#24-CM-0062, State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

[Alistair Vespucci]

Defendant Name: Alistair Vespucci
Defendant Phone: 3156876
Defendant Address: N/A
(( Defendant Discord: steakhappy ))
Requested Attorney: David Coast

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 22/FEB/2024 19:00
Charge(s):

• Evading an Officer
• Operating a vehicle with a suspended license
• Accessory to drive-by
• Attempted murder of a gov. employee
• Battery of a gov. employee

Narrative:
I believe that I was unlawfully charged and arrested.

---

I, Alistair Vespucci, 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. ))

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

NOTICE OF RECEIPT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 27th of February, 2024.

The Superior Court of San Andreas has received your filing and the case is now pending activation. Be advised that the court system runs on a first-come, first-served basis and will only activate cases out of order for special circumstances.

During this time, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense, otherwise, a court-appointed attorney will be assigned to the case upon its activation.

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.



Court Clerk
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]

[Alistair Vespucci]

I have chosen to work with a private law firm on this case. Namely, Wood Law.

[David Vespucci]

Notification Of Counsel
State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

To whom it may concern,

I, David Coast, an Associate with Wood Law, will be representing the Defendant, Alistair Vespucci in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Primary Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.

Respectfully,

David Coast
Associate
Bar Certified Attorney
☏ 593-1338

[Luna McMillan]

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

---

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 15th of August 2024.

I, Luna McMillan, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant(s), Alistair Vespucci in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Co-Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.



Public Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 463-9315 —[email protected][/list]

[Paige Enora]

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

---

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci


A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 15th of August 2024.

I, Paige Enora, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant(s), Alistair Vespucci in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Primary Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.



Public Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 369-9671 —[email protected]

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

NOTICE OF ACTIVATION

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on the 3rd of September, 2024.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci is hereby activated by this Court under #24-CM-0062.

At this time the Defendant has adequate representation, however, a State Prosecutor has not been assigned to this case. At this time the court will delay the Order for Discovery until adequate representation has been assigned and they inform the court they are ready to proceed.

In accordance with guidelines set forth by the Supreme Court of San Andreas, this case shall require an in-person trial. Once all pretrial matters have been resolved, a Notice of Scheduling will be issued to arrange an appropriate time for trial.

So ordered,

Associate Justice
Supreme Court of San Andreas
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]

[Terence Williams]

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

---

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 3rd of September, 2024.

I, Terence Williams, Acting Attorney General of the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the State of San Andreas in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Primary Counsel and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.


Terence Williams
Acting Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

ORDER FOR DISCOVERY

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A court order was entered in the above case on the 3rd of September, 2024.

The prosecution is hereby ordered to provide all evidence collected from the arresting Law Enforcement Agency and submit it to the Court via Motion for Discovery within seven days. If additional time is needed, the prosecution can file a Motion for Continuance.

Once evidence has been submitted to the official docket the defense can begin filing motions.

So ordered,

Associate Justice
Supreme Court of San Andreas
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]

[Andrew Cuttings]

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

---

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on 03/SEP/2024.

I, Andrew Cuttings, Prosecuting Attorney of the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the State of San Andreas in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Co-Counsel alongside Terence Williams and will await further instruction from the Presiding Judge.


Junior Prosecutor
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 528-7107 — [email protected]

[Terence Williams]

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. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 6th of August, 2024.

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 - Alistair Vespucci, 22/FEB/2024

  

  

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

  
  

  ---

  MUGSHOT

  • SUSPECT DETAILS
    • 
      Full Name: Alistair Vespucci
      Phone Number: 3156876
      Licenses Suspended: Yes
      Officers Involved:
      • Police Detective III Samuel Martin
      • Police Detective I Mikael Cowell
      • Police Officer II Murphy Azalea
      Charges:
      • VF01 - Evading an Officer
      • GM19 - Face Concealment (b)
      • GM02 - Battery of a Gov. Employee
      • Accessory to WF02 - Shooting from a Vehicle (Drive-By) of a Gov. Employee
      • VM02 - Operating a Vehicle with a Suspended License
    INCIDENT NARRATIVE
    • Incident Date: 22/FEB/2024
      
      Explain what happened, sufficient detail must be given to justify the placed charges, videos could be provided.
      • The suspect was the driver of an evading Jugular. Occupants of the Jugular threw BZ Gas at officers on a scene. Zoe Williams was witnessed getting out and back into the Jugular during the attack. The vehicle was being driven by Alistar Vespucci.
        
        The Jugular evaded from the scene of the BZ Gas attack, during the pursuit occupants of the vehicle started shooting out of the vehicle towards police cruisers. Visual was lost of the Jugular. Shortly after Zoe Williams and Alistair Vespucci was found together in a Kamacho wearing the same clothes. Both suspects were also shot from the Jugular pursuit. Alistair was found to be driving the Kamacho with a suspended license.
        
        During transferring the suspects to DOC Alistair kicked Murphy Azalea.
        
        Photos are location here
    EVIDENCE DETAILS
    • Document the possessions confiscated from the arrested suspect.
      Possessions are to be documented individually, examples of documented illegal possessions are "Pistol .50" or "12 grams of Cocaine". Legal possessions that can be categorized may be grouped, eg. "Clothing" to describe all clothing items. Body camera footage/pictures may be attached as an evidence exhibit.
      
      Where possible, the serial number of each firearm seized as evidence should be noted.
      • Illegal Possessions:
        Exhibit A: Mask
        
        
        Legal Possessions:
        Exhibit A: Radio
        
        
        Photograph of Possessions (MANDATORY)

        

  

• Exhibit #2: Bodycam footage - Samuel Martin, 22/FEB/2024

  Footage
  (())

• Exhibit #3: Witness Statement - Police Lieutenant Samuel Martin

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 22/FEB/2024

  Witness Information

  • Name: Samuel Martin
    Date of Birth: REDACTED
    Phone Number: REDACTED
    Occupation: Police Lieutenant I, Los Santos Police Department

  Witness Statement

  • On the 22nd of Febuary 2024, a department call came over from MD stating an officer was being held hostage behind Eclipse Towers. Multiple units responded to the area in search of the officer. Deputy Chief Bala was the first unit on scene. Detective Mike Adams was the officer that was being held hostage.
    
    As Samuel Martin arrived on scene John Chapel was being arrested for the hostage taking of Detective Mike Adams. Samuel Martin watched over the arrest sat in his patrol vehicle when a black Jugular approached the scene with four occupants inside.
    
    The two back occupants of the vehicle stepped out and threw BZ Gas towards the officers that were arrested John Chapel. The front right passenger then stepped out of the vehicle. Deputy Chief Bala opened fire on the Jugular, all suspects got back inside of the Jugular and started to evade from the scene.
    
    The pursuit went north on Milton Road until the pursuit reached Mount Vinewood Drive. The suspect Jugular opened fire on the lead pursuit unit (Samuel Martin) taking the Jugulars tyres and causing the lead unit to crash and lose visual.
    
    Samuel Martin and Mikael Cowell continued patrol after the situation conducting a 10-55 on a Kamacho. The Kamacho had two occupants inside, Zoe Williams and Alistair Vespucci. Both suspects were detained due to matching descriptions of the suspects in the Jugular.
    
    Both suspects matched 100% to the front occupants of the Jugular. When detained both suspects were still wounded with the GSWs caused when officers opened fire on the evading Jugular.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Samuel Martin, affirm that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I affirm that this statement has been made voluntarily, made without promise of reward, and made not under threat, force, or coercion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
    
    Signed,
    
    
    Samuel Martin
    Police Lieutenant I
    Los Santos Police Department
    
    Date: 01/JAN/2000

  

• Exhibit #4: Witness Statement - Police Detective III Mikael Cowell

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 22/FEB/2024

  Witness Information

  • Name: Mikael Cowell
    Date of Birth: 23/AUG/1995
    Phone Number: 582-4080
    Occupation: Gang Detective, Los Santos Police Department

  Witness Statement

  • On the incident date, my unit consisting of Police Lieutenant Samuel Martin and Police Detective Mikael Cowell responded to an officer being held at gunpoint on the northern side of Tequilala.
    
    When I was placing handcuffs on the suspect (John Chapel) a black Jugular (or similar) arrived to the arrest location. The next thing I noticed was containers of active BZ Gas spreading in our environment.
    
    Our suspect (John Chapel) took of running due to him being scared due to the danger imposed on all of us. He was however apprehended within short.
    
    My unit was later conducting patrol duties when we observed a Kamacho getting chased by multiple automotives. We chose to attempt a traffic stop on the Kamacho to see what was going on. When we caught up, they had taken the car off-road and were located at Richman on a dirt trail.
    
    Lieutenant Martin then noticed the similarity of the occupants and affiliation to the suspect in the earlier situation, which made him review his footage and conclude to place charges on them.
    
    I was not directly in contact with BZ gas at the scene. I have yet to be exposed to the substance, I did however hear some officers became nauseous and dizzy upon contact with it.
    
    I am not in possession of any footage from the situation.
    
    Mike Adams was also present when BZ Gas was thrown.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Mikael Cowell, affirm that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I affirm that this statement has been made voluntarily, made without promise of reward, and made not under threat, force, or coercion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
    
    Signed,
    
    
    Police Detective I Mikael Cowell
    Gang and Narcotics Division
    Los Santos Police Department
    [/b]
    Date: 01/MAR/2024

  

• Exhibit #5: Witness Statement - Police Detective I Murphy Azalea

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Incident Date: 22/FEB/2024

  Witness Information

  • Name: Murphy Azalea
    Date of Birth: 16/JAN/2024
    Phone Number: 375-6636
    Occupation: Police Officer II, Los Santos Police Department

  Witness Statement

  • I was called on the radio to respond to a backup to transport arrested suspects to DOC for detective Martin. Upon arrival to the scene Alistair Vespucci was cuffed alongside Zoe Williams in the back of a Kamacho. We transferred them to my cruiser and I was cleared from the scene alerted DOC that i was on route and then drove them up to DOC. Upon arrival to DOC I entered through the gates and Alistair Vespucci was let out of the cruiser and kicked me when the DOC guards helped get him under control. He was then taken in and processed then Zoe Williams was taken out of the car and processed without a problem. I was not involved in the original scene so can not comment on anything that happened before arriving on scene to transport.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Murphy Azalea, affirm that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I affirm that this statement has been made voluntarily, made without promise of reward, and made not under threat, force, or coercion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
    
    Signed,
    
    
    Murphy Azalea
    Police Officer II
    Los Santos Police Department
    
    Date: 28/FEB/2024

  

• Exhibit #6: Expert Witness Statement - Master EMT Viktor Markov

  

  

  
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  Official Witness Statement
  "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  Case Information

  • Case number: N/A
    Incident Date: N/A

  Witness Information

  • Name: Viktor Markov
    Date of Birth: 02/MAY/2001
    Phone Number: 595-3649
    Occupation: Master EMT / Interim Assistant Head of AMU within LSEMS

  Witness Statement

  • Statement written by the Interim Assistant Head of the Advance Medicine Unit of Los Santos
    
    What is BZ Gas?
    It is an agent that can be deployed through specifically made smoke grenades, otherwise in liquid forms. Meaning that the substance is primarily absorbed through ones respiratory system, upon inhaling it. The chemical itself has several names, such as BZ or QNB, while it's formal name reads "3-Quinuclidinyl benzilate". It's an odorless and white in color crystalline powder, which is environmentally stable. Apart from it's well known and highly potent incapacitating function, it has a bitter-like taste.
    
    What effect does BZ Gas have on the human body?
    The symptoms of BZ exposure are disruptive to the point where one is temporarily unable to perform any basic task. With the reason being that in such an occurrence, a human body is met with extremely high dosages of toxins. Effects like these can be near identical with the symptoms of drug overdose.
    
    To clarify, those effects are both physiological and psychological. First and foremost comes a state of acute confusion, in which the exposed start receiving hallucinations and other cognitive dysfunctions. Signs like this are almost always followed by a loss of motor control, vomiting, blurred vision, decreased blood pressure, fever, dilated pupils, dry mouth etc. According to a study from 1963 (Ketchum), the damage mentioned is gradually revealed in a few different stages after BZ Gas intoxication. During the first 4 hours, one will feel discomfort and restlessness among muscle spasms in the arms and legs. In the second stage the exposed should be in a stuporous inactivity (partially unconscious), seemingly asleep for up to 12 hours. During that time they may only respond to forceful stimulation. After those 12 hours, the toughest stage is presented. At this time, the hallucinations are apparent and the person will remain confused. Overall the BZ gas will set the human body in a disabled state, with concerning vital levels that need to be monitored.
    
    Historically, people that have inhaled BZ gas have been treated through various methods. Common antidotes for QNB are medications such as, 7-MEOTA, Atropine and THA (Tacrine). Luckily these medications are very efficient and have the ability to counter the effects of the BZ gas when given in a tablet/injection form. THA in specific has proven to be the quickest acting solution, which reduces the symptoms within minutes. (Possibly a good addition to LEO BLS Bags)
    
    In conclusion.
    Cases will differ vastly, due to the fact that specific environmental conditions determine the efficiency of a BZ gas deployment. Not much is known regarding the lethality of this agent, due to it's research being confidential. However it is safe to say that lower dosage exposure carry health risks and suffering which will require hospitalization. This leaves the assumption that even higher dosages of BZ gas can be lethal, unless treated in time.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Viktor Markov, affirm that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. I affirm that this statement has been made voluntarily, made without promise of reward, and made not under threat, force, or coercion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
    
    Signed,
    
    
    Viktor Markov
    Master EMT | Interim Assistant Head of AMU
    Los Santos Emergency Medical Services | Advanced Medicine
    
    Date: 19/MAR/2024

  

• Exhibit #7: Still images - Photos of suspects

  Still image 1
  Still image 2
  Still image 3

• Exhibit #8: Impound Report - Black Jugular, RO Alistair Vespucci

  

  

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

  ---

  • VEHICLE DETAILS
    • Vehicle Owner: Alistair Vespucci
      Phone Number: 3156876
      License Plate: 18XPFH9C
      Vehicle Model: Jugular
      Vehicle Color: Black
      Miscelleanous Details:
    
    IMPOUND DETAILS
    • Date and Time: 07/NOV/2023 19:18
      Location: Voodoo Place
      Brief Statement of Impounding Reason: Vehicle used in evading from an officer.
      Officers Involved: Police Officer I Mohamed Abdullah, Police Sergeant I John Keys
      Documented Evidence:

  
  

  ---

  

• Exhibit #9: Impound Report - Black Jugular, RO Alistair Vespucci

  

  

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

  ---

  • VEHICLE DETAILS
    • Vehicle Owner: Alistair Vespucci
      Phone Number: 3156876
      License Plate: 18XPFH9C
      Vehicle Model: Jugular
      Vehicle Color: Black
      Miscelleanous Details:
    
    IMPOUND DETAILS
    • Date and Time: 29/NOV/2023 16:10
      Location: Popular Street
      Brief Statement of Impounding Reason: The vehicle was used to evade
      Officers Involved: Police Officer I Hannah Koch, Police Officer II Jack Clark, Police Sergeant I John Keys, Police Officer II Matteo Ellis, Police Officer III+1 Saurian Logan
      Documented Evidence:

  
  

  ---

  

Terence Williams
Acting Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

Andrew Cuttings
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 528-7107 — [email protected]

[Alistair Vespucci]

Your Honor and pertaining parties,

I am posting this notice to request replacement of my defense attorneys. At the time when Chief Public Defender and self-admitted homosexual Izaak Scott assigned the defense attorneys, I informed him that I did not trust that they would do their jobs. Alas, that seems to be happening right in front of us: I am not being defended in any way, shape, or form. I request that Izaak Scott himself take over my case. Otherwise, I will be exercising my right to defend myself.

Thank you,
Alistair Vespucci

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

NOTIFICATION OF COUNSEL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 10th of September, 2024.

I, Alistair Vespucci, the defendant, will be representing myself in the underlying case.

I will be taking the responsibility of Primary and sole Counsel.



(909) 315-6876

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Motion for Continuance was filed in the above case on the 10th of September, 2024.

The Defendant, Alistair Vespucci, filed this Motion for Continuance, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

• Reasoning: Adequate timeframe to prepare defense.
  • Detailed Explanation: As I have recently taken over as counsel on my own case, and seeing as my previous defense team negligently and flippantly ignored the typical timeframe allowed by the court, I am requesting a continuance of 3 days in an effort to arm myself with legal knowledge and knowledge of the case needed to defend myself before submitting motions.

(909) 315-6876

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

MOTION TO SUPPRESS

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Motion to Suppress was filed in the above case on the 11th of September, 2024.

The Defendant, Alistair Vespucci, filed this Motion to Suppress, and requests the following be suppressed from evidence;

• Exhibit #1: Arrest Report - Alistair Vespucci, 22/FEB/2024
  Requested Evidence to Suppress:Lines highlighted in yellow (speculation) and green (Lack of foundation)

  The suspect was the driver of an evading Jugular. Occupants of the Jugular threw BZ Gas at officers on a scene. Zoe Williams was witnessed getting out and back into the Jugular during the attack. The vehicle was being driven by Alistar Vespucci.
  
  The Jugular evaded from the scene of the BZ Gas attack, during the pursuit occupants of the vehicle started shooting out of the vehicle towards police cruisers. Visual was lost of the Jugular. Shortly after Zoe Williams and Alistair Vespucci was found together in a Kamacho wearing the same clothes. Both suspects were also shot from the Jugular pursuit. Alistair was found to be driving the Kamacho with a suspended license.
  
  During transferring the suspects to DOC Alistair kicked Murphy Azalea.
  
  Photos are location here

  • Detailed Reasoning: The arrest report states the yellow highlighted lines as fact rather than allegations, and violate the concept of presumption of innocence. There is no proof presented by the prosecution to prove positive identification, and is based fully on unclear bodycam footage found in Exhibit #2, which never fully shows the driver of the Jugular. It has yet to be proven that the defendant was operating the jugular during the evasion or even present for that matter. Additionally, the arrest report attempts to conclude that the bullet found in the defendant came from the gun used by a Police Officer, but offers no evidence (such as ballistics) to back this up. As such, this information constitutes speculation.
    
    The line highlighted in green simply lacks foundation. There is no evidence presented to support the allegation that the defendant kicked Officer Azalea nor anyone else, such as bodycam footage or medical records.

• Exhibit #2: Bodycam footage - Samuel Martin, 22/FEB/2024
  Requested Evidence to Suppress:

  Entire Exhibit.

  • Detailed Reasoning: Lack of Reliability. The bodycam footage is extremely unclear and low quality, and is being presented by the LSPD in an attempt to identify the individual driving the vehicle, although the footage never shows more than the outline of the driver's shoulders and masked face. Additionally, the footage shows a graphic scene, with the individuals shown committing near-unspeakable acts. This, combined with the former point of low-quality footage attempting to be used for identification, could also constitute suppression on the grounds of being more prejudicial than probative.

• Exhibit #3: Witness Statement - Police Lieutenant Samuel Martin
  Requested Evidence to Suppress: Lines Highlighted in yellow.

  On the 22nd of Febuary 2024, a department call came over from MD stating an officer was being held hostage behind Eclipse Towers. Multiple units responded to the area in search of the officer. Deputy Chief Bala was the first unit on scene. Detective Mike Adams was the officer that was being held hostage.
  
  As Samuel Martin arrived on scene John Chapel was being arrested for the hostage taking of Detective Mike Adams. Samuel Martin watched over the arrest sat in his patrol vehicle when a black Jugular approached the scene with four occupants inside.
  
  The two back occupants of the vehicle stepped out and threw BZ Gas towards the officers that were arrested John Chapel. The front right passenger then stepped out of the vehicle. Deputy Chief Bala opened fire on the Jugular, all suspects got back inside of the Jugular and started to evade from the scene.
  
  The pursuit went north on Milton Road until the pursuit reached Mount Vinewood Drive. The suspect Jugular opened fire on the lead pursuit unit (Samuel Martin) taking the Jugulars tyres and causing the lead unit to crash and lose visual.
  
  Samuel Martin and Mikael Cowell continued patrol after the situation conducting a 10-55 on a Kamacho. The Kamacho had two occupants inside, Zoe Williams and Alistair Vespucci. Both suspects were detained due to matching descriptions of the suspects in the Jugular.
  
  Both suspects matched 100% to the front occupants of the Jugular. When detained both suspects were still wounded with the GSWs caused when officers opened fire on the evading Jugular.

  • Detailed Reasoning: Relevance and speculation. The narrative regarding John Chapel holding an officer hostage is not relevant to the case at hand in any way, shape, or form, and seeks to sway the judge by inferring that the defendant was somehow connected to this event.
    
    The statement goes on to claim that both suspects "matched 100% to the front occupants of the Jugular," which is speculation. We have seen the bodycam footage, and there is simply no way that this bodycam can be used to 100% identify someone. Additionally, the statement goes on to speculate that the wounds found on the occupants of the kamacho were caused by gunfire from the LSPD, but offers no proof in the form of ballistics to back this up.

• Exhibit #4: Witness Statement - Police Detective III Mikael Cowell
  Requested Evidence to Suppress: Lines Highlighted in yellow (Relevance). Lines highlighted in green (Hearsay.)

  On the incident date, my unit consisting of Police Lieutenant Samuel Martin and Police Detective Mikael Cowell responded to an officer being held at gunpoint on the northern side of Tequilala.
  
  When I was placing handcuffs on the suspect (John Chapel) a black Jugular (or similar) arrived to the arrest location. The next thing I noticed was containers of active BZ Gas spreading in our environment.
  
  Our suspect (John Chapel) took of running due to him being scared due to the danger imposed on all of us. He was however apprehended within short.
  
  My unit was later conducting patrol duties when we observed a Kamacho getting chased by multiple automotives. We chose to attempt a traffic stop on the Kamacho to see what was going on. When we caught up, they had taken the car off-road and were located at Richman on a dirt trail.
  
  Lieutenant Martin then noticed the similarity of the occupants and affiliation to the suspect in the earlier situation, which made him review his footage and conclude to place charges on them.
  
  I was not directly in contact with BZ gas at the scene. I have yet to be exposed to the substance, I did however hear some officers became nauseous and dizzy upon contact with it.
  
  I am not in possession of any footage from the situation.
  
  Mike Adams was also present when BZ Gas was thrown.

  
  
  • Detailed Reasoning: The lines highlighted in yellow are being objected to on the grounds of relevance. The narrative regarding John Chapel has no bearing on this case and, once again, only seeks to
    infer that the defendant was connected to this person's criminal actions. Additionally, the fact that Mike Adams was present has no bearing on the case.
    
    The line highlighted in green is being objected to on the grounds of hearsay. The line regarding officers becoming nauseous and dizzy is textbook hearsay, as this is something told to Detective Cowell and there is no evidence provided to the court that any individual actually experienced these symptoms.
    • • Exhibits #8 and #9: Impound Reports
        Requested Evidence to Suppress: Entire Exhibits.
        • Detailed Reasoning: These exhibits are being objected to on the grounds of relevance. These impound reports simply show that the defendant has, at some point, owned a black Jugular. They have no bearing on this case, and prove nothing regarding the events in question.
          
          
          
          
          (909) 315-6876

[Terence Williams]

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

---

Rebuttal

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

An Objection was filed in the above case on the 13th of September, 2024.

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, presents a rebuttal to the recent motion;

• Exhibit #1: Arrest Report - Alistair Vespucci, 22/FEB/2024
  Regarding speculation
  • The identification of the defendant and Zoe Williams was done by matching the suspects' clothing, tattoos, and body type between the bodycam footage from Exhibit #2 and the attached photos from Exhibit #7, a process validated through binding precedent set in #24-CM-0007 State of San Andreas v. Tyler Masons, #22-CM-0060 State of San Andreas v. Edward Greeg, and #23-CM-0102 State of San Andreas v. Melody Frey et al. The bodycam provides a clean image of the female suspect later identified as Zoe Williams, with tattoos visible and wearing the same outfit as in the image from Exhibit #7. While the defendant is argued to not have stepped out of the vehicle during the incident as they were the driver, the bodycam footage also provides an image of the driver who is clearly seen wearing a black wifebeater and with partial tattoos matching those worn by the defendant in the image from Exhibit #7. Additionally, the images in Exhibit #7 clearly shows the defendant and Zoe Williams with fresh gunshot wounds in the same places where they were hit as seen in the bodycam footage. It would be a far-fetched coincidence if the defendant and Zoe Williams had picked up the exact same injuries elsewhere as the suspects from the bodycam footage had received from the present law enforcement officers.
  
  Regarding lack of foundation
  • In Exhibit #5, Detective Murphy Azalea gives eye witness testimony opposing the defendant's argument, specifically stating that the defendant kicked them after being brought to DOC.

• Exhibit #2: Bodycam footage - Samuel Martin, 22/FEB/2024
  • The bodycam footage provided is recorded with an Axon Body 2 camera, the standard issue body camera provided by the Los Santos Police Department to all its employees. The camera records footage in 1080p High Definition, which is more than sufficient quality for any use as evidence, as we can clearly see various details of the suspects in the footage. Additionally, there is no prejudicial value to the evidence, as the footage shows acts being committed that cannot be denied as anything other than fact, the video being reliable beyond a reasonable doubt in context with the other evidence submitted in discovery.

• Exhibit #3: Witness Statement - Police Lieutenant Samuel Martin
  Regarding relevance and speculation
  • The incident involving John Chapel provides context to the incident of this case as well as motive of the defendant. The defendant and John Chapel are jointly affiliated through the criminal organization known as "The Shadows", both individuals being members of this organization. The Prosecution argues that the pending arrest of John Chapel provided a motive for the defendant and their accomplices to attack law enforcement in an attempt to free their associate, which was a partial success as John Chapel managed to briefly escape on foot before being recaptured by law enforcement.
    
    For the defendant's continued argument that they cannot be identified through the submitted evidence, the Prosecution retains its argument that the bodycam footage provided was used as a reliable source of identification along with the other evidence submitted in discovery.

• Exhibit #4: Witness Statement - Police Detective III Mikael Cowell
  Regarding relevance
  • The Prosecution retains its argument on the relevance of John Chapel's pending arrest due to providing context and motive for the defendant. Additionally, the Prosecution has no objections to the mention of Mike Adams being present on the scene at the time of the incident.
  
  Regarding hearsay
  • Being present on the scene of the incident, Detective Cowell would have been able to both visibly and audibly experience the effects the BZ gas had on affected officers. Even if they did not personally experience the effects of the BZ gas, it is more than reasonable to believe the detective can infer the effects of the BZ gas on the affected officers.

• Exhibits #8 and #9: Impound Reports
  Regarding relevance
  • The impound reports are used to infer the defendant's involvement in this incident. The vehicle listed in both reports, a black Jugular previously and currently owned by the defendant, is identical to the one pictured in the bodycam footage. Comparing the exhibits, the vehicle seen in the bodycam footage is sporting the same fitted rims, rear spoiler, and vented hoods as in the impound report images. The Prosecution argues that these reports are relevant in conjunction with the remainder of the submitted discovery in regard to inferring the defendant's involvement in this incident.

Terence Williams
Acting Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

Andrew Cuttings
Junior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 528-7107 — [email protected]

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

• Parties,
  
  The Court presents its excuses for the delay in deciding the pending matters. Let this be a formal notice that a decision in that regard will be adopted no later than October 6th, 2024.
  
  Best regards,
  
  
  Associate Justice
  Supreme Court of San Andreas
  Director of the San Andreas Bar Association
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  (909) 553-8869 — [email protected]

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

COURT DECISION

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A decision was reached in the above case on the 7th day of October, 2024.

The defense has filed a Motion to Suppress arguing that portions of Exhibit #1 constitute speculation and lack of foundation, to which the Prosecution objected on the basis that identification was made by matching suspect's clothing, tattoos and other features, along with arguing that Detective Azalea's testimony constituted first hand evidence of the events. To the Court, the presumed flaws that constitute speculation and lack of foundation -in accordance to the defense- appear to be matters that the deciding judge must evaluate during the trial, as it is not the nature of the evidence being attacked but rather whether it can actually prove the State's allegations. With this in mind, the Court will deny the motion related to exhibit #1.

In regards to exhibit #2, the defense has argued that it is not reliable, unclear and low quality. Without diving deeper into the reasoning and the objections provided by the State, to the Court it appears that neither of the arguments presented by the defense hold up against the particular piece of evidence, as it is clear and of acceptable quality. Whether it can prove -or not- the State's allegations, is a matter not of a Motion to Suppress. The Court will not accept this Motion.

In regards to exhibit #3, the defense has argued that the narrative related to John Chapel's presumed hostage situation lacked relevance to the case and also argued that the statements in regards to the identification of the alleged defendants were speculative. In that regard, the Prosecution objected arguing that the John Chapel events provided motive for the events that the defendant is being accused of. The Prosecution has also argued that identification is impossible as a result of discovery, and thus, the identification of them constitutes speculation. To this regard, the Court sides with the defense in regards to the incidents related to John Chapel. Although they might -or might not- provide context for motive, our legal system does not consider motive as a principal element of criminal responsibility, and while it is valuable, the Superior Court would err in allowing foreign events to be evaluated in this case. However, the Court is unable to recognize how the second portion constitutes speculation and is rather a matter of evidence evaluation during the case in chief.

As for exhibit #4, the same reasoning applies to the first two statements requested to be suppressed for lack of relevance, and it is proven that the statement requested to be suppressed on the grounds or hearsay is in fact of that nature. Thus, the Court will allow the Motion to Suppress except for the final statement, which is of relevance to the current case.

Finally, in regards to exhibits #8 and #9, the defense argued that they are of no relevance to the case and only prove that they have owned a vehicle of specific features. The Prosecution argued against, affirming that the exhibits are relevant in conjunction with the discovery in order to infer the defendant's involvement in the incident. To the Court, then, it appears unreasonable to suppress these exhibits.

So ordered,

Associate Justice
Supreme Court of San Andreas
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected][/list]

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

MOTION FOR MISTRIAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

#24-CM-0062

---

This motion for mistrial is submitted to the Court by the defendant, Alistair Vespucci, on the following grounds:

1. Failure of the Defense to File Timely Motions:
The defense counsel failed to file any motions whatsoever during the allotted period following discovery, despite ample time and opportunity. This failure to act deprived the defendant of a robust legal defense and led to him taking over his own trial, asserting self-representation in a state of duress.

2. Lack of Judicial Responsiveness:
The presiding judge has responded to the docket very sparingly, creating significant delays and contributing to a trial environment lacking proper judicial oversight. These delays have directly impacted the fairness and efficiency of the trial proceedings, further prejudicing the defendant's right to a fair trial.


These failures have infringed upon the defendant's right to effective legal representation and timely due process, as protected by the Constitution of the State of San Andreas.


- The failure of the defense to file motions critically impacted trial strategy and led to the defendant's forced decision to represent himself.
- The judge's lack of timely responsiveness to motions and court filings has hindered the smooth progression of the trial and compromised its integrity.


For the reasons stated, the defense respectfully moves for an immediate declaration of mistrial, and requests that a new trial be scheduled or charges be dismissed.


Respectfully submitted,

---

(909) 315-6876

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Motion for Involuntary Dismissal was filed in the above case on October 26, 2024.

The defendant, Alistair Kon (formerly Vespucci), through undersigned counsel, respectfully moves this Court for an involuntary dismissal. This request is based on the following grounds:

• Grounds for Dismissal: Violation of the Defendant’s 6th Amendment rights under the San Andreas Constitution.
  • Explanation: The 6th Amendment to the Constitution of San Andreas states:
    
    "In all criminal trials brought forth by or to the San Andreas Judicial Branch, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial Judge of the State wherein the crime shall have been committed, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against them; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in their favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for their defense."
    
    The defense asserts that since the initiation of this case, the Judicial Branch has failed to uphold—and has actively infringed upon—the defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial as well as access to an assisting counsel.
    
    To clarify:
    
    • The case was initiated on September 3rd, and discovery was promptly ordered on this same date. The prosecution fulfilled its discovery obligations within the 7-day limit. Following this, the prior defense team had 3 days to submit motions.
    • 4 days passed without any motions from the prior defense counsel, prompting the defendant to assume his own defense.
    • The defendant filed a motion to suppress the following day, to which the prosecution responded within 2 days.
    • 18 days later, the judge acknowledged a delay in ruling on the pending matters, assuring that a decision would be rendered no later than October 6, 2024. This statement implicitly recognizes an unreasonable delay, yet no response to the pending matters was made until 7 days later, 1 day past the court’s self-imposed deadline of Octiber 6th.
    • After an additional 7 days without further docket updates, the defendant filed a motion for mistrial, which has now gone 11 days without any response.
      
      It should be noted that it has been 18 days since the court's last entry on the docket.
      
      Consequently, the defendant has been deprived of his right to a speedy trial, and has not been afforded the effective assistance of counsel, given the previous defense team's inaction on critical motions.
      
      Given these clear constitutional violations, the defense respectfully moves for dismissal of all charges. An initial motion for mistrial was attempted to address these concerns; however, the continued lack of timely response necessitates this final measure. With that said, the defense does not wish to forego the motion for mistrial, if the court were to deny the motion for dismissal.
      
      
      (909) 315-6876

[Terence Williams]

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

---

OBJECTION

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

An Objection was filed in the above case on the 29th of October, 2024.

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this objection in response to the defendant's most recent motions;

• The Prosecution is objecting the the defendant's recent Motion for Involuntary Dismissal, as well as the Motion for Mistrial, on the grounds that no judicial proceedings have been breached. While not responding to a motion is perhaps not the best course of action, it is a conscious decision nonetheless, one made by the previous counsel. And while the responsiveness of the court may not always be optimal, it is still in line with the majority standard of cases filed in the San Andreas Court System, and should not be considered grounds for breach of the 6th Amendment.

Terence Williams
Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 234-9321 — [email protected]

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

Rebuttal to Prosecution's Objection

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

The Prosecution’s recent objections to my motions for mistrial and dismissal are, respectfully, both incomprehensible and unreasonable. The Prosecution’s counterarguments seem to rely on two primary points, which I will address directly:

1. The previous defense team made a conscious decision to forego filing motions.
Yes, Attorney General Williams, your observation of the facts is accurate in a technical sense; however, this is precisely the basis for my mistrial motion. Per the Constitution of the State of San Andreas, I am entitled to the "assistance of counsel" in my defense. My previous counsel made the decision to forgo motions without my input or awareness, infringing upon my right to an active defense. The result of this non-engagement was the absence of meaningful action on my behalf during a critical time. Furthermore, my previous counsel, Paige Enora, ceased contact with me after a respectful discussion about political views—a conversation that should have no bearing on her professional obligations to this case. It appears, however, that personal biases may have influenced her approach, as evidenced by her lack of engagement in the docket and her overall disinterest in my case.

2. The responsiveness of the court is within standard for most cases.
The Prosecution’s suggestion that timeliness in other cases somehow mitigates or justifies delays in this case is entirely irrelevant. Claiming that typical responsiveness excuses this deviation is equivalent to saying that an officer respecting a suspect’s constitutional rights most of the time excuses any singular violation. By this reasoning, the pattern of prompt responses in other cases is more troubling here, as it indicates that my case may be receiving less consideration. This raises concerns of possible bias, especially given my past interactions with the SAJB, though I am presently committed to a reformed path.

In light of these concerns, I respectfully request either a mistrial or an involuntary dismissal on the grounds outlined above.

Respectfully,


(909) 315-6876

[Antonio McFornell]

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

---

COURT DECISION

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A decision was reached in the above case on the 9th day of November, 2024.

The Motion for Mistrial is a foreign type of Motion that, to this day, has had no development in the Superior Court of San Andreas. Nonetheless, the defendant has raised an important concern related to their right to a defense counsel. Particularly, the defendant mentions that the Public Defender assigned to their case was unresponsive and failed to act, allegedly as a result of political disagreements with the defendant. Afterwards, in the Motion for Involuntary Dismissal the defendant raised concerns, yet again, about their public defender. Specifically mentioning that their delay or lack of responsiveness led to the defendant conducting their own defense.

With this in mind, before issuing a Notice of Scheduling, the Court will allow the defendant with multiple options with the intention of ensuring that they are guaranteed a proper defense:

• The Superior Court will communicate with the Ethics Review Board in order to investigate the alleged misconduct regarding the lack of defense.
• The defendant will be allowed to get in contact with a new public defender, and if one is assigned, they will be granted a four day continuance to file any motions that they consider.
• The defendant will be allowed to continue self-representing, and will be granted a four day continuance to file motions for the time in which the previous defender allegedly refused to do so.

The Court requests that the defendant expresses their intentions in the next 48 hours, period after which the continuances will be granted.


Supreme Court Justice
Director of the San Andreas Bar Association
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]

[Alistair Vespucci]

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

---

MOTION TO STAY PENDING APPEAL

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci
#24-CM-0062

A Motion to Stay Pending Appeal was filed in the above case on the 15th of November, 2024.

The defendant filed this motion and the reasoning for request is as follows;

• Reasoning: The Defendant in this case has initiated an appeal within the San Andreas Court of Appeals following the latest Court Decision.

(909) 315-6876

[Maximilian Fitzgerald]

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

---

NOTICE OF JUDICIAL REASSIGNMENT

---

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Alistair Vespucci

Due to the resignation of the previous Judge, I will be dealing with this case moving forward. Once appeal has been concluded I will proceed.


Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
☎ 1-000-000
✉ [email protected]