| 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. | Open · On Hold↗ 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. | Open · On Hold↗ 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. | Open · On Hold↗ 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. | Open · On Hold↗ 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. | Open · On Hold↗ 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. | Open · On Hold↗ 26-00035650 |
Guilty of charging an electric vehicle responsibly, in public, with a safety ramp. Sentence: to keep doing exactly that. The cord remains at large.
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.