#22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Vince Williams
Posts: 43
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2021 12:54 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Bakmeel

#22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Vince Williams »

Image
Image
Defendant Name: Vince Williams
Defendant Phone: 4299775
Defendant Address: Senora Road 1
(( Defendant Discord: HERE ))
Requested Attorney: Robert Winejudge & Cyrus Raven
Image
Charging Department: Los Santos Police Department
Image
Date & Time of Incident(s): 07/SEP/2022 2130 UTC
Charge(s):
  • VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel
    VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving
Narrative:
I was wrongfully charged by the same officers in two different situations that had a correlation to each other. I did not commit these crimes.



I, Vince Williams, 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. ))
Image
User avatar
Robert Winejudge
Judicial Branch
Posts: 429
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2022 10:37 pm
ECRP Forum Name:

SAJB Awards

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Robert Winejudge »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • To whom it may concern,

    I, Defense Attorney Robert Winejudge, will be representing Defendant Vince Williams in this case. I have talked to my client, and I'm ready to proceed at the court's discretion once this case is activated.

    Respectfully,

    Image
    Public Defense Attorney
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 372-4223 — [email protected]
Image
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • To whom it may concern,

    The purpose of this notice is to inform you that as of this moment I, Roderick Marchisio, will be representing the State of San Andreas in all the proceedings pertaining to the underlying case.

    I will take it upon myself to reach out to the involved parties to collect and review all evidence in relation to the underlying case to ensure a proper and smooth continuation of this process.

Respectfully,


Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Sarah Williams
Posts: 401
Joined: Sat May 01, 2021 6:10 am
ECRP Forum Name: Iriael

DOC Awards

SAJB Awards

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Sarah Williams »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • To Whom it May Concern,

    I, Junior Defense Attorney Sarah Williams, will be co-counseling with Defense Attorney Robert Winejudge and representing the defendant Vince Williams in this case.

    Respectfully,
    Sarah Williams
    Image
    Junior Defense Attorney
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    463-8400 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Sarah Williams
Posts: 401
Joined: Sat May 01, 2021 6:10 am
ECRP Forum Name: Iriael

DOC Awards

SAJB Awards

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Sarah Williams »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • To Whom it May Concern,

    I, Junior Defense Attorney Sarah Williams, will be withdrawing my assistance due to unforeseen circumstances. ((My character, Sayaka Yukimura has placed the VF04 charge, and thus I cannot take this case due to conflicts of interest. My apologies.))

    Respectfully,
    Sarah Williams
    Image
    Junior Defense Attorney
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    463-8400 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Counselors,

    I am Chief Justice Colt Daniels and I will be presiding over this case in my courtroom.

    At this time I am activating this case under #22-CM-0071. I see that both parties have adequarte representation to move forward with this case. Immediately following this notice I will be ordering discovery from the prosecution.

    Respectfully,

    Chief Justice
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    (909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image



San Andreas Judicial Branch

"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"


#22-CM-0071
Presiding Judge: Colt Daniels

ORDER FOR DISCOVERY


IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS

State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
#22-CM-0071

A court order was entered in the above case on 8 November, 2022.


The case of the State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams, #22-CM-0071 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.




Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Motion for Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion for Discovery

Honorable Daniels,

  • We the Prosecution in the case below are presenting our discovery to the court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: N/A
    Party Members: Roderick Marchisio
    Exhibit #1: Witness Statement Sayaka Yukimura Incident #1
    Type of Discovery:
    • Witness Statement
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Witness Statement as provided by Police Detective I Sayaka Yukimura of the Los Santos Police Department indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. It becomes evident that the Defendant stopped his motor vehicle in a small traffic tunnel to impede and/or block the reasonable oncoming movement of traffic.
    • Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch
      Official Witness Statement
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
      Case Information
      • Incident Date: 07/SEP/2022 at or around 21:00 ((UTC))
      Witness Information
      • Name: Sayaka Yukimura
        Date of Birth: 22/DEC/2022
        Phone Number: On file
        Occupation: Detective I, Los Santos Police Department
      Witness Statement
      • We were in pursuit of a green 10F and a convoy of other cars for street racing. Upon coming up to observatory tunnel, we had to make a stop to not ram the piles of cars inside it, including Mr. Williams Car. He stopped when pulled over, and was brought in for questioning about why he was blocking the tunnel and the alleged street racing. I was given bodycam by the lead in the pursuit, and was clearly able to prove that the car was blocking the travel of traffic in the tunnel.

        Attached below is a picture of cars in tunnel, including the one Vince Williams was driving. This was handed over to me by Officer Tyrell Lee.
        Image
        ((Image))
        ((Personal bodycam: https://i.imgur.com/DHiXSgs.png))
      Witness Affirmation
      • I, Sayaka Yukimura, 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,

        ImageImage
        Sayaka Yukimura
        Detective I, Major Crimes Division
        Los Santos Police Department

        Date: 18/OCT/2022
      Image
    Exhibit #2: Witness Statement Callum James Incidents #1 and #2
    Type of Discovery:
    • Witness Statement
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Witness Statement as provided by Police Officer Callum James of the Los Santos Police Department firstly shows the reasoning for the charge VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. Again, it becomes evident that the Defendant stopped his motor vehicle in a small traffic tunnel to impede and/or block the reasonable oncoming movement of traffic.

    Further, in relation to the second incident, this statement indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving during the second incident. It becomes evident that the Defendant was engaging in an activity which distracts the driver from driving safely through the use of his mobile phone.
    • Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch
      Official Witness Statement
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
      Case Information
      • Incident Date: [07/SEP/2022]
      Witness Information
      • Name: [Callum James]
        Date of Birth: [01/JAN/2000]
        Phone Number: 3991950
        Occupation: Police Officer
      Witness Statement
      • Both charges are from two completeley seperate situations that have no relevance to each other so to make it easier I will break them down into two sections.

        VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel

        Mr Williams received this charge following an investigation into his suspected involvement in obstructing justice. A pursuit was in progress of a vehicle that ended up taking us to the tunnel by the observatory. In the tunnel were multiple vehicles that were stopped in the middle of the road blocking us from continuing the pursuit Mr Williams was the driver of one of the vehicles blocking the road. Due to this the pursuit was lost. Mr Williams remained on scene still idling in his vehicle so he was pulled over, detained and transported to Mission Row. He was questioned by Detective Yukimura and due to doubt on his intention the charge for obstruction of justice was dropped and he was given VM04.

        The next situation follows a few minutes after the conclusion of the above situation.

        VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving

        Myself and Officer Xavier were at the front of Mission Row when Officer Xavier pointed out to me that Mr Williams appeared to be on his mobile telephone whilst driving as he drove past us on Vespucci Blvd. He then failed to maintain lane by taking an illegal right turn onto Sinner St where he should of continued straight on. I got into my cruiser with Officer Xavier and followed him to the gas station by Central MD. Just before the turning to the gas station I drove up alongside Mr Williams and myself saw him on his mobile telephone. He was then pulled over and as he had commited a traffic violation whilst on his mobile telephone he was distracted whilst driving which lead to the charge of VM05 and his arrest.

        For clarification when I say on his mobile telephone I mean one hand was off the steering wheel and he was holding the phone to his ear.
      Witness Affirmation
      • I, Callum James, 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,

        Image
        Callum James

        Date:17/10/2022
      Image
    Exhibit #3: Witness Statement Alexander Xavier Incidents #1 and #2
    Type of Discovery:
    • Witness Statement
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Witness Statement as provided by Police Officer Alexander Xavier of the Los Santos Police Department firstly shows the reasoning for the charge VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. Again, it becomes evident that the Defendant stopped his motor vehicle in a small traffic tunnel to impede and/or block the reasonable oncoming movement of traffic.

    Further, in relation to the second incident, this statement indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving during the second incident. It becomes evident that the Defendant was engaging in an activity which distracts the driver from driving safely through the use of his mobile phone.
    • Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch
      Official Witness Statement
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
      Case Information
      • Incident Date: [07/SEP/2022]
      Witness Information
      • Name: [Alexander Xavier]
        Date of Birth: [//]
        Phone Number: [473-6947]
        Occupation: [Police Officer]
      Witness Statement
      • [VM-04

        I was in the passenger seat of Callum James's cruiser during a pursuit of a vehicle. We lost the pursuit in the tunnels by the observatory as a bunch of vehicles had blocked our path. Mr Williams was pulled over as he remained stationary in the middle of the road. Callum detained him for Obstruction of Justice and we took him to Mission Row where he was questioned. From his questioning we weren't confident on an Obstruction of Justice charge so he was instead charged with VM-04.

        VM-05

        After he had been released I was out front with Callum as we were getting a new cruiser. I then spotted Mr Williams drive past us on his phone. I pointed it out to Callum James and we then hopped in the cruiser and followed him to the gas station closest to Mission Row. Callum pulled up alongside him and we both then saw again he was on his phone so we were confident he was distracted whilst driving as he committed a traffic violation when he took a right turn towards Legion Square when he was supposed to continue on.]
      Witness Affirmation
      • I, [Alexander Xavier], 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,

        Image
        [Alexander Xavier]
        [Title, if applicable]
        [Organization, if applicable]

        Date: [18/OCT/2022]
      Image
    Exhibit #4: Arrest Report Vince Williams Incident #2
    Type of Discovery:
    • Physical Evidence
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The arrest report of the Defendant in relation to the second incident per the appeal gives insight into the situation of the underlying case. In this arrest report, Officer Callum James of the Los Santos Police Department indicates that the reason for the arrest was seen on their phone while driving while also failing to adhere to other traffic law.
    • Callum James wrote: Sat Sep 10, 2022 10:37 pm Image
      Image

      Los Santos Police Department

      ARREST REPORT
      "TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE"

      MUGSHOT
      • SUSPECT DETAILS
        • Full Name: Vince Williams
          Phone Number: 4299755
          Licenses Suspended: Yes
          Officers Involved:
          • Police Officer II Alexander Xavier
          • Police Officer II Callum James
          Charges:
          • VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving
        INCIDENT NARRATIVE
        • Explain what happened, no need to provide too much detail, videos could be provided
          • Suspect was spotted on their mobile phone whilst driving a vehicle. Whilst doing so they failed to maintain lane by taking an illegal right turn. I followed the vehicle and drove up alongside it where I saw him still on his mobile phone. he was pulled over and arrested.

            ((This arrest report was written and posted a few days ago but I must of messed up the post as it wasn't posted.))
        EVIDENCE DETAILS
        • Document the possessions confiscated from the arrested suspect.
          Legal possessions may be grouped and documented as "Legal Possessions". Illegal possessions must be documented individually, examples of documented illegal possessions are "Pistol .50" or "12 grams of Cocaine". Body camera footage may be attached as an evidence exhibit.
          • Exhibit A: N/A

            Photograph of possessions in evidence locker (if applicable)
            Image
      Image


Sincerely,


Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Motion for Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion for Discovery

Honorable Daniels,

  • We the Prosecution in the case below are presenting our discovery to the court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: N/A
    Party Members: Roderick Marchisio
    Exhibit #5: Bodycam Footage Tyrell Lee Incident #1
    Type of Discovery:
    • Witness Statement
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Bodycam footage as provided by Police Officer Tyrell Lee of the Los Santos Police Department indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident.
    • **Bodycam footage**

      ((
      RP proof
      ImageImage
      ))

Sincerely,


Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Your Honor,

    As the Defense seemingly has no objections to the evidence as previously provided to the court, the Prosecution wishes to schedule a Motions hearing to present the evidence as per the above.

Respectfully,

Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Court Notice
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honourable Colt Daniels,

    I, Chief Public Defender Cyrus Raven, will be co-counselling with Director Robert Winejudge and representing the defendant Vince Williams in this case.

    Respectfully,

    Image
    Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Motion to Suppress
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion to Suppress

Honorable Colt Daniels,

  • We the Defense in the case below are requesting that certain evidence be inadmissible in court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: Cyrus Raven
    Party Members: Robert Winejudge, Cyrus Raven, Vince Williams
    Requested Evidence to Suppress: Exhibit #1: Witness Statement Sayaka Yukimura Incident #1
    Detailed explanation:

    The defense is looking to suppress certain portions of exhibit #1 due to hearsay/lack of foundation. Not only is there a lack of full body-cam video to review, despite the alleged existence of said footage by Detective Yukimura, but the still image does not show or prove any vehicles belonging to Mr. Williams were present at the scene nor is able to show any blocking of a lane of travel.
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Witness Statement as provided by Police Detective I Sayaka Yukimura of the Los Santos Police Department indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. It becomes evident that the Defendant stopped his motor vehicle in a small traffic tunnel to impede and/or block the reasonable oncoming movement of traffic.
    • Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch
      Official Witness Statement
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
      Case Information
      • Incident Date: 07/SEP/2022 at or around 21:00 ((UTC))
      Witness Information
      • Name: Sayaka Yukimura
        Date of Birth: 22/DEC/2022
        Phone Number: On file
        Occupation: Detective I, Los Santos Police Department
      Witness Statement
      • We were in pursuit of a green 10F and a convoy of other cars for street racing. Upon coming up to observatory tunnel, we had to make a stop to not ram the piles of cars inside it, including Mr. Williams Car. He stopped when pulled over, and was brought in for questioning about why he was blocking the tunnel and the alleged street racing. I was given bodycam by the lead in the pursuit, and was clearly able to prove that the car was blocking the travel of traffic in the tunnel.

        Attached below is a picture of cars in tunnel, including the one Vince Williams was driving. This was handed over to me by Officer Tyrell Lee.
        Image
        ((Image))
        ((Personal bodycam: https://i.imgur.com/DHiXSgs.png))
      Witness Affirmation
      • I, Sayaka Yukimura, 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,

        ImageImage
        Sayaka Yukimura
        Detective I, Major Crimes Division
        Los Santos Police Department

        Date: 18/OCT/2022
      Image

    Requested Evidence to Suppress: Exhibit #2: Witness Statement Callum James Incidents #1 and #2
    Detailed explanation:

    The defense is looking to suppress certain portions of exhibit #2 due to hearsay/lack of foundation. With regards to VM04, once again there is no foundation to establish that the vehicles were parked in the tunnel. Furthermore, no evidence exists to suggest Mr. Williams was driving any of the vehicles seen in Exhibit #1.

    Additionally, regarding the statements made on the charge VM05, Officer James speaks to what he was told by Officer Xavier, having not seen in personally, making this a statement based on hearsay.
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Witness Statement as provided by Police Officer Callum James of the Los Santos Police Department firstly shows the reasoning for the charge VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. Again, it becomes evident that the Defendant stopped his motor vehicle in a small traffic tunnel to impede and/or block the reasonable oncoming movement of traffic.

    Further, in relation to the second incident, this statement indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving during the second incident. It becomes evident that the Defendant was engaging in an activity which distracts the driver from driving safely through the use of his mobile phone.
    • Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch
      Official Witness Statement
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
      Case Information
      • Incident Date: [07/SEP/2022]
      Witness Information
      • Name: [Callum James]
        Date of Birth: [01/JAN/2000]
        Phone Number: 3991950
        Occupation: Police Officer
      Witness Statement
      • Both charges are from two completeley seperate situations that have no relevance to each other so to make it easier I will break them down into two sections.

        VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel

        Mr Williams received this charge following an investigation into his suspected involvement in obstructing justice. A pursuit was in progress of a vehicle that ended up taking us to the tunnel by the observatory. In the tunnel were multiple vehicles that were stopped in the middle of the road blocking us from continuing the pursuit Mr Williams was the driver of one of the vehicles blocking the road. Due to this the pursuit was lost. Mr Williams remained on scene still idling in his vehicle so he was pulled over, detained and transported to Mission Row. He was questioned by Detective Yukimura and due to doubt on his intention the charge for obstruction of justice was dropped and he was given VM04.

        The next situation follows a few minutes after the conclusion of the above situation.

        VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving

        Myself and Officer Xavier were at the front of Mission Row when Officer Xavier pointed out to me that Mr Williams appeared to be on his mobile telephone whilst driving as he drove past us on Vespucci Blvd. He then failed to maintain lane by taking an illegal right turn onto Sinner St where he should of continued straight on. I got into my cruiser with Officer Xavier and followed him to the gas station by Central MD. Just before the turning to the gas station I drove up alongside Mr Williams and myself saw him on his mobile telephone. He was then pulled over and as he had committed a traffic violation whilst on his mobile telephone he was distracted whilst driving which lead to the charge of VM05 and his arrest.

        For clarification when I say on his mobile telephone I mean one hand was off the steering wheel and he was holding the phone to his ear.
      Witness Affirmation
      • I, Callum James, 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,

        Image
        Callum James

        Date:17/10/2022
      Image

    Requested Evidence to Suppress: Exhibit #3: Witness Statement Alexander Xavier Incidents #1 and #2
    Detailed explanation:

    The defense is looking to suppress certain portions of exhibit #3 due to hearsay/lack of foundation.
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Witness Statement as provided by Police Officer Alexander Xavier of the Los Santos Police Department firstly shows the reasoning for the charge VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. Again, it becomes evident that the Defendant stopped his motor vehicle in a small traffic tunnel to impede and/or block the reasonable oncoming movement of traffic.

    Further, in relation to the second incident, this statement indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving during the second incident. It becomes evident that the Defendant was engaging in an activity which distracts the driver from driving safely through the use of his mobile phone.
    • Image

      San Andreas Judicial Branch
      Official Witness Statement
      "HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
      Case Information
      • Incident Date: [07/SEP/2022]
      Witness Information
      • Name: [Alexander Xavier]
        Date of Birth: [//]
        Phone Number: [473-6947]
        Occupation: [Police Officer]
      Witness Statement
      • [VM-04

        I was in the passenger seat of Callum James's cruiser during a pursuit of a vehicle. We lost the pursuit in the tunnels by the observatory as a bunch of vehicles had blocked our path. Mr Williams was pulled over as he remained stationary in the middle of the road. Callum detained him for Obstruction of Justice and we took him to Mission Row where he was questioned. From his questioning we weren't confident on an Obstruction of Justice charge so he was instead charged with VM-04.

        VM-05

        After he had been released I was out front with Callum as we were getting a new cruiser. I then spotted Mr Williams drive past us on his phone. I pointed it out to Callum James and we then hopped in the cruiser and followed him to the gas station closest to Mission Row. Callum pulled up alongside him and we both then saw again he was on his phone so we were confident he was distracted whilst driving as he committed a traffic violation when he took a right turn towards Legion Square when he was supposed to continue on.]
      Witness Affirmation
      • I, [Alexander Xavier], 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,

        Image
        [Alexander Xavier]
        [Title, if applicable]
        [Organization, if applicable]

        Date: [18/OCT/2022]
      Image

    Requested Evidence to Suppress: Exhibit #5: Bodycam Footage Tyrell Lee Incident #1
    Detailed explanation:

    Exhibit #5 does not contain any footage for analysis and should be suppressed.


Sincerely,

Image
Cyrus Raven
Chief Public Defender Cyrus Raven
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Motion for Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion for Discovery

Honorable Daniels,

  • We the Prosecution in the case below are presenting our discovery to the court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: N/A
    Party Members: Roderick Marchisio
    Exhibit #6: Bodycam Footage Sayaka Yukimura Incident #1
    Type of Discovery:
    • Bodycam Footage
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Bodycam footage as provided by Police Officer Tyrell Lee of the Los Santos Police Department indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident.
    • **Bodycam footage**

      ((
      Bodycam
      Image
      RP proof
      Image
      ))

Sincerely,


Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Motion to Compel Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion to Compel Discovery

Honorable Colt Daniels,

  • We the Defense in the case below are requesting the disclosure of the following material by opposing counsel, please find a detailed reason as to our request below.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: £22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: Cyrus Raven
    Party Members: Vince Williams, Robert Winejudge, Cyrus Raven
    Discovery from: State

    Type of Discovery: Physical Evidence
    • We the Defense are requesting any and all body-cam footage from Officer Xavier and Officer James from any of the two situations they were involved in.
    Detailed reasoning:
    • Both Officers mentioned seeing the Defendant on his phone, as such we request they provide their body-cam and/or dash-cam footage which they are mandated to be wearing at all times during their shift to establish the veracity of their claims.
    Type of Discovery: Illustrative Evidence
    • We the Defense are requesting a visual representation of the alleged illegal maneuver taken by the Defendant in the situation which led to his arrest for ''VM05 - Drunk, Impaired, or Distracted Driving''
    Detailed reasoning:
    • In exhibit #2, Officer James states ''He then failed to maintain lane by taking an illegal right turn onto Sinner St where he should of continued straight on.''

      We have taken the liberty to provide a blank map of the immediate area where this alleged situation took place. Feel free to use this or any other suitable replacement.

      Image


Sincerely,

Image
Cyrus Raven
Chief Public Defender
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Docket Notice
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Colt Daniels,

    The Defense at this time waives any discovery and motions hearings and we are ready to proceed to trial following a determination for the motion to suppress and motion to compel discovery. We request this be done on the docket and request the prosecution present it's rebuttal, if any, verbally to your honor, or likewise here on the docket.

    Respectfully,

    Image
    Chief Public Defender
    San Andreas Judicial Branch - Command
    5356160 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    Apologies for the slight delay in response. As you are aware, the Holiday season is upon us and responses in general are slower than usual.

    In relation to the first part of the Motion to Compel Discovery, the Prosecution notes that it has already provided with one arrest report and two separate witness statements in relation to the second incident. Following case law, per the #22-CM-0050, State of San Andreas v. Harley Pavlovich motions hearing, this request is deemed disproportional by the prosecution.

    In relation to the second part, the Prosecution agrees with the Defense that this request leads to the facts of the underlying case being clearer and as such, have requested this information with the Los Santos Police Department. They were able to provide us with the following drawn image:
    Drawn map
    Image
    In this respect, the Prosecution notes that Officer James had erroneously mistaken the street names in his original witness statement:
    Callum James, Fri Dec 02, 2022 10:12 pm wrote: Hi,

    Apologies I had the streets mixed up.

    Vince was driving south on Sinner St past the front of mission row where he took a right hand turn onto Vespucci Blvd.

    Hope that clears it up
    To give a more detailed overview as per the request of the Defense, the Prosecution notes this happened on the intersection between Sinner Street and Vespucci Boulevard. As it is quite snowy outside, and this was not the case in the time of the incident, the Prosecution has taken the liberty of getting a satellite image from the corresponding intersection:
    Satellite Image #1
    Image
    In this respect, it is very clear and obvious that only an arrow indicating forward is on the road, as well as traffic lights and other parts of the road indicating the same. The streets of Los Santos are quite clear in this respect. For completeness' sake, the Prosecution has also included a satellite image of the road section that the Defendant should actually have followed. Here, it becomes evidently clear that the road signs are clear on which way civilians are allowed to drive.
    Satellite Image #2
    Image
    Summarized, the Prosecution deems it obvious that the Defendant in the underlying case broke traffic law by taking a right turn where he was supposed to go straight. Additionally, the Prosecution deems it obvious this distraction has been caused by the Defendant being on his phone while driving.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    In relation to the Motion to Suppress as filed by the Defense, the Prosecution would like to reply as follows.

    Regarding the first item, the Prosecution notes that the witness statement as provided by Detective Yukimura should be viewed as standalone evidence. The Prosecution further notes that Detective Yukimura was on the scene and situation itself. If she saw this situation happening with her own eyes and is declaring this as such in her witness statement, there are no grounds for the Defense to suppress this item as this is simply exactly what the witness statement is intended to be used for.

    Regarding the second item, in relation to the first incident, the Prosecution again notes that the witness statement as provided by Officer James should be viewed as standalone evidence. The Prosecution further notes that Officer James was on the scene and situation itself. If he saw this situation happening with his own eyes and is declaring this as such in his witness statement, there are no grounds for the Defense to suppress this item as this is simply exactly what the witness statement is intended to be used for.
    Further, in relation to the second incident, the Prosecution notes that Officer James is simply recalling what was said to him and as such the reasoning for his continued actions. Nowhere is Officer James stating that it is a fact because he was told so. Only later was this fact confirmed when he saw the Defendant himself.

    Regarding the third item, the Prosecution again notes that the witness statement as provided by Officer Xavier should be viewed as standalone evidence. The Prosecution further notes that Officer James was on the scene and situation itself. If he saw this situation happening with his own eyes and is declaring this as such in his witness statement, there are no grounds for the Defense to suppress this item as this is simply exactly what the witness statement is intended to be used for.

    Finally, the Prosecution notes that as per evidence exhibit #6, it is clear that in the first incident the Defendant was indeed the driver of a vehicle that was pulled over.

    Summarized, the Prosecution deems it obvious that the Motion to Suppress as filed by the Defense should be denied in full based on the above arguments. The Prosecution at this time waives any discovery and motions hearings and we are ready to proceed to trial following a determination for the Motion to Suppress and Motion to Compel Discovery. We request this be done on the docket.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Motion for Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion for Discovery

Honorable Colt Daniels,

  • We the Defense in the case below are presenting our discovery to the court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: Cyrus Raven
    Party Members: Vince Williams, Cyrus Raven
    Exhibit #7: Body-Cam footage by Cyrus Raven
    Type of Discovery: Physical Evidence
    • Footage
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery: This body-cam footage is relevant to the court in determining how the roads in front of Mission Row are used, even by Los Santos Police Department Employees. It speaks towards the motive behind the Officer's conducting the traffic stop. It is clear that given the first situation at the tunnels that these two Officers were looking to find any excuse they can to conduct a traffic stop on Mr. Williams. Additionally, as shown in the footage, it is clear that no one follows the arrow indications. Instead the road marking indicating a right hand turn is possible is what is used to justify the right hand turn. (See Exhibit #8)

    Exhibit #2: Picture of Mission Row Cameras facing road
    Type of Discovery: Physical Evidence
    • Picture
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery This image shows a camera in Mission Row. I'm sure the court is able to review all instances where someone has taken a right-hand turn free of any repercussion. Although I'm sure the prosecution would prefer if I refrain from requesting all this footage.
    • Image
    Exhibit #3: Picture of Road Markings
    Type of Discovery: Physical Evidence
    • Picture
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery This image shows the road markings, indicating that right-hand turns are possible and perfectly legal to perform, which aligns with the behaviour of anyone who uses this road on a daily basis.
    • Image


Sincerely,

Image
Cyrus Raven
Deputy Chief Public Defender
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Motion to Suppress
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion to Suppress

Honorable Daniels,

  • We the Prosecution in the case below are requesting that certain evidence be inadmissible in court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: Prosecution
    Party Members: Roderick Marchisio
    Requested Evidence to Suppress: Exhibit #7
    Detailed explanation:
    The Prosecution requests the court to suppress evidence exhibit #7 based on relevance and suggestiveness. The underlying case is pertaining the case State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams. The fact that another civilian makes a similar mistake while driving should have no legal bearing for this case. Allowing the Defense to include infractions of other civilians in a case would set a worrying precedent. Further, the Prosecution notes these pictures have been handpicked by the Defense and as such, this lineup has been conducted in a suggestive matter.

    Further, the Prosecution points out that if the Defense would like to present evidence from camera's such as the one as presented in exhibit #2 (8, really?), the burden of proof is obviously on the party submitting the evidence, in this case the Defense.

    Finally, the Prosecution notes that the arrows on the road are clearly the leading factor. In this respect, the Prosecution points out that by following the argument of the Defense, even from the left lane of the bridge a right handed turn and crossing another lane would be perfectly allowed. The Prosecution notes that this does not make any logical sense.

    The Prosecution at this time waives any discovery and motions hearings and we are ready to proceed to trial following a determination for the Motion to Suppress and Motion to Compel Discovery. We request this be done on the docket.
    Example
    Image


Sincerely,


Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »


Clarification of Exhibit # from the latest Motion for Discovery by Defense
  • Exhibit #7: Body-Cam footage by Cyrus Raven
  • Exhibit #8: Picture of Mission Row Cameras facing road
  • Exhibit #9: Picture of Road Markings
Additionally, in Exhibit #7 ''Instead the road marking indicating a right hand turn is possible is what is used to justify the right hand turn. (See Exhibit #8)'' this would be referring to Exhibit #9 and not Exhibit #8.
User avatar
Colt Daniels
Judicial Branch
Posts: 1964
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2019 2:01 am
ECRP Forum Name: Colt

SAJB Awards

LSSD Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Colt Daniels »

Image


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. Vince Williams
#22-CM-0071

A decision was reached in the above case on the 12th day of December, 2022.


In regards to the Motion to Suppress filed by the defense on Novermber 17th, 2022.

I will be denying the request to suppress Exhibit #1: Witness Statement Sayaka Yukimura Incident #1 as the evidence and statements provided do not constitute hearsay as it is the detectives recollection of the events that took place. Furthermore the court believes there is foundation for this evidence as it gives a reasoning behind what took place during the incident.

I will be denying the request to suppress Exhibit #2: Witness Statement Callum James Incident #1 as the reason for suppression does not meet the criterial for a suppression of this statement. However I will be granting the suppression of Exhibit #2: Witness Statement Callum James Incident #2 as a witness cannot quote what someone outside the courtroom said.

I will be denying the request to suppress Exhibit #3: Witness Statement Alexander Xavier as the statement does not violate the hearsay rule or lack foundation.

I will be granting the request to suppress Exhibit #5: Bodycam Footage Tyrell Lee Incident #1 due to no footage being provided for analysis.

In regards to the Motion to Compel Discovery filed by the defense on November 19th, 2022.

I will be granting the request for any dashcam or body camera footage the Los Santos Police Department of the incident however if they do not have any that has not been provided the court acknowledges they cannot provide evidence they do not have.

In regards to the illustrative evidence, that has been provided through a following motion filed by the prosecution.

In regards to the Motion to Suppress filed by the prosecution on December 4th, 2022.

I will be granting the suppression of Exhibit #7: Body-Cam footage by Cyrus Raven as I must agree that this case is the State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams. I do not believe that similar mistakes or traffic infractions done by other individuals holds any baring in this case.


At this time the court will allow 72 hours for the prosecution to provide any additional body camera footage the Los Santos Police Department might have regarding this incident. However if no further evidence is presented I will not be allowing any following motions and I will move to hear this case at trial.


Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Motion for Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion for Discovery

Honorable Daniels,

  • We the Prosecution in the case below are presenting our discovery to the court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: #22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: N/A
    Party Members: Roderick Marchisio
    Exhibit #5: Re-upload Bodycam Footage Tyrell Lee Incident #1
    Type of Discovery:
    • Bodycam footage
    Spoiler
    All Information from the Discovery The Bodycam footage as provided by Police Officer Tyrell Lee of the Los Santos Police Department indicates why the Defendant was charged with VM04 - Disruptive Impeding or Blocking Travel during the first incident. The Prosecution notes that apparently the full video did not upload correctly to the docket. As such, we hereby utilize the 72 hours as granted by Honorable Daniels to upload the footage correctly. We note that through this footage in combination with the picture as provided previously it becomes clear that while the Defendant did seemingly not deliberately interfere with the pursuit as conducted by the Los Santos Police Department, the Defendant was indeed stationary in the tunnel for no legitimate reason.
    • **Bodycam footage**

      ((
      Bodycam
      Kind thanks to Vince_Williams himself for providing these /ldo's himself.

      Image
      Image
      Image
      Image
      Image
      Image
      RP proof
      ImageImage
      ))

Sincerely,


Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    In relation to the Motion to Compel Discovery filed by the defense on November 19th, 2022, the Prosecution has indeed requested the Los Santos Police Department if there was any bodycam footage available from either Police Officers. However, we were informed this is unfortunately not the case.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Roderick Marchisio
Posts: 6247
Joined: Thu May 14, 2020 1:08 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Roderick

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Roderick Marchisio »

Image

San Andreas Judicial Branch

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"

  • Honorable Daniels,

    In relation to the Motion to Compel Discovery filed by the defense on November 19th, 2022, the Prosecution has indeed requested the Los Santos Police Department if there was any bodycam footage available from either Police Officers. However, we were informed this is unfortunately not the case.

Respectfully,

Deputy Attorney General
Director of Public Notary
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 — [email protected]
Image
User avatar
Cyrus Raven
Posts: 1982
Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2019 11:14 pm
ECRP Forum Name: Cyrus Raven

LSPD Awards for Service

SAJB Awards

Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams

Post by Cyrus Raven »

Motion to Suppress
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion to Suppress

Honorable Colt Daniels,

  • We the Defense in the case below are requesting that certain evidence be inadmissible in court.
    State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
    Assigned Court Case Number: 22-CM-0071
    Requesting Party: Cyrus Raven
    Party Members: Cyrus Raven, Robert Winejudge, Vince Williams
    Requested Evidence to Suppress: Exhibit #5: Re-upload Bodycam Footage Tyrell Lee Incident #1
    Detailed explanation:

    Outside the scope of the motion to Compel Discovery. On the 12th of December. this court granted the Defense's motion to Compel Discovery filed on November 19th, 2022.

    This motion to compel discovery was precise in it's request, only requesting Body-Cam footage from Officer Callum James and/or Officer Alexander Xavier.


Sincerely,

Image
Cyrus Raven
Deputy Chief Public Defender
Image
Locked

Return to “SAJB - Archived Criminal Cases”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests