#26-BT-0026 State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado

[Brian Love]

Defendant Name: Ghost Kamado
Defendant Phone: 4433939
(( Defendant Discord: ghost_mane01 ))
(( Defendant Timezone: EST ))
Type of Representation (Pick one): Self-Representation

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 2nd/MAR/2026 16:34
Charge(s):

• GM19 - Face Concealment (b), VF01 - Evading an Officer, GM14 - Obstruction of Justice

Narrative:
While driving my red Buffalo STX around on the radio, I hear that my friends are being robbed by members of Empire. And I also found one of my friends dead on the side of the road just next to the freeway on Lower Pillbox. My car was stolen; it was a black monstrosity, LP UFXU8OXR. The officer at the time said, "Okay, we will be on the lookout for it," and checked my record and was like, "You don't have any warrants, just tickets." I said okay and left. I got my car fixed and upgraded at Benny's and was driving down the road, did a U-turn, and got pulled over by the same Red STX Blue outfit. Just like the first time, I spoke with PD Complyed, got the ticket, checked my GPS, and found my car. It was wrecked and abandoned. I took it to Benny's, got a fix, and then went to park my red STX. I had a girl with me the entire time whose name I won't share at this time. As she took the red car to parking, I pulled up next to a sheriff and said, "Hey, I have found my car; please take the bolo down." I was then pulled over and detained, where they unlawfully searched my car, claiming I was the fat person in purple. They later on said that at the scene where whatever crime happened, a gang member from Bratva (Erin Walker) stated that the fat person in purple was Ghost Kamado. And with that info from a criminal, I was arrested and taken to MRPD, where they found clothing in the car and forced me to change into it. and was like, "Oh, he has the same helmet and now the same clothes on," and proceeded to have PD arrest me for the following charges. I requested a supervisor; I was told no, nobody is on shift. I requested the highest-ranking unit. They said it was a woman named Dymond. I requested and waited, and they said no, she's not coming. The officer who charged me was unknown, but I know one of their names was Yuri. I was informed by Doc that y'all could get the person's info from the MDC on who charged me. But the fact they are taking a known criminal's word at face value and arresting me for it is absurd. Time runs down. I informed the cops of my car being stolen in my red STX while wearing blue. -20 mins later I get pulled over in the red STX wearing blue Comply. Get a ticket. 10 mins later I find the abandoned car and inform SD, and I then get arrested by PD. PD Also Stole my clothes an forced me to keep a Rival groups Colors on instead of giving me back my Original blue outfit.

---

I, Ghost Kamado, hereby affirm that all information provided above is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and understand that knowingly providing false information could result in additional charges and/or fines. (( I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means. ))

[Joseph Horton]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF RECEIPT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

The State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado
#26-BT-0026

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 5th day of March, 2026.

The Superior Court Bench Trial system runs off of defendant responsiveness. If defendants are interacting with the court or their attorney, a Notice to Schedule will be posted with all parties being able note their availability. A Judge will then pick the most suitable time for trial. Once a trial has been scheduled, the court will consider most submissions to be final.

Prior to scheduling, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense. The defendant is further encouraged to speak with an authorized individual at Rockford Hills City Hall, Mission Row Police Station, or Paleto Bay Sheriff's Office for official clarification on the specific charges received and their respective date and times, as once the case has been activated, any omitted charges will be considered abandoned and unable to be disputed within this case.

Respectfully,


Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
274-6959 - [email protected]

[Joseph Horton]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF ACTIVATION & ORDER FOR DISCOVERY

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

The State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado
#26-BT-0026

A Notice of Activation & Order for Discovery was entered in the above case on the 5th day of March, 2026.

The case of State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado is hereby activated and opened by this Court.

The Superior Court Bench Trial system runs off of defendant responsiveness. If defendants are interacting with the court or their attorney, a Notice to Schedule will be posted with all parties being able note their availability. A Judge will then pick the most suitable time for trial. Once a trial has been scheduled, the court will consider most submissions to be final.

The prosecution and defense are hereby ordered to provide their evidence to the Court via Motion for Discovery within the next 30 days or file a Motion for Continuance.

If at any point in time the defense or prosecution wishes set precedence or desire a formal criminal trial, they are welcome to file a Motion for a Change in Venue

Respectfully,


Associate Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
274-6959 - [email protected]

[Brian Love]

I would be Defending myself during the court case as due to the arrest I am in debt and can not afford a Lawyer.
-G. Kamado.

[Joseph Horton]

San Andreas Judicial Branch Docket Notice "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

---

• Mr. Kamado,
  
  The Judicial Branch offers Public Defense Attorneys at no cost. If you would like an attorney to reach out and help represent your case, please let the Court know, and we can help arrange that.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Associate Justice
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  274-6959 - [email protected]

[Rowin Lawson]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

MOTION FOR DISCOVERY

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado
#26-BT-0026

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 29th day of March, 2026.

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Discovery, and presents the following as evidence;

• Exhibit #1 Arrest report

  

  

  Los Santos Police Department ARREST REPORT "TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE"

  
  

  ---

  • ARREST DETAILS
    • Arresting Officer: Brian Knight
      Callsign: 21-A-11
      
      Date of Arrest: 02/MAR/2026
      Officers Involved:
      • Police Officer III Brian Knight
      • Police Officer II Yuri Knight
      • Police Officer II Chris Malosh
      • LSSD Giorgos Papageorgiou
      • LSSD Charlie Lutte
      Narrative: Explain what happened in detail, provide sufficient detail to justify the charges. Video and image evidence can be provided. Specifically state why each charge listed was placed.
      
      
      
      02/MAR Incident Report by Charles Williams
      21-A-11 responded to a pursuit involving a stolen Sheriff’s Department cruiser. An individual wearing a black puffer jacket and a doll mask stole a Buffalo from the Sheriff’s Department while deputies were attempting to pick up an evidence bag. A pursuit was initiated. The stolen vehicle was eventually recovered; however, the suspect was picked up by a blue Elegy Retro Custom and fled the scene.
      
      Before the suspect was able to fully escape, the deputy who reported their cruiser stolen advised that a black Monstrociti was also involved. The deputy stated the Monstrociti swiped the evidence bag before they could retrieve it, actively assisting the individual who stole the SD Buffalo.
      
      I ran the license plate UFXU8OXR, which returned to Ghost Kamado. Bodycam footage was reviewed, and images were obtained of the black Monstrociti (LP# UFXU8OXR) involved in the incident. The Monstrociti successfully evaded officers at that time.
      
      Approximately 15–20 minutes after the pursuit was terminated on the black Monstrociti, SD Charlie Lutte (118A) conducted a traffic stop at Legion Square on a black Monstrociti matching the earlier BOLO. The registered owner, Ghost Kamado, was detained for investigation.
      
      A search of the Monstrociti recovered clothing matching the exact description of what the suspect was seen wearing when stealing the evidence bag from SD Charlie Lutte, and during the earlier evasion. Based on the totality of the circumstances, Officer Knight elected to take custody of the arrest. Ghost Kamado was charged with Obstruction of Justice, Evading an Officer, and Face Concealment (B).

  ---

  • MUGSHOT
    SUSPECT #1 DETAILS
    • 
      Full Name: GHOST KAMADO
      Phone Number: 4433939
      License(s) Suspended: Driver Trucker Firearms Pilot
      Charge(s):
      • VF01 - Evading an Officer
      • GM14 - Obstruction of Justice
      • GM19 - Face Concealment (b)
      Evidence: Include a photo of the evidence items; it is optional to document the items in writing when including a photo. Always provide the serial number of any seized firearm. Mark where the possessions were stored.
      
      Evidence Description and/or Photo

      Exhibit A:
      
      Evidence Location: Mission Row Station Vinewood Police Headquarters Department of Corrections

  

Rowin Lawson
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
451-9939 - [email protected]

[Adam Patrone]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF SCHEDULING

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado
#26-BT-0026

An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on 30th day of March, 2026.

All parties in this case are encouraged to complete the following Scheduling Tool in an attempt to schedule a trial on the above case. When the scheduling tool has been completed by either party, please post on the docket stating as such.

In the event all parties have overlapping availability the Presiding Judge will determine the best date and time to have a trial take place and post a Notice of Trial informing all of the upcoming proceeding.

In the event some or all parties do not have overlapping availability, the Presiding Judge will continue to attempt to schedule the proceeding or seek alternative avenues to conclude the case.

If either party has the intentions of calling a witness to the stand during the proceeding they must inform the court by filing a Witness List at the time of filing their availability. If no Witness List is filed before the Notice of Trial is filed you will be unable to call a witness during the proceeding.


Respectfully,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

[Adam Patrone]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

NOTICE OF TRIAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado
#26-BT-0026

A trial date was set on the above case on the 1st day of April, 2026.

In accordance with the availability reported by parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 20:00 PM on 5th day of April, 2026 at Rockford Hills City Hall, Carcer Way, Metro Los Santos, SA.

Both parties are ordered to be present in the Judges Chambers no later than 15 minutes prior to the above listed date for pretrial arrangements. If complications occur that must result in a delay or cancellation of the trial, you are ordered to inform the court no later than 12 hours prior to the above listed date.


So ordered,


Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]

[Adam Patrone]

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

---

ISSUANCE OF VERDICT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

The State of San Andreas v. Ghost Kamado
#26-BT-0026

A decision was reached in the above case on the 5th day of April, 2026.

---

Facts

---

• An officer stated an individual in a black Monstrociti, along with others, was involved in the theft of an "evidence bag" during a subsequent theft of a Sheriff's Department cruiser.
• The same vehicle was found elsewhere at least 15-20 minutes later, with the defendant driving, and they were detained.
• The same type of clothes worn by the individual in the initial incident were found when the vehicle was searched.

---

Arguments From Either Side

---

The prosecution contends that the vehicle and the person seen taking an "evidence bag" were part of a group that also interfered while others stole a police vehicle. They later identified the suspects by matching a license plate, and the defendant's clothing in the vehicle matched that of the person involved in the earlier incident, which strengthens the case against the defendant.

The defense argues that, given the time gap between the Monstrociti being lost and found again, and the receipt of a ticket at the time of the incident, proves they could not be involved. They argue they had a conversation with officers at a different location about the theft of their Monstrociti, and that the events involving their vehicle occurred without their knowledge. Since the defendant reported his vehicle as stolen, the officers lost the vehicle for a significant time; his timestamp on a ticket provides an alibi; and they finally informed deputies when it was found, there is no possibility they could have been involved in this incident.

---

Verdict

---

The Court finds that the vehicle observed at the initial scene, where a bag belonging to a Sheriff’s Deputy was taken, was subsequently stopped approximately fifteen to twenty minutes later for investigative purposes. Based on the officers’ observations at that scene, the Court concludes that probable cause existed to justify the investigative stop of the defendant.

However, upon review of the evidence presented by the Prosecution, the nature and extent of the Monstrociti’s involvement is unclear. The report establishes, at most, that an individual retrieved a bag that did not belong to them. There is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that any subsequent actions by those involved constituted willful flight or an attempt to elude pursuing law enforcement, particularly given the ambiguity of the arrest report and the absence of corroborating evidence.

The Court notes the ambiguous "pursuit" referenced in the arrest report that was "terminated." The ambiguity arises from questions about when or where the vehicle was lost, whether it was actively fleeing, or whether it was merely searched for after a review of body camera footage. The arrest report also introduces a meaningful time gap during which additional intervening events could have occurred, with or without the defendant’s knowledge. Furthermore, while the defendant advances a narrative that cannot be proven by evidence, it carries circumstantial weight given the lack of any reference to questioning or statements included in the Prosecution's evidence.

It is noted that the only items recovered from the vehicle consisted of matching clothing. Such items in the vehicle do not alone establish the defendant’s knowledge of or connection to any criminal activity. Just as significant is the absence of the referenced “evidence bag” or any other forensic evidence linking the defendant to the initial incident.

Additionally, the Court notes that the evidentiary support is materially deficient. Aside from the departments' ambiguous arrest report, even when referenced, there is a notable absence of forensic evidence, body camera footage, witness statements, or other competent evidence to meet the burden of proof required by this court. This lack of corroborating evidence, therefore, undermines the reliability of the Prosecution’s case.

It is with the above considerations that I issue the following verdict:

• On the count of GM19 - Face Concealment (b), I find the defendant, Ghost Kamado, not guilty.
• On the count of VF01 - Evading an Officer, I find the defendant, Ghost Kamado, not guilty.
• On the count of GM14 - Obstruction of Justice, I find the defendant, Ghost Kamado, not guilty.

The defendant has made their way to City Hall to have their record amended and to have the $39,500 payment for fines, time, and other expenses/inconveniences incurred from the contested charges returned to them.



So Ordered,

Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
298-3863 - [email protected]