| Count | Date | Alleged Offense | Public Record |
|---|---|---|---|
| I | Jun 3 | Charging in the first degree. Suspect connected a motor vehicle to a wall. A cord was present at the scene. | Closed↗ 26-00021687 |
| II | Jun 4 | Reoffending within 24 hours. Anonymous tip: “remove this cord before someone gets hurt.” Nobody got hurt. | Closed↗ 26-00021709 |
| III | Jun 17 | Fueling a car with electricity across the public right-of-way. The audacity, apparently, continued. | Closed↗ 26-00021710 |
| IV | Jun 29 | Escalation. The Hotline could no longer locate the proper authorities. The cord remained deeply corded. | Closed26-00025690Sealed |
| V | Jul 1 | Formal demand for Enforcement™. Ramp still ramping. Electrons still flowing. Morale, high. | Closed↗ 26-00026228 |
| VI | Jul 2 | Aggravated recharging. Now allegedly in violation of municipal code, federal statute, and the second law of thermodynamics. | Open↗ 26-00026221 |
| VII | Jul 2 | The cord was, per the filing, “again” blocking the sidewalk — “again” doing considerable heavy lifting. Report No. 2 of the afternoon. | Open↗ 26-00024027 |
| VIII | Jul 2 | Now with citations — Sec. 5-2-16, Sec. 5-2-29, the ADA, and the social contract. Cord unmoved. Report No. 3 before dinner. | Open↗ 26-00026438 |
| IX | Jul 13 | The homeowner, it is alleged, “constantly” runs his charger across the sidewalk — a word here meaning roughly three hours once a week. Submitted exhibit photographed July 1 (per EXIF + GPS); filed July 13. Even the evidence is a rerun. | Closed↗ 26-00027621 |
| X | Jul 17 | A tenth filing — this one bundling three exhibits already on file, one (IMG_3359) first submitted back on Count I. The evidence, like the cord, keeps coming back. | Closed↗ 26-00028351 |
| XI | Jul 25 | An eleventh filing — this time under a brand-new category (“Sidewalk” proper), the case having changed venue. A fresh photo, for once, and a new allegation involving a nighttime dog-walk. The cord endures. (See Count XIV: this record was later reborn.) | Closed↗ 26-00029428 |
| XII | Jul 26 | The encore. Filed the very next afternoon, the case returning to its original venue (“ROW Access”), starring the very same photograph (IMG_0746) submitted the day before with Count XI. The City closed it: “Work is Complete.” The work — charging — continues. | Closed↗ 26-00029427 |
| XIII | Aug 13 | After an 18-day ceasefire, the case resumes — with two exhibits. Exhibit one: IMG_0746, in its third docket appearance, now annotated with a red mark for dramatic emphasis. Exhibit two: a photograph of the defendant’s new explanatory sign. The defense’s own signage has been entered into evidence against it. | Closed↗ 26-00029434 |
| XIV | Aug 14 | A rerun so faithful it kept the case number: Count XI’s record returns — same nighttime dog-walk allegation, word for word, and IMG_0746’s fourth appearance — now stamped as submitted August 14, back under the original “ROW Access” venue. The docket, like the photo, is recycled. | Closed↗ 26-00029428 |
| XV | Aug 15 | Three days, three filings — and a breakthrough: an entirely new photograph, plus a policy recommendation. The City, says the filing, should require “an overhead swing arm” (they exist). The defense agrees; overhead swing arms are an approved method in its own pilot proposal, §4-B. The prosecution is now contributing engineering suggestions to the defense’s legislation. | Closed↗ 26-00032310 |
| XVI | Aug 31 | After a 16-day intermission, a five-exhibit filing — a personal best — objecting to the defendant’s “additional signage asking to not be reported.” The filing clarifies that “that is not how it works,” and observes that “no one asked this homeowner to buy an electric car or a house without a driveway.” Correct on both counts. Nobody asked the complainant to photograph it five times, either. The City’s disposition, a new one for this docket: “Work is On Hold.” The prosecution has been placed on hold. The cord has not. | Closed↗ 26-00034438 |
| XVII | Sep 3 | “Yet again” draping the cord across the sidewalk — “reported for months,” says the filing, and the months are not in dispute (see Counts I–XVI). The “dangerous situation for pedestrians” remains, three months in, entirely prospective: injuries to date, zero. One exhibit. On hold. | Closed↗ 26-00035239 |
| XVIII | Sep 4 | A filing about the very same Wednesday-evening charge as Count XVII — logged, however, against 2 West Oak, the address across the way. Same cord, same evening, different house. The docket now prosecutes the defendant in absentia at a residence he does not own. “Dangerous particularly for disabled pedestrians,” it adds; the ramp remains the only ADA-shaped object in the story. | Closed↗ 26-00035248 |
| XIX | Sep 4 | The same Thursday-evening session now has three filings — Count XVII that night, Count XVIII the next morning, and this one that afternoon. Demands a fine for “refusing to comply despite countless warnings,” the word “countless” doing here what “again” did back in Count VII. Also asserts the defendant “is no more important than anyone else and should not be receiving special treatment.” The defense concurs — that is, verbatim, the proposal: the same rule for every household without a driveway. Two exhibits. On hold. | Closed↗ 26-00035251 |
| XX | Sep 8 | The twentieth filing turns philosophical: “What remedy does the city have in place to stop this?” A fair question, and the docket now answers it — “Work is On Hold,” stamped on all six of the latest filings, reason unstated. (Council, coincidentally, has deferred its vote on the very penalty ladder the prosecution keeps requesting.) The ADA is cited once more; the ramp, once more, remains the ADA-friendliest object on the block. One exhibit. | Closed↗ 26-00035652 |
| XXI | Sep 8 | Sixty-six minutes after Count XX, the shortest filing yet — “Charging cable across public sidewalk. Tripping hazard. ADA compliance issue.” — eleven words, filed once more against 2 West Oak. Its photograph and Count XX’s are the same scene, minutes apart. Two addresses, two case numbers, one cord, one hour. | Closed↗ 26-00035650 |
| XXII | Sep 11 | A new theory of the case: the cord is now a threat to children. The filing places the offense at “school release time 330pm” and worries that “kids on their bikes or scooters may crash or trip and be severely injured.” School lets out at 2:30. The defendant’s own two daughters attend it, a block away, and walk past the ramp daily — as do their parents. This filing also arrives after the defendant had publicly pledged to stop charging across the sidewalk altogether; whether the photograph predates that pledge, the record does not say. Twenty-two counts in, the injury column still reads zero. Verdict on the tone: “selfish and unacceptable.” | Closed↗ 26-00036524 |
| XXIII | Sep 13 | Venue change number four. Having worked through “ROW Access,” “Sidewalk,” and back again, the prosecution files this one under Parking Comments, Complaints or Inquiries — routing it, for the first time in the docket, to the Police Department. “Another day, another infraction,” it opens — describing a practice the defendant had already promised, in writing and on his own fence, to abandon. “It is dangerous. It is illegal. It has to be enforced.” Three sentences, three assertions, no new evidence, and nothing left to enforce against. The City gave it a due date of September 22. | Closed↗ 26-00036696 |
| XXIV | Sep 14 | The prosecution discovers the Pledge of Compliance — a signed, dated promise that the defendant will not plug in across the sidewalk until the City makes it lawful — and files it as “another threatening message.” The note, it warns, says “the behavior will continue to happen.” The note says the opposite. It closes: “stop these scofflaws!” — the prosecution now quoting the defense’s own case file. Filed under Parking; closed by the Police the next afternoon. That same day, September 14, the City closed every filing it had placed on hold, six of them, plus Count XXII, in one sitting. | Closed↗ 26-00036795 |
| XXV | Sep 15 | Sign Seven, the supercharger field test, is entered into evidence within a day of going up: “A new sign today asking people to waste council time. We can all do that.” The filing adds a theory of the defendant’s original sin — “You made a choice to buy a house without a driveway while owning an EV” — and the standing instruction, “Follow the law!” The law in question does not yet exist, which is what the sign is about. Closed in eight hours. Four of the last ten filings are now photographs of signs rather than of a cord. | Closed↗ 26-00037044 |
| XXVI | Sep 18 · 11:48am | A filing about a filing. The exhibit is a screenshot of the prosecution’s own earlier report (Count XXIII), showing the City’s word “CLOSED.” No new photograph of the defendant, the car or the cord is offered, because none was taken: “My request was closed with no resolution to the law breaking happening at 1 West Oak.” It closes with a promise — “i will continue to report the behavior” — filed seven days after the behaviour stopped. | Open↗ 26-00037630 |
| XXVII | Sep 18 · 8:24pm | Twice in one day, and again the evidence is the docket itself: two screenshots of Count XIX’s record, stamped “Work is Complete” and “Investigation Status — Void.” The filing asks the City to explain its own paperwork, and asserts the cord “continues to be charged over the sidewalk,” the sole support being a photograph the City closed four days earlier. The spree has become a spree about the spree. | Closed↗ 26-00037755 |
Not with a citation — none was ever issued — though the City had asked, more than once and in writing, that the cord be removed from the sidewalk. On September 11 the defendant — who volunteers as Vice Chair of the City’s Environmental Policy Commission, whose members pledge not to break the law — was reminded of that pledge. The choice put to him was the cord or the seat. He chose the seat: signed a Pledge of Compliance, posted it on the fence, unplugged, and now drives to a public Supercharger like everyone else without a driveway. Brought to justice, in other words, not by the law — which has no rule for him to break or obey — but by leverage on the one thing he cares about more than charging his car: serving the city that has no rule.
The prosecution did not notice. Six reports have been filed since the surrender (Counts XXII–XXVII): one alleging a fresh infraction, one recycling the September 8 photograph as a new day, two photographing the surrender itself — one of which describes the signed pledge to stop as “another threatening message.” The defendant is now a martyr for the cause of cross-sidewalk charging, which is the only promotion this docket has ever conferred.
And then, on September 18, the case turned inward. The last two filings contain no photograph of the defendant, the car, the cord or the sidewalk. They are screenshots of the prosecution’s own earlier reports — one stamped “CLOSED,” one stamped “Investigation Status: Void” — submitted as fresh reports, complaining about the disposition of the reports. No new conduct is alleged to have been observed, because by then there was none to observe. The docket has become its own evidence, and the promise attached to it is plain: “i will continue to report the behavior.”
Guilty of charging an electric vehicle responsibly, in public, with a safety ramp. Sentence: served. The defendant surrendered on September 11 and now charges at a public Supercharger, twenty-five minutes each way, like a martyr. The cord has been retired to the basement. The cause has not.
The accused has channeled his life of crime into a fully-cited policy proposal: a Residential EV Charging Access Pilot for Alexandria — engineering standards, insurance analysis, cost models, peer-city research, the works. Review the evidence →
Dossier prepared by the accused, about the accused, from his own public records — the case-file numbers above link to the real Alex311 reports (sealed entries withhold their link to protect privacy). No neighbors were named, shamed, or identified in the making of this exhibit; the complaints appear only as the charges against our hero. Any resemblance to an actual municipal document is deeply intentional and entirely satirical. The cord is fine. Everyone is fine.