Page 1 of 2
#22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 08 Sep 2022, 19:12
by Vince Williams
Defendant Name: Vince Williams
Defendant Phone: 4299775
Defendant Address: Senora Road 1
(( Defendant Discord: HERE ))
Requested Attorney: Robert Winejudge & Cyrus Raven
Charging Department: Los Santos Police Department
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.
))
Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 08 Sep 2022, 19:16
by Robert Winejudge
Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 10 Sep 2022, 09:38
by Roderick Marchisio
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]
Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 03 Oct 2022, 18:34
by Sarah Williams
Re: State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 18 Oct 2022, 15:31
by Sarah Williams
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 08 Nov 2022, 02:17
by Colt Daniels
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 08 Nov 2022, 02:19
by Colt Daniels
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]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 08 Nov 2022, 21:49
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:
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.
-
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.
((
))
((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,
Sayaka Yukimura
Detective I, Major Crimes Division
Los Santos Police Department
Date: 18/OCT/2022
Type of Discovery:
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.
-
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,
Callum James
Date:17/10/2022
Type of Discovery:
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.
-
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]
Type of Discovery:
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: ↑10 Sep 2022, 22:37
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.
Sincerely,
Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 09 Nov 2022, 19:20
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:
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**
((
Sincerely,
Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 13 Nov 2022, 16:09
by Roderick Marchisio
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]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 18 Nov 2022, 01:43
by Cyrus Raven
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 18 Nov 2022, 02:26
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.
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.
-
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.
(())
((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,
Sayaka Yukimura
Detective I, Major Crimes Division
Los Santos Police Department
Date: 18/OCT/2022
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.
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.
-
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,
Callum James
Date:17/10/2022
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.
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.
-
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]
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,
Cyrus Raven
Chief Public Defender Cyrus Raven
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 18 Nov 2022, 21:00
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:
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**
((
Sincerely,
Senior Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 19 Nov 2022, 17:06
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.
Sincerely,
Cyrus Raven
Chief Public Defender
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 23 Nov 2022, 12:18
by Cyrus Raven
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 03 Dec 2022, 22:19
by Roderick Marchisio
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:
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:
Respectfully,
Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 03 Dec 2022, 22:46
by Roderick Marchisio
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]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 04 Dec 2022, 14:47
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
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
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.
Type of Discovery: Physical Evidence
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.
Sincerely,
Cyrus Raven
Deputy Chief Public Defender
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 04 Dec 2022, 15:22
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.
Sincerely,
Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 04 Dec 2022, 15:31
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.
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 12 Dec 2022, 02:43
by Colt Daniels
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]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 12 Dec 2022, 20:42
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:
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**
((
Sincerely,
Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 12 Dec 2022, 20:46
by Roderick Marchisio
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]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 12 Dec 2022, 20:46
by Roderick Marchisio
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]
Re: #22-CM-0071, State of San Andreas v. Vince Williams
Posted: 12 Dec 2022, 21:03
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,
Cyrus Raven
Deputy Chief Public Defender
