 2012

Yep, the trolls know most of what went on in the court room yesterday; it is confirmed that two of them were in there, going by the online names of "Cyan" and "Indigo". Rob recognized them both, and informed them that their trolling stupid presence is noted and known. I have also found their transcribed, personal reports on the Cwcki Forum, and they have a 23 second video on YouTube of them driving by the courthouse and holding up the day's "New York Times" paper, titled "CyanIndigo", same as their account name. And they quoted me in calling Snyder "thieving and lying"; I had actually said "Bribing and lying".

Anyway, we ALL know of them, and they will be brought in regardless of currently being in Or outside of [[Virginia]] or even the [[United States of America]].
}}

While Cyan and Indigo confirmed that Bell did indeed confront them during the course of the trial, it should be noted that their only actions were to attend a court session that was open to the public and then report on the proceedings, neither of which are illegal. Noteworthy is the fact that Chris either refuses or can’t see the big picture that Snyder along with his attorney, the prosecutor, and the judge have given him a wakeup call to turn his life around rather than ending up with a life-altering felony conviction.

[[Category:Eyewitness Accounts]]

Talk:A-Logs

2012-07-09T23:09:38Z

Kengel1021:

It's a start, but it could be a lot better. I'm only vaguely familiar with A-Log myself, so I'm not sure how much I could do to fix the article. While I don't want this to turn into an Encylopedia Dramatica article about A-Log himself, we need more direct comparisons to him and his actions to fully illustrate why this is discouraged.

If I might make a suggestion Champ, (and this is the only time I will ever say this), I think that this is something we'd need the /cwc/fags' help with. They're the ones who discovered A-Log, know everything about him, wrote his actual ED page, and let's be honest here; When you say the "broader CWC community", that's mostly referring to /cwc/. Why not go over there and put up an invite for them to help us define Alogging and educate the newfags? At the very least we might get some decent quotes from the anons explaining it a bit.

Just a suggestion. --[[User:Old meme|Old meme]] 07:03, 11 May 2012 (PDT)

A couple of points...

:1) "Chris's discomfort for black people [...] is arguably more from failing to understand social norms in that you don't announce to the world you're discomforted by African American rather than of the ideology of white supremacy that your average KKK member would have"

:While I'm no Alogger or anything I think that his attitude toward blacks (and Jews) goes beyond merely not wanting to have sex with their women. Just at look at the way [[Chris Drops the N-Bomb|he uses the n-word]]. Also let's not forget [[Michael Snyder is ColdHearted and Mean]]. Also according to Mimms and Lucas Chris was always worrying that the black kids at the game place would try to steal his stuff, defintely a racist.

:His hatred toward homosexuals most definitely goes beyond regular homophobia. The casual American homophobe does not [[Mailbag 49#Chris loves his country|supports the repeal of DADT so more homos can die]] nor does he wish to [[CWC Address to Unilever About AXE|prevent them from buying certain brands of body spray]]. A typical homophobes does not wish to have homosexuals locked up and forced into reparative therapy either (I'm too lazy to dig up the chat where he advocates that but it's somewhere here on the wiki).

:Now granted, these are not good reasons for inflicting boddily harm upon Chris. He's too much of a pussy to commit hate crimes, too much of a lazy ass to go and harass people Westboro Baptist style and lacks any political clout to make his hare braind ideas a reality, but I still think that you're understimating his bigotry.

:2) Another argument that I can see aloggers using to justify their attitude toawrd Chris is his lawbreaking. I think that the best counterarguments would be: A) Chris's offenses are relatively minor and most aloggers would not wish physical harm upon a person other than Chris who has the same rapsheet. B) While Chris needs to be punished for his crimes, we already have the legal system for it and it's doing [[28 October 2011#Chris's|a bang up job]]. C) By advocating intentional infliction of bodily harm upon Chris, aloggers are being worse than him by supporting crimes far worse (both from a moral and legal standpoint) than anything he's ever done.

[[User:NegaCWC|NegaCWC]] 12:09, 11 May 2012 (PDT)

::Another nitpick: "White knights '''believe that Chris is capable of no wrong''' and try to help him [emphasis added]". I somewhat doubt that all white knights really think that Chris is completely blameless, and anyway that's not their defining characteristic. A person who thinks that Chris is much to blame for his current predicament yet also tries to stop the trolls and help Chris better himself is not a white knight? -- [[User:NegaCWC|NegaCWC]] 16:43, 12 May 2012 (PDT)

*These are good points, NegaCWC and I think the fellow who added a bunch to the page addressed some of these concerns. It's a delicate issue, I want this page done right if it's going to be in the main namespace, so do you (or anyone else for that matter) think it's good to go now?--[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 07:37, 30 May 2012 (PDT)
* If the fellow you're referring to is me, then yes, addressing some of those points was part of the intent of my last edit. As for whether the page is ready to go or not, I'm leaning towards "not just yet". Looking at it, there isn't really much in the way of hard information there, and a lot of it is within the confines of opinions and speculation (the arguments for and against). It feels to me a little more like something you'd see on a forum and not an article that could be referenced. I think a little bit more exposition on A-log himself, at least as far as his involvement in the ongoing saga that is Chris, and how the practice of "A-logging" came into being and came to be known as such, would probably make it feel more like an article. A little bit more fact and reference to balance out the opinion and speculation, so to speak. Course, that's just my opinion, and I'm just a noob. -- [[User:Perpetual Lurker|Perpetual Lurker]] 03:56, 1 June 2012 (PDT)
:*Like I said on the community portal, this is a tricky article because it doesn't exactly pertain to Chris directly in the same way [[white knighting]] does, or at least we don't have tangible documentation or anything like that of Chris responding to A-Logging. I really don't want to focus the article on A-Log, because 1) this is the CWCki and [[CWCki:CWCki_is#CWCki_is_about_Chris|the CWCki is about Chris]] and not so much ancillary characters like A-Log, especially given that Chris hasn't responded to anything he's done and 2) I'm more concerned about the mindset that was popularized by A-Log rather than the guy himself.
::I agree that in general, we should try to have articles based on facts and references rather than just our opinions and speculation. But I think this article might need to be an exception to the rule. The white knighting article started out as mostly dealing with the meta-topic of "Can Chris be helped?/I think I should try to help Chris" is probably one of the stages Chris trolls go through and it comes up time and again on Chris related sites. The problem with the White knighting article is that one can read it and end up thinking "Gee, Chris doesn't want help and he's not as innocent as he seems, that means he's an awful awful person and he should be punished." I think it should be pretty clear that Chris is not a spawn of Satan like A-Loggers would like to argue, it's common sense really. Maybe talking about A-Logging and what he did, merely to establish the type of behavior associated with A-Logging, would help make this more factual, with examples of A-Logging on various Chris related sites might flush it out and make it seem like an actual phenomena and less than speculation.
::Ideally I want this article to serve a few goals - 1) bring up this topic, because as I said, it comes up time and again and I think it's a significant meta-topic that warrants discussion, and 2) help CWCki readers and editors not be an A-Log. People have said it and they probably have a point that people often read the CWCki and think Chris is an awful, awful person mostly because we have a tendency to exaggerate for dramatic and rhetorical purposes. This article, coupled with a "Don't be an A-Log" rule in regards to article tone, related to [[CWCki:NPOV|NPOV]], would help the CWCki tremendously.
::At least, that's just my opinion. --[[User:Champthom|Champthom]] 05:01, 2 June 2012 (PDT)
:*It'd be good if we could get a screencap of A-Logging from YouTube (there was some good quotes on a recent /cwc/ thread along these lines), perhaps a screencap from /cwc/ of someone A-Logging and someone replying with "HI A-LOG." <sub>-unsigned comment by [[User:Champthom|Champthom]]</sub>
*** Y'know, we DO have a good "HI A-LOG"-type message here - someone in the [[Chris and Money]] talk page was talking about Chris's SSI and trying to get rid of it.--[[User:Blazer|Blazer]] 06:49, 1 June 2012 (PDT)

I went in and did a major revision to this page. This was originally on my user page so I took it out and put it on this page because i think the subject matter is relevant to this particular topic on people who may think of "A-Logging" over the Michael Snyder incident.
Kengel1021
* I'm not 100% certain that the revision in question, at least as it is currently worded and formatted, is wholly right for the article. Despite the potential relevance, it doesn't touch upon A-Logging at all, and talks solely about the incident on [[28 October 2011|28 October]]. Moreover, the points you raise are mostly in defense of Chris and his actions on that day. I can see the relevance to A-Logging, in the sense that one shouldn't A-Log Chris over this particular incident, but the reference is tangential at best. I would suggest editing your revision further to make it tie more directly to A-Logging, because as I'm reading it, I feel it belongs more on 28 October 2011 rather than here. I'll further point out that your revision isn't -bad-, per se. Just that it probably needs work to make it more relevant to A-Logging, since you believe the subject matter is indeed relevant. Again, this is only my opinion, and what the bleep do I know? --[[User:Perpetual Lurker|Perpetual Lurker]] 00:41, 9 July 2012 (PDT)

I have a feeling you are probably right about putting it under the October 28th incident. But there is more leniency regarding this page than the October 28th page regarding speculative articles and I am not sure if this would cross the line or not. Perhaps a moderator could help us here.

Talk:A-Logs

2012-07-09T23:01:08Z

Kengel1021:

Talk:A-Logs

2012-07-09T05:43:58Z

Kengel1021:

User:Kengel1021

2012-07-09T05:36:16Z

Kengel1021:

This is my user page.