#25-CM-0015, State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler

Post by **Diana Butler** » 04 Aug 2024, 02:18

Defendant Name: Diana Butler
Defendant Phone: 550-6957
Defendant Address: N/A
(( Defendant Discord: dapph ))
Requested Attorney: N/A

Charging Department: LSPD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 02/AUG/2024
Charge(s):

SF01 - Domestic Terrorism
SF02 - Murder of a government employee
GF03 - Armed Robbery
WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm
WM03 - Criminal Use of Weapon Modifications
GF20 - Possession of Human Body Tissue
NM03 - Unlawful Assembly
VF04 - Felony Public Endangerment
GF10 - Grand Theft
DM04 - Possession of a Controlled Substance while Armed

Narrative:
I was wrongly charged.

I, Diana Butler, 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. ))

Post by **Judith Mason** » 04 Aug 2024, 02:23

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. Diana Butler

The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on the 4th day of August, 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.

Acting Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 257-9183 — [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 20 Jan 2025, 04:02

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. Diana Butler

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 20th of January, 2025.

I, Michael Blaise, a Prosecutor with 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.

Lead Prosecutor
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

Post by **Finlay Mcculloch** » 26 Feb 2025, 05:28

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Notice of Activation was entered in the above case on 26th of February, 2025.

The case of the State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler is hereby activated by this Court under #25-CM-0015.

Both the State and Defendant in this case are still awaiting adequate representation. At this time the court will delay the Order for Discovery until adequate representation has been assigned for the Defendant and a State Prosecutor has been assigned to the case and both parties 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.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 274-4300 - [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 27 Feb 2025, 17:52

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 27th of February, 2025.

I, Michael Blaise, Deputy Attorney General with 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.

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

Post by **Piper Johnson** » 27 Feb 2025, 18:55

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. Diana Butler

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the 27/FEB/2025

I, Piper Johnson, a Senior Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the defendant, Diana Butler in the underlying case.

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

Senior Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Finlay Mcculloch** » 27 Feb 2025, 19:03

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A court order was entered in the above case on the 27th of February, 2025.

The case of #25-CM-0015, State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler is hereby opened and acknowledged by the Court.

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,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 274-4300 - [email protected]

Post by **Daniel Carmello** » 27 Feb 2025, 20:16

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. Defendant

A Notification of Counsel was filed in the above case on the Day of Month, Year.

I, Daniel Carmello, a Public Defense Attorney with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant(s), Diana Butler in the underlying case.

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

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 27 Feb 2025, 23:18

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Motion for Discovery was filed in the above case on the 27th of February, 2025.

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"

MUGSHOT
- SUSPECT DETAILS
  
  Full Name: Diana Butler
  Phone Number: 5506957
  Licenses Suspended: No
  Officers Involved:
  
  Police Captain I Mike Luigi
  
  Police Detective I Edward Linton
  
  Deputy Chief Victor Einhart
  
  Police Captain I Jonathan Willowick
  
  Charges:
  
  SF01 - Domestic Terrorism
  
  GF03 - Armed Robbery
  
  GF10 - Grand Theft
  
  WM02 - Possession of a Class 1 Firearm
  
  WM03 - Criminal Use of Weapon Modifications
  
  DM04 - Possession of a Controlled Substance while Armed
  
  GF20 - Possession of Human Body Tissue
  
  SF02 - Murder of a Gov. Employee
  
  VF04 - Felony Public Endangerment
  
  GC06 - Possession of Cannabis
  
  NM03 - Unlawful Assembly
  
  INCIDENT NARRATIVE
  
  Incident Date: 01/AUG/2024
  
  Explain what happened, sufficient detail must be given to justify the placed charges, videos could be provided.
  
  Diana Butler stormed City Hall alongside: Andrea Tyrie, Jack Ramm, Elizabeth Honk and Ronnie Bathsheba.
  
  Whilst in City Hall the group held up multiple civilians and government workers. Diana Butler then robbed Scottie Scross of their Pistol MK II along with its attachments. Diana Butler proceeded to use the firearm to shoot and murder a GSB agent within City Hall, becoming incapacitated in the process. All listed possessions were found on Diana Butlers person by Captain Luigi.
  
  **FOOTAGE**
  
  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: Pistol Mk II - 1709570288933
  Exhibit B: Modifications x4
  Exhibit C: Human meat x3
  Exhibit D: Marijuana plant x7
  
  Legal Possessions:
  Exhibit A: Radio
  Exhibit B: Screwdriver
  Exhibit C: Crowbar
  Exhibit D: Knife
  Exhibit E: Clothing x6
  Exhibit F: GPS
  Exhibit G: Campfire x2
  
  Photograph of Possessions (MANDATORY)
Exhibit #2: Official Witness Statement, Deputy Chief Einhart
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Incident Date: 01/AUG/2024
Witness Information
- Name: Victor Einhart
  Date of Birth: 07/06/1990
  Phone Number: 3256988
  Occupation: Deputy Chief, Los Santos Police Department
Witness Statement
- I responded to a call at City Hall which reported a shooting. Upon arrival, I observed that a member of GSB was dead and a number of other individuals on scene were injured. Eyewitnesses on scene reported that a number of the injured individuals had run into the City Hall reception area and began an armed altercation. This escalated into a shooting with GSB personnel and prompted a call for assistance. We were also provided video evidence of the shooting, and GSB declared they would add relevant charges to those involved.
  
  I worked to organize officers from the Los Santos Police Department while on scene, and made sure officers double checked the records of those who we were transporting to Bolingbroke Penitentiary to avoid a situation where individuals show up to the facility without charges. Officers identified Diana Butler as one of the individuals we had in custody, and my understanding was we verified her involvement in the shooting using the video evidence provided and officer investigation on scene. I based this understanding on the fact that other individuals on scene were exonerated from involvement and released.
  
  I will refer to the arrest report for more focused details.
Witness Affirmation
- I, Victor Einhart, 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,
  
  Victor Einhart
  Deputy Chief
  Los Santos Police Department
  
  Date: 5/AUG/2024
Exhibit #3: Official Witness Statement, Captain Willowick
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Incident Date: 01/AUG/2024
Witness Information
- Name: Jonathan Willowick
  Date of Birth: 09/AUG/1987
  Phone Number: 413-4102
  Occupation: Captian I, Los Santos Police Department
Witness Statement
- My unit was nearby city hall when the sound of gunshots being fired was heard. We quickly responded and upon entering the scene there was one deceased government worker, and multiple injuries individuals on the scene. CCTV was reviewed on scene by Officers and a group of individuals, Diana Butler included, stormed into city hall. They held workers and civlians at gunpoint, and Diana Butler stole a firearm off Scottie Cross and murdered a GSB Agent before being shot and injured herself. The CCTV footage is attached to the arrest report above from the incident.
Witness Affirmation
- I, Jonathan Willowick, 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,
  
  Jonathan Willowick
  Captain I
  Los Santos Police Department
  
  Date: 06/AUG/2024
Exhibit #4: Official Witness Statement, Detective Linton
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Incident Date: 01/AUG/2024
Witness Information
- Name: Edward Linton
  Date of Birth: 02/SEP/2024
  Phone Number: 286-4405
  Occupation: Detective I, Los Santos Police Department
Witness Statement
- I was operating under my own callsign (3-A-12) when multiple panics came through dispatch from City Hall. Additionally, some department radio calls and a 911 call from Herrman Wolff came in stating that City Hall was being stormed. When I arrived on the scene, all suspects were down, with one deceased GSB agent, and everyone was being treated. I first watched CCTV from outside, relaying that information through TAC to everyone else. Then I spoke with Solomon Cobb, got his footage of the incident, uploaded it to the LSPD server, and shared it with those who needed it for arrest reports. Once everything was squared away, I followed the transport to DOC before clearing again.
  
  I didn't do much on the scene apart from looking at CCTV footage and footage from Solomon Cobb's camera.
  
  *Still from City Hall CCTV*
  *Footage taken from Solomon Cobbs Camera*
Witness Affirmation
- I, Edward Linton, 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,
  
  Edward Linton
  Detective I
  Los Santos Police Department
  
  Date: 05/AUG/2024
Exhibit #5: Official Witness Statement, Captain Luigi
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

Case Information
- Incident Date: 01/AUG/2024
Witness Information
- Name: Mike Luigi
  Date of Birth: 07/JAN/1997
  Phone Number: 3815045
  Occupation: Police Captain I, Los Santos Police Department
Witness Statement
- Diana Butler stormed City Hall alongside: Andrea Tyrie, Jack Ramm, Elizabeth Honk and Ronnie Bathsheba.
  
  Whilst in City Hall the group held up multiple civilians and government workers. Diana Butler then robbed Scottie Scross of their Pistol MK II along with its attachments. Diana Butler proceeded to use the firearm to shoot and murder a GSB agent within City Hall, becoming incapacitated in the process. All listed possessions were found on Diana Butlers person by Captain Luigi.
  
  All of this can be clearly seen within the provided: **FOOTAGE**
Witness Affirmation
- I, Mike Luigi, 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,
  
  Mike Luigi
  Police Captain I
  Los Santos Police Department
  
  Date: 07/AUG/2024
Exhibit #6: Incident Witness Footage
Butler.City.Hall.mp4

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

Post by **Daniel Carmello** » 01 Mar 2025, 03:47

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

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0013

A Motion to Compel Discovery was filed in the above case on the 28th of February, 2025.

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Compel Discovery, and requests as follows;

Requested Discovery: Bodycam Footage, Deputy Chief Einhart
- Detailed Reasoning: This is crucial evidence needed for this case. When looking over the current footage you notice that there is a person behind the officer that was murdered. My client was taken down before the murder occured. Additionally you can see the person in the big white hat behind the GSB officer was the person to land the last few shots that actually murdered this officer. My client did not murder the officer and I want bodycam footage from every officer on the scene to prove this from every point of view.

Requested Discovery: Bodycam Footage, Captain Willowick
- Detailed Reasoning: We will retain the same argument as we did in the first discovery request.

Requested Discovery: Bodycam Footage, Detective Linton
- Detailed Reasoning: We will retain the same argument as we did in the first discovery request.

Requested Discovery: Bodycam Footage, Captain Luigi
- Detailed Reasoning: We will retain the same argument as we did in the first discovery request.

Requested Discovery: List of On-Duty GSB Agents involved with this incident
- Detailed Reasoning: We are requesting a list of all Government Security Bureau Agents that worked when this incident occurred. We would like to be able to get evidence from the people who were able to respond to this call. The officers weren't able to respond until after GSB had started shooting so I will later request that we have a deposition with a specific agent when we get a list of all of the agents working during this incident. This includes the deceased GSB agent who was not named in any witness statement.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Senior Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 01 Mar 2025, 04:30

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

The Prosecution formally objects to the Defense's Motion to Compel Discovery on the grounds that the requested evidence is not material to the defense’s claims and does not meet the legal threshold for compelled disclosure.

The defense argues that additional bodycam footage may reveal that another individual fired the final shots that resulted in the death of the GSB officer. However, this argument is legally insufficient to justify the request. Per the precedent established in #24-CM-0084, State of San Andreas v. Dave Ward, Judge Maximillian Fitzgerald III held:

“The coordinated actions of the group, in which Mr. Ward played a demonstrable role, directly resulted in the death of a law enforcement officer. Taken together, this evidence leaves no reasonable doubt as to his culpability.

The court wishes to emphasize that this verdict does not suggest that mere presence at the scene of a crime renders an individual culpable. However, in this instance, the evidence conclusively demonstrates that Mr. Ward played a significant and hostile role in the events that led to the tragic death of a deputy.”

This ruling establishes that an individual need not have fired the fatal shot to bear legal responsibility for a murder if they played an active and culpable role in the events leading up to the death. In this case, the prosecution has already provided substantial evidence, including footage, showing the Defendant actively engaging in gunfire against the officer as a member of a hostile group.

The defense’s request for additional bodycam footage from multiple officers, as well as a list of all on-duty GSB agents, does not serve a legitimate legal purpose. Rather, it appears to be an attempt aimed at introducing uncertainty where none legally exists. The burden is on the defense to demonstrate that the requested evidence is material and necessary to their case. Given that the prosecution’s evidence already establishes the Defendant’s participation in the events leading to the officer’s death, the requested discovery is not relevant to the core legal question of culpability.

For these reasons, the prosecution respectfully requests that the court deny the Defense’s Motion to Compel Discovery in its entirety.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

Post by **Daniel Carmello** » 01 Mar 2025, 04:53

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Rebuttal was filed in the above case on the 28th of February, 2024

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Rebuttal;

The Prosecution brings up precedent on a previous case that may show my client's involvement in one of the crimes. Yet the footage continues to pan back and forth through all members involved, not only my client. This footage does not show my client completing all charges listed. Additionally, if this footage were to help the prosecutions argument why would they reject this evidence. Is the Prosecution nervous that we may find something in the bodycam footage that may help the defendant? This bodycam footage will only help the court get a better view of the entire situation.

Additionally, the list of GSB agents is still necessary. Not a single witness statement that has been placed in discovery is stated by someone who was at the scene when the incident first started. Every witness statement is from someone who later showed up to the incident. Basically these aren't witness statements. These are people that witnessed the suspects being arrested. That is all that these statements show. Other than that it is all hearsay. Having a list of the GSB agents who were actually there is something that would help us make sure that what the officers are saying is true.

The addition of this footage does not hurt the prosecution in any way. Without this additional bodycam footage, we see an edited film from "Cobb's Blog". Must I say again that this film is edited. This means that this film could be doctored to make it seem that my client was in the wrong. Unedited footage from the police bodycams would help. All we have is witness statements that have no backup to it other than an edited film. Unedited film from the officers would greatly help the court see exactly what happened during this incident without there being cuts within the clip. The court should never allow chopped-up film into discovery as it does not show how the entire scene unfolded.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 01 Mar 2025, 05:43

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

The Prosecution submits this final objection to the Defense’s Motion to Compel Discovery.

Per legal precedent established in State of San Andreas v. Samuel Martin (#24-CM-0092),, body-worn camera footage is not the property of the individual officer but rather the agency they are employed by. As noted in the ruling by Honorable Judge Fitzgerald III:

"The fifth amendment protects individuals from being compelled to provide testimonial evidence against themselves. Physical/real evidence such as DNA, fingerprints, photographs, or recordings of external events is generally not deemed as testimonial. Bodycam footage is more akin to recording of external events rather than statements made by the defendant. As for the arguments about the fourth amendment rights, bodycamera footage belongs to the law enforcement agency and not the individual police officer. Also, due to the footage being part of official duties, has a reduced privacy interest.
In conclusion, due to the latter aspect of my explanation, the motion to compel discovery is denied. A subpoena request for the footage will be reviewed after this decision instead."

As this ruling makes clear, a Motion to Compel Discovery is an improper legal mechanism for obtaining bodycam footage. If the Defense wishes to obtain such evidence, the correct course of action would be to submit a subpoena request for the footage in question. Until such a proper request is made and reviewed by the court, the Prosecution maintains that the Defense’s motion lacks legal merit and should be denied outright.

Additionally, the request for a list of all on-duty GSB agents is both overly broad and unnecessary. The Defense has failed to establish a specific, articulable need for this information beyond a vague assertion that they may wish to question certain agents at a later date. Discovery is not a tool for fishing expeditions, and speculative arguments about possible inconsistencies do not justify the disclosure of government personnel records without a clear and immediate relevance to the case at hand.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

Post by **Daniel Carmello** » 02 Mar 2025, 11:51

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Motion to Suppress was filed in the above case on the 3rd of March, 2025.

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion to Suppress, and requests to following be suppressed from evidence;

Exhibit #1: Arrest Report
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
Footage from Solomon Cobb
- Detailed Reasoning:
  The footage presented to the court was filmed by a man named Solomon Cobb. He runs a blog named "Cobbs Blog" through lifeinvader where he collects short clips and edits the film for entertainment purposes. This footage pans back and forth throughout all members involved in a situation making it difficult to see everything that happened. The footage is edited and made for entertainment purposes. No matter what this footage shows, it could be fabricated as it is clearly edited. Throughout the clip you notice that there are multiple cuts. This film does not show the entire situation unfold. It does not show that my client could have been fearing for her life. With edited footage you can easily make the story look different than what actually happened. This is a common tactic used in entertainment, mainly in reality television, where they move clips around the make the viewers see a different picture than what actually happened. This seems to be what is happening here. The prosecution is also denying sending any sort of bodycam footage and only wants to rely on this edited film. This can raise doubt on what actually happened in the situation. The defense requests this evidence be removed as it is a fabricated film.

Exhibit #2: Official Witness Statement, Deputy Chief Einhart
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
Eyewitnesses on scene reported that a number of the injured individuals had run into the City Hall reception area and began an armed altercation. This escalated into a shooting with GSB personnel and prompted a call for assistance.
- Detailed Reasoning:
  The statement presented is hearsay. The officer is speaking on what eye-witnesses explained. Chief Einhart has not seen this happen and this statement should be removed from the record. If the prosecution wants to bring those eye-witnesses into court they can do that to prove this statement, but it can not be said from an officer who did not witness it first hand.

Exhibit #3: Official Witness Statement, Captain Willowick
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
CCTV was reviewed on scene by Officers and a group of individuals, Diana Butler included, stormed into city hall. They held workers and civlians at gunpoint, and Diana Butler stole a firearm off Scottie Cross and murdered a GSB Agent before being shot and injured herself.
- Detailed Reasoning:
  The defense requests to remove this statement as it is all, once again, hearsay. The officer states "CCTV was reviewed on scene by Officers" yet never states that he reviewed the CCTV himself. This officer is getting information from other officers and explaining it as he is a witness to watching the CCTV.
  
  The officer also states "The CCTV footage is attached to the arrest report above from the incident." Yet this is not CCTV footage. This is footage that was caught by Solomon Cobb which was edited and posted on his blog named "Cobb's Blog" which is mainly made for entertainment.

Exhibit #5: Official Witness Statement, Captain Luigi
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
The entire exhibit
- Detailed Reasoning:
  As seen from the current fabricated footage, you will notice that there is not a single officer in city hall during this incident. The fact that Captain Luigi is making a statement from an incident he never witnessed is absurd. He is unable to speak on this incident as he never mentions he looked at CCTV. He never mentions he looked at Solomon Cobb's footage. He never mentions anything about being at the scene. This entire exhibit should be removed as it is all speculation

Exhibit #6: Incident Witness Footagei
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
The entire exhibit
- Detailed Reasoning:
  The defense will retain the same argument for Exhibit #1

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Senior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Piper Johnson** » 02 Mar 2025, 12:00

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

Surrebuttal

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Surrebuttal was filed in the above case on the 2nd of March, 2025

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Surrebuttal;

The prosecution states "The Defense has failed to establish a specific, articulable need for this information", yet we have noted multiple times that these officers were not the ones to show up on scene. This piece of evidence is not "overly broad" as having evidence of the employees that worked in this incident would help the defense prove who was at the incident and prove exactly which officers were able to see this alleged crime. As stated previously, the current officer's witness statements are made by people who only witnessed the arrest.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Senior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Piper Johnson** » 02 Mar 2025, 12:02

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

SUBPOENA REQUEST

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Subpoena Request was filed in the above case on the 2nd of March, 2025.

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, respectfully requests the issuance of a subpoena for the following documents and/or testimony:

Documents/Information Requested: Bodycam Footage from the following officers present at the scene:
- Deputy Chief Einhart
- Captain Willowick
- Detective Linton
- Captain Luigi
- Purpose/Reasoning for Subpoena: The requested bodycam footage is necessary to provide a complete description of events leading up to and during my client’s arrest. The footage from multiple angles is important to evaluating my client's actions, regardless of assumptions based on belonging to a certain group of people, ensuring that liability is not unfairly assigned without clear evidence. This is essential to ensuring due process under the 5th Amendment.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Senior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 03 Mar 2025, 00:14

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

Rebuttal to Defense's Motion to Suppress

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

The Prosecution submits this rebuttal to the Defense's recent Motion to Suppress.

Regarding Exhibit #1: Arrest Report: The Prosecution has no objection, as the footage was never intended to be included in Exhibit #1 but was always designated as a separate exhibit, Exhibit #6.

Regarding Exhibit #2: Official Witness Statement, Deputy Chief Einhart:

The defense argues that Deputy Chief Einhart’s statement is hearsay because it references eyewitness accounts. However, the statement is being introduced to establish the course of the investigation, which included gathering these eyewitness accounts. Furthermore, Deputy Chief Einhart explicitly states that video evidence corroborated the accounts given by those on the scene. His role in organizing officers and verifying identifications further affirms that his testimony is based on official police procedure, not mere speculation.

Regarding Exhibit #3: Official Witness Statement, Captain Willowick:

The defense argues that Captain Willowick’s statement should be suppressed because he did not explicitly state that he reviewed the CCTV footage himself. However, Captain Willowick was present at the scene, heard gunfire, and responded immediately. His statement reflects information gathered during the course of his duties, including video review conducted by the LSPD.

Exhibit #5: Official Witness Statement, Captain Luigi
The defense claims Captain Luigi’s statement should be removed because he was not present at the scene. However, Captain Luigi’s role in the case includes evidence collection and suspect processing. The arrest report confirms that Diana Butler was found in possession of the stolen firearm, directly linking her to the crime. His statement is based on tangible evidence, corroborated by other officers’ reports and video footage. Furthermore, his presence during evidence documentation makes his testimony relevant and admissible.

Regarding Exhibit #6: Incident Witness Footage

The defense argues that the footage is unreliable due to alleged edits and its origin from a personal blog. However, the prosecution maintains that the footage was lawfully obtained and reviewed as part of the official investigation. The mere presence of cuts does not render the footage inadmissible, as it clearly depicts the defendant’s direct involvement in the crimes charged.

Furthermore, the defense’s claim that the footage is heavily edited is misleading. Upon review, there are only two to three instances where the footage transitions between scenes, and at least one of these scenes is over 1 minute long. Crucially, in each instance, the defendant remains on camera for extended periods, actively committing the very offenses she stands accused of. This exhibit carries substantial probative value, as it provides clear, objective evidence of the defendant’s criminal conduct.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

Post by **Finlay Mcculloch** » 03 Mar 2025, 19:37

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A decision was reached in the above case on the 3rd day of March, 2025.

Response to Motion to Compel Discovery

I will begin with the Body cam footage of the 4 officers. Due to Precedent set in State of San Andreas v. Samuel Martin (#24-CM-0092), I will be affirming the prosecution's objection to this footage and denying the request for all of the officers' body cam via the motion to compel discovery. However, I suggest you seek it via the correct avenue of a Subepeana. This does not mean it will be approved as subepeana; it will still undertake further review based on the evidence submitted.

As for the list of GSB Agents on Duty, I will be granting this as Defense has argued that Officers were not on the scene before the fatal event, and it's only fair for Defense to be able to interview GSB agents who were actively involved in this scene. I will, however, be limiting the scope of this to Agents who were actively involved in the scene, not all agents on duty.

The motion to suppress and the subpeana requests are still under review, and a response will be issued once both Defense and Prosecution have had a chance to review and respond to these submissions.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 274-4300 - [email protected]

Post by **Piper Johnson** » 03 Mar 2025, 20:09

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

Surrebuttal

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Surrebuttal was filed in the above case on the 3rd of March, 2025

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Surrebuttal;

Exhibit #1: Arrest Report:
The prosecution admits that the footage of Solomon Cobb was never part of Exhibit #1, but rather Exhibit #6. While the Defense acknowledges this, it does not change the fact that this video footage remains unreliable and must be excluded entirely, as stated in our argument regarding Exhibit #6.

Exhibit #2: Deputy Chief Einhart’s Statement:
The prosecution argues that Mr. Einhart's statement is admissible because it establishes the course of the investigation, but it contains secondary eyewitness accounts to prove guilt, making it hearsay. The Fifth Amendment guarantees due process, meaning that a conviction cannot be based on statements from unnamed witnesses. The prosecution cites video evidence but does not provide CCTV or law enforcement bodycamera footage to support Deputy Chief Einhart's claims. Without such verification, his statement should be suppressed.

Exhibit #3: Captain Willowick’s Statement:
The prosecution argues that Captain Willowick's statement is admissible because officers reviewed the CCTV footage. However, he does not confirm that he personally reviewed it, giving his testimony based on secondhand information rather than direct knowledge. Furthermore, the "CCTV footage" in question is actually an edited blog video by Solomon Cobb, not a legal recording by law enforcement. If the original CCTV footage exists, it should be presented separately, rather than relying on a edited, non-legal source.

Exhibit #5: Captain Luigi’s Statement:
Captain Luigi was not at the scene and did not personally witness any of the events, making his statement speculative. The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection, meaning, a conviction cannot be based on secondary reports. His role in gathering evidence does not entitle him to testify on matters he did not directly observe. His statement should be removed or significantly limited in scope.

The prosecution also states "Captain Luigi’s role in the case includes evidence collection and suspect processing." This is another speculative statement, as there is no evidence in the discovery that shows this is Captain Luigi's role. It is not stated in the witness statement or in the arrest report.

Exhibit #6: Solomon Cobb’s Footage:
The prosecution claims that the footage Solomon Cobb took is credible, but it is not from a law enforcement or unedited CCTV source. Penal Code requires that evidence should be reliable and unaltered, but this video was edited for entertainment purposes, so its authenticity could not be verified. The prosecution has not provided unedited or bodycamera footage, raising concerns that critical parts may have been removed or tampered with. The prosecution does not want to post bodycam footage to back this edited footage up. Again this film was made for entertainment meaning there could be more edits than what we can easily notice. Relying on the blog video over official law enforcement footage violates the due process of the 5th Amendment, therefore it should be excluded from all exhibits.

Senior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Post by **Finlay Mcculloch** » 05 Mar 2025, 19:40

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. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A decision was reached in the above case on the 5th day of March, 2025.

Response to Motion to Supress

Exhibit #1: Arrest Report
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
Footage from Solomon Cobb attached to the Arrest Report
- Court Decision:
  This footage will be suppressed as an attachment to the arrest report. The reason for this is that the Prosecution does not contest the suppression of this evidence on the arrest report.

Exhibit #2: Official Witness Statement, Deputy Chief Einhart
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
Eyewitnesses on scene reported that a number of the injured individuals had run into the City Hall reception area and began an armed altercation. This escalated into a shooting with GSB personnel and prompted a call for assistance.
- Court Decision:
  I will be denying the suppression of this exhibit. What has been stated by the officer is information that has been relayed by news outlets on social media and by witnesses of the scene. Some of the statement is also corroborated by the still shot of the CCTV within Detective Linton's Witness Statement. So this information is not speculative; it is public knowledge.

Exhibit #3: Official Witness Statement, Captain Willowick
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
CCTV was reviewed on scene by Officers and a group of individuals, Diana Butler included, stormed into city hall. They held workers and civlians at gunpoint, and Diana Butler stole a firearm off Scottie Cross and murdered a GSB Agent before being shot and injured herself.
- Court Decision:
  I will be revising this request. Again, CCTV was reviewed on the scene by officers; this is shown in Detective Linton's witness statement. Additionally, the information stated once again is public knowledge and was reported by news outlets, posted on social media and confirmed by witnesses who were on the scene. Some of this statement is also corroborated in the CCTV still image in Linton's statement. With all of this being said, what is speculative and not public knowledge is any reference to Diana Butler and her alleged actions. The Officer did not witness this firsthand and wasn't on the scene. Therefore, I will be suppressing any reference to her name or alleged actions in this statement.

Exhibit #5: Official Witness Statement, Captain Luigi
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
The entire exhibit
- Court Decision:
  I will be approving the suppression of this exhibit due to it being speculative. The Officer wasn't on the scene during the events and has written his statement as if he witnessed it all first hand According to his statement he made no mention of reviewing CCTV and we can see from the footage of Cobbs Blog that no officer arrived on the scene until GSB were in control of the scene.

Exhibit #6: Incident Witness Footage
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
The entire exhibit
- Court Decision:
  I will be approving the suppression of this exhibit due to it being edited footage and following precedence set in #22-CM-0065, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich. If you can find a copy of the original CCTV Footage that Detective Linton referenced and had a still shot of, then that can be used in its place. As he mentioned, the footage was uploaded to the LSPD Server.
  
  ((If you guys agree to it, CCTV wasn't recorded however it was reviewed we do have a still shot of it, then cobbs footage can be used as "CCTV Footage" but RP of collecting the footage from City Hall would have to be done or from the LSPD Server if that is what Linton meant by him uploading to the server. The reason I am suggesting this is that the footage would still be available and be able to be obtained. I will let you guys figure that one out together, or we can talk on Discord))

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 274-4300 - [email protected]

Post by **Finlay Mcculloch** » 05 Mar 2025, 19:40

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

SUBPOENA

The applying party is hereby instructed to provide a copy of the Subpoena to the below listed entity. If the opposing party objects to the request, they must still take the appropriate measures to comply with the request up until the point of passing over the evidence. If the objection is successful, the opposing party will not have to provide evidence to the court. However if it is unsuccessful they must produce the evidence within 24 hours to the court.

TO: Los Santos Police Department

YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TO:

Produce the specified physical evidence as detailed below and deliver it to the designated recipient by 10/MAR/2025. The request is in relation to the case of #25-CM-0015.

Bodycam footage from the listed officers below from when they arrived on the scene up to transporting the individuals to DOC. This is related to the incident in City Hall on 02/AUG/2024 the referenced case for more information above.

Deputy Chief Einhart
Captain Willowick
Detective Linton
Captain Luigi

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 274-4300 - [email protected]

DISCLAIMER: Failure to comply with this court order may result in criminal charges, including but not limited to GF25 - Felony Contempt of Court, GM22 - Contempt of Court, GF16 - Tampering with Evidence, GM14 - Obstruction of Justice

Post by **Finlay Mcculloch** » 12 Mar 2025, 06:44

San Andreas Judicial Branch
Docket Notice
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"

Prosecution & Defense,

Defense, have you submitted or had a response to your subpoena yet? If so, could you post your findings?

Prosecution, how far along are you on getting the list of agents on duty and involved in the scene?

I would like to keep this case moving, I would appreciate if you could update me at your earliest convenience.

Respectfully,

Superior Court Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 274-4300 - [email protected]

Post by **Daniel Carmello** » 12 Mar 2025, 07:15

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

MOTION FOR DISMISSAL

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Motion for Dismissal was filed in the above case on the 12th of March, 2025.

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Involuntary Dismissal, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

Reasoning: Prosecutorial Misconduct
- Detailed Explanation:
  
  The prosecution has failed to comply with court orders as we have requested evidence that has not been submitted. The Subpeana'd evidence was due two days ago on the 10th of March 2025. The prosecution has also failed to provide the required evidence from the Motion to Compel Discovery. Michael Blaise has been active on other cases and on the government website in general, proving that he has had the ability to notify the court that it may take a bit longer than what the court requested. This has happened in previous cases, such as #25-CM-0006, State of San Andreas v. Roberto Sanchez. Unfortunately, there is no response from the judge when it comes to this motion, but the prosecution had responded to this motion.
  
  Attorney General Terance Williams stated:
  
  "Touching on the Defense's Motion for Involuntary Dismissal, the Prosecution believes the motion to be unfounded. While a lack of answer on the docket in response to the motion is unfortunate and regrettable, the Prosecution complied with the order to the best of its abilities by attempting to gain access to a usable version of the evidence requested by the Defense. As such, none of the defendant's rights were breached."
  
  The prosecution in this case has not shown any sort of effort in obtaining this evidence. The prosecution has not posted the necessary Motion for Continuance and has continued to work on other cases, seeming to forget about my client. My client has been waiting since June 24th of 2024. This has been two hundred twenty-one (221) days since this case has been created. It has been fourteen (14) days since the case has been activated. The prosecution has responded to each Motion in this case within at most three (3) days, yet this one has taken the prosecution 7 days to respond, again two (2) days after the required date. This violates procedural due process and my client’s right to a fair trial.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Senior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Daniel Carmello** » 12 Mar 2025, 07:15

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

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Motion for Contempt was filed in the above case on the 12th of March, 2025.

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Contempt, and the reasoning for request is as follows;

Parties:
- Michael Blaise
- Deputy Chief Einhart
- Captain Willowick
- Detective Linton
- Captain Luigi
Reasoning: Failure to Comply with Subpoena Constituting Misconduct
- Detailed Explanation:
  
  The prosecution and all officers who were subpoenaed have failed to comply with court orders as we have requested evidence that has not been submitted. The Subpoenaed evidence was due two days ago on the 10th of March 2025. All parties included in the subpoena have been seen in person or on the government website recently.
  - Michael Blaise has been involved with multiple cases with his last public message being on March 11th, 2025 and was last active on the government website March 11th, 2025 10:54 pm.
  - Detective Edward Linton was seen approving a ride-along on March 11th, 2025 and was last active on the government website March 11th, 2025 9:26 pm.
  - Mike Luigi was seen in court on March 10th, 2025.
  - Deputy Chief Vincent Einhart was last active on the government website March 12th, 2025 at 1:55 am.
  - Captain Johnathan Willowick was last active on the government website March 12th, 2025 12:29 am.
  This can all be seen publicly on each person's government website profile under the "User Statistics" tab. Even if there was an email that was sent out to each party, they could have easily read this email at any time before the required submission date of March 10th, 2025. If they were not able to present this evidence it should have been brought to the court, yet it has not by any party. The people listed above have disobeyed an order from the court and should be given a fine for their wrongdoings. Any other civilian would get hit with contempt for disobeying the court and these people should not be seen any different no matter their occupation or rank.
  
  The penal code for GM22 - Contempt of Court states:
  "Minor willful disobedience to, or disregard of, a court order or any misconduct in the presence of a court, including but not limited to:
  a. Any act of disrespect, disobedience, defiance, or interference by any person during a legal proceeding.
  b. Willfully failing to preform a specific act in accordance with a valid court order."
  
  With the above-shown timestamps of their activity on the government website, they have been able to see their subpoena as it is listed in the public criminal court docket. This shows they have willfully failed to comply with the court order. You can also say they have "disobeyed" and "disregarded" the court order. There is evidence of each parties unlawful acts and is proven to be unlawful through the penal code which is why the defense pushes to hold all members stated above under contempt of court.

Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 313 — [email protected]

Senior Defense Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 480-1442 — [email protected]

Post by **Michael Blaise** » 12 Mar 2025, 16:37

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

REBUTTAL TO MOTIONS FOR DISMISSAL AND CONTEMPT

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Diana Butler
#25-CM-0015

A Rebuttal to the Defense's Motions for Dismissal and Contempt was filed in the above case on the 12th of March, 2025.

The Defense appears to have misinterpreted the procedural obligations associated with the subpoena in question. The Defense itself filed for the subpoena, and at no point was the Prosecution directed to procure or present any evidence pursuant to it. The court-ordered subpoena explicitly designates the Los Santos Police Department as the recipient.

The Prosecution was neither listed as a recipient nor obligated in any capacity to ensure compliance with the subpoena. According to standard legal procedure (and explicitly stated on the court-order itself), it is the responsibility of the party requesting the subpoena (in this case, the Defense) to ensure proper service and execution. Any failure to deliver the subpoena to the LSPD does not constitute prosecutorial misconduct or neglect, as the the prosecution did not apply for the subpoena.

Accordingly, there was no court order disregarded by the Prosecution, and any alleged procedural deficiency rests solely with the Defense.

The compelled list of present GSB agents can be found below:

Marc Ericcson
Hunter Parker

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 552-8150 — [email protected]

SAJB Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSEMS Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSEMS Awards

SAJB Awards

SADOC Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

SADOC Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

SADOC Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

SADOC Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSEMS Awards

SAJB Awards

SAJB Awards

LSEMS Awards

SAJB Awards

LSEMS Awards

SAJB Awards

LSEMS Awards

SAJB Awards

SADOC Awards

SAJB Awards

SADOC Awards

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards