Anonymous wrote:I lived in Richmond for many years and worked in fundraising (so, I knew many wealthy families) and they are not "socialites." They are an old prominent family, but they aren't old money the way the Rockefeller's or Vanderbilts are. This pervert's parents are probably UMC, maybe UC, but certainly not in the way you all are thinking of it.

I dunno, I don't really feel bad shit talking her for being frumpy or taking her pseudo-pedigree down a peg, because she's so evil and revolting that it's like, why not, you know? If she were a nice person I'd at least feel bad calling her ugly.

I just wanted to point all this out. I'm sure she's crazy enough that she loves that she's being called a "socialite" - you can tell she's delusional about that because she thinks being a UVA alumna is enough to get her out of jail lmfao keep dreaming, sis - and I don't even want to give her that much. Sick, evil woman who deserves to never see the light of day again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://fredericksburg.com/news/state-and-regional/crime-and-courts/eleanor-hunton-hoppe-hearing-may-be-continued/article_966331c9-ac6c-57aa-9164-43bc2efaebe9.html

The article made it out like it's irregular that Eleanor Hunton Hoppe, ex-spouse of Charlottesville-based Federal judge Joel Hoppe, qualified for the services of the Federal Public Defender:

The court records do not include a written account of why the defendant, who attended a private Richmond girls school called St. Catherine’s and whose family founded what became Richmond’s largest law firm, Hunton Andrews Kurth, qualified for the services of a public defender.

For state-level prosecutions, in Virginia and elsewhere, a formula based on the poverty line determines eligibility to receive the services of a public defender. If you fall below that threshold, which is some multiple of the poverty line with consideration of assets available to the defendant, than you qualify.

The standard is very different in the Federal criminal system, where the magistrate judge determines whether the defendant has insufficient resources to retain counsel while providing for the necessities of life.

§ 210.40.30 Standards for Eligibility

(a) A person is "financially unable to obtain counsel" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(b)(link is external) if the person's net financial resources and income are insufficient to obtain qualified counsel. In determining whether such insufficiency exists, consideration should be given to:

(1) the cost of providing the person and his dependents with the necessities of life, and

(2) the cost of the defendant's bail bond if financial conditions are imposed, or the amount of the case deposit defendant is required to make to secure release on bond.

On the one hand "duh". But it actually allows more latitude to provide publicly-financed counsel as it takes into account the need to provide "qualified counsel". This means counsel that has the training to provide a defense to the charges filed, at least to the point of averting an "ineffective assistance of counsel" (IAC) claim. As child pornography cases have a ton of (awful) discovery associated with them, the costs spiral quickly past the usual maximum levels. So it's entirely plausible at this point that she qualifies for counsel under the Criminal Justice Act. Then if somehow the costs are less than expected the court could seek reimbursement at a later point in time.

Anonymous wrote:https://fredericksburg.com/news/state-and-regional/crime-and-courts/eleanor-hunton-hoppe-hearing-may-be-continued/article_966331c9-ac6c-57aa-9164-43bc2efaebe9.html

The court records do not include a written account of why the defendant, who attended a private Richmond girls school called St. Catherine’s and whose family founded what became Richmond’s largest law firm, Hunton Andrews Kurth, qualified for the services of a public defender.

§ 210.40.30 Standards for Eligibility

(a) A person is "financially unable to obtain counsel" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(b)(link is external) if the person's net financial resources and income are insufficient to obtain qualified counsel. In determining whether such insufficiency exists, consideration should be given to:

(1) the cost of providing the person and his dependents with the necessities of life, and

(2) the cost of the defendant's bail bond if financial conditions are imposed, or the amount of the case deposit defendant is required to make to secure release on bond.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And I take back my caution already. The url to the court pdf was rendered such that I only saw “images” and not the whole domain or file - so didn’t click through, thinking it was more of his photography.

I see he has a record of abusing his position of a photographer and seems like one of the creepy ones too.

Yeah, no issue with the art nudes. It’s the court pdf that’s gross.

Anonymous wrote:And I take back my caution already. The url to the court pdf was rendered such that I only saw “images” and not the whole domain or file - so didn’t click through, thinking it was more of his photography.

I see he has a record of abusing his position of a photographer and seems like one of the creepy ones too.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arresting officer Kevin Faubion remains tight-lipped about the 2019 incident that led him to arrest Hoppe on a charge of “undressing where prohibited” in Pocahontas State Park. Faubion, the park’s former assistant manager, referred questions to the park system’s safety director, Scott Vantrease, who did not reply to inquiries.

Chesterfield County court records show that Faubion’s arrest of Hoppe coincided with his arrest of another individual: Andrew Hersey, a photographer once based in Charlottesville. The charge against Hersey was for conducting an “unauthorized commercial enterprise” in that same park.

Chesterfield County prosecutor Stacey Davenport has downplayed Hoppe’s arrest because it “did not involve children or any sexual act.” Davenport went on to further downplay the incident by noting that the regulation used to charge Hoppe was repealed just one week after the incident.

Both individuals were charged with a violation of the Virginia State Park regulations. These are Class 3 misdemeanors which, as Davenport noted, are nonjailable offenses with a maximum punishment of a $500 fine.

Chesterfield General District Court records show that both Hoppe and Hersey were found guilty in absentia. Hoppe was assessed $172 in fines and fees, which she appealed, while Hersey paid $187.

I wonder if this is the same Andrew Hersey.
https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/documents/292/116681/Peabody-v-the-Rector-and-Visitors-of-the-University-of-Virginia.pdf

Of course it is. Good God, these people are sick.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Arresting officer Kevin Faubion remains tight-lipped about the 2019 incident that led him to arrest Hoppe on a charge of “undressing where prohibited” in Pocahontas State Park. Faubion, the park’s former assistant manager, referred questions to the park system’s safety director, Scott Vantrease, who did not reply to inquiries.

Chesterfield County court records show that Faubion’s arrest of Hoppe coincided with his arrest of another individual: Andrew Hersey, a photographer once based in Charlottesville. The charge against Hersey was for conducting an “unauthorized commercial enterprise” in that same park.

Chesterfield County prosecutor Stacey Davenport has downplayed Hoppe’s arrest because it “did not involve children or any sexual act.” Davenport went on to further downplay the incident by noting that the regulation used to charge Hoppe was repealed just one week after the incident.

Both individuals were charged with a violation of the Virginia State Park regulations. These are Class 3 misdemeanors which, as Davenport noted, are nonjailable offenses with a maximum punishment of a $500 fine.

Chesterfield General District Court records show that both Hoppe and Hersey were found guilty in absentia. Hoppe was assessed $172 in fines and fees, which she appealed, while Hersey paid $187.

I wonder if this is the same Andrew Hersey.
https://images.law.com/contrib/content/uploads/documents/292/116681/Peabody-v-the-Rector-and-Visitors-of-the-University-of-Virginia.pdf

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You guys are overthinking the undressing in public part. It doesn’t take especially significant wealth and connections to get that knocked down to community service for first time offenders. As long as she was engaged in activities with a consenting adult jail time seems really unlikely. I’m not sure what you’re expecting when you can avoid jail time for first time bar fights and theft.

The offense occurred 10/10/2019. Unless she couldn't make it to a bathroom and was reliving herself, I can't think of a legitimate excuse for a woman to get naked in the park in the fall. I doubt she would have been arrested, if she was relieving herself. Seems like it would have been too cold for most people.

It's typically pretty warm in Virginia in early October.

https://www.wunderground.com/history/daily/us/va/chesterfield-county/KVACHEST60/date/2019-10-10

It got up to 75 at 3:54PM in Chesterfield but there was 12mph NNE wind and the condition was partly cloudy tapering off from mostly cloudy. Like I said, only reason to be undressed there is to relieve one's self and she wouldn't have been arrested if that were the case. The assistant manager was the complainant, so I doubt they would have called the police because a woman had diarrhea, and now he was promoted to a full manager at another facility and is not permitted to talk about this case. There wasn't any sunbathing or skinny dipping going on.

Anonymous wrote:Arresting officer Kevin Faubion remains tight-lipped about the 2019 incident that led him to arrest Hoppe on a charge of “undressing where prohibited” in Pocahontas State Park. Faubion, the park’s former assistant manager, referred questions to the park system’s safety director, Scott Vantrease, who did not reply to inquiries.

Chesterfield County court records show that Faubion’s arrest of Hoppe coincided with his arrest of another individual: Andrew Hersey, a photographer once based in Charlottesville. The charge against Hersey was for conducting an “unauthorized commercial enterprise” in that same park.

Chesterfield County prosecutor Stacey Davenport has downplayed Hoppe’s arrest because it “did not involve children or any sexual act.” Davenport went on to further downplay the incident by noting that the regulation used to charge Hoppe was repealed just one week after the incident.

Both individuals were charged with a violation of the Virginia State Park regulations. These are Class 3 misdemeanors which, as Davenport noted, are nonjailable offenses with a maximum punishment of a $500 fine.

Chesterfield General District Court records show that both Hoppe and Hersey were found guilty in absentia. Hoppe was assessed $172 in fines and fees, which she appealed, while Hersey paid $187.