Page 1 of 1
#23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 09 Sep 2022, 19:30
by Sue Bee
Defendant Name: Lennox Jet
Defendant Phone: 406-1487
Defendant Address: Eclipse Tower #599
(( Defendant Discord: MushyMiMi#5998 ))
Requested Attorney: N/A
Charging Department: PD
Date & Time of Incident(s): 9/9/2022 6:10 pm
Charge(s):
Narrative:
I was wrongfully charged with Evading when i was a hostage in kidnapping situation. i didn't feel that there was a safe opportunity for me to exit the vehicle during the chase. for my safety i did not jump out of a moving vehicle, which is the impression that the officer gave me that i should have done. i have never been in a situation like this before and i didn't know what to do, i was scared and just confused on what i should have done. i have always been a law abiding citizen with a clean record. i dont feel that i had broken any laws as i was never told what to do in a situation like that.
I,
Lennox Jet, 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. Lennox Jet
Posted: 10 Nov 2022, 19:07
by Colt Daniels
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"
NOTICE OF RECEIPT
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
The court has hereby received and acknowledged the above case on 10 November, 2022.
The Superior Court of San Andreas has received your filing and the case is now pending activation. Be advised that the court system runs on a first-come, first-served basis and will only activate cases out of order for special circumstances.
During this time, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense, otherwise, a court-appointed attorney will be assigned to the case upon its activation.
The defendant is further encouraged to speak with an authorized individual at Rockford Hills City Hall, Mission Row Police Station, or Paleto Bay Sheriff's Office for official clarification on the specific charges received and their respective date and times, as once the case has been activated, any omitted charges will be considered abandoned and unable to be disputed within this case.
Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Re: State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 18 Nov 2022, 20:17
by Antonio McFornell
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 02 Jan 2023, 03:57
by Colt Daniels
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 04 Jan 2023, 10:13
by Cyrus Raven
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 04 Jan 2023, 23:35
by Cyrus Raven
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 07 Jan 2023, 01:38
by Ruwin Korbel
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 10 Jan 2023, 01:42
by Ruwin Korbel
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 14 Jan 2023, 18:26
by Colt Daniels
San Andreas Judicial Branch
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
#23-CM-0001
Presiding Judge: Colt Daniels |
ORDER FOR DISCOVERY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
#23-CM-0001
A court order was entered in the above case on 14 January, 2023.
The case of the State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet, #23-CM-0001 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: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 19 Jan 2023, 21:28
by Antonio McFornell
Motion for Discovery
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion for Discovery
Honorable Justice Daniels,
- We the Prosecution in the case below are presenting our discovery to the court.
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Assigned Court Case Number: 23-CM-001
Requesting Party: Prosecution
Party Members: Tony McFornell
Exhibit #1: LSPD Arrest Report
Type of Discovery: [Deposition/Physical Evidence/Interview/Interrogation/Document Request] (Ex. Interview)
Jack Bezrukov wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 18:21
Los Santos Police Department
ARREST REPORT
"TO PROTECT AND TO SERVE"
|
MUGSHOT
- SUSPECT DETAILS
-
Full Name: Lennox Jet
Phone Number: 4061487
Licenses Suspended: Yes
Officers Involved:
- Police Officer III Jack Bezrukov
- Police Officer III Mike Luigi
- Police Officer III Tyrell Lee
- Police Officer III+1 Alex Sorvanis
Charges:
- VF01 - Evading an Officer
- GM03 - Possession of a Blade
INCIDENT NARRATIVE
- Explain what happened, no need to provide too much detail, videos could be provided
- The suspect was the passenger of a black Paragon that was evading from officers. The vehicle had stopped many times throughout the pursuit and the passenger did not exit or dial 911. The passenger only exited as the Paragon ran out of fuel. The suspect was also found to be in possession of a 5-inch blade.
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: Legal Possessions
Exhibit B: Knife - 5 inches
Type of Discovery: [Deposition/Physical Evidence/Interview/Interrogation/Document Request] (Ex. Interview)
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
Case Information
- Incident Date: 09/SEP/2022
Witness Information
- Name: Jack Bezrukov
Date of Birth: 12/JAN/1990
Phone Number: Redacted
Occupation: Police Officer III
Witness Statement
- On September 9, 2022, the appellant, Lennox Jet, was the passenger in a black Paragon that was evading officers. Throughout the pursuit, the vehicle constantly made stops on city streets or on the freeway before turning around and spinning around the pursuing cruisers. At no point did the appellant make an attempt to exit the vehicle, while safe to do so, or even dial 911 to inform officers of her situation. While claiming she was kidnapped, there was absolutely no proof of such threats or coercions made that would force her to stay silent within the vehicle. Eventually, she did exit the evading vehicle, AFTER it had already run out of fuel and was rolling to a stop. After a thorough search of her person, she was found to be in possession of a 5-inch knife. The lack of communication, escape attempts, and possessing a weapon casts a large doubt on the claims of being kidnapped.
Witness Affirmation
- I, Jack Bezrukov, 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,
Jack Bezrukov
Police Officer III
Los Santos Police Department
Date: [07/OCT/2022]
Type of Discovery: [Deposition/Physical Evidence/Interview/Interrogation/Document Request] (Ex. Interview)
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Official Witness Statement
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
Case Information
- Incident Date: [09/SEPT/2022]
Witness Information
- Name: [Alex Sorvanis ]
Date of Birth: [07/JAN/1996]
Phone Number: [2017110]
Occupation: Police Officer
Witness Statement
- A pursuit started on a paragon 2x occupied, we had AIR-1 above it at all times and the paragon did multiple stops through the pursuit and the passenger could easily get out from, when we arrested them I asked the passenger why she didn't get out and she said that the driver was her son and didn't wanna leave him alone and that she was fully aware that they were evading so officer Bezrukov went ahead and added the appropriate charges for her.
Witness Affirmation
- I, [Alex Sorvanis], 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,
[Alex Sorvanis]
[Police Officer III+1]
Date: [01/JAN/2000]
Sincerely,
Tony McFornell
Prosecuting Attorney
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 26 Jan 2023, 18:48
by Ruwin Korbel
Motion to Suppress
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Motion to Suppress
Honorable Daniels,
- We the Defense in the case below are requesting that certain evidence be inadmissible in court.
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Assigned Court Case Number: #23-CM-0001
Requesting Party: Defence Counsel
Party Members: Ruwin Korbel, Cyrus Raven
Requested Evidence to Suppress:
Exhibit #1 & #2
#1 =
The suspect was the passenger of a black Paragon that was evading from officers. The vehicle had stopped many times throughout the pursuit and the passenger did not exit or dial 911. The passenger only exited as the Paragon ran out of fuel. The suspect was also found to be in possession of a 5-inch blade.
#2 = "On September 9, 2022, the appellant, Lennox Jet, was the passenger in a black Paragon that was evading officers. Throughout the pursuit, the vehicle constantly made stops on city streets or on the freeway before turning around and spinning around the pursuing cruisers. At no point did the appellant make an attempt to exit the vehicle, while safe to do so, or even dial 911 to inform officers of her situation. While claiming she was kidnapped, there was absolutely no proof of such threats or coercions made that would force her to stay silent within the vehicle. Eventually, she did exit the evading vehicle, AFTER it had already run out of fuel and was rolling to a stop. After a thorough search of her person, she was found to be in possession of a 5-inch knife communication, escape attempts, and possessing a weapon casts a large doubt on the claims of being kidnapped."
Detailed explanation: The prosecution has failed to provide evidence detailing the origin or length of the blade. All Knives purchased legally through SA weapons stores are of a legal length for hunting/recreational purposes and require no licensing to own or carry.
(( so far as i am aware, the only way to determine the length of a blade being illegal is if the owner RPs it as so. this has not been provided.))
Exibit #3 = LSPD A. Sorvanis' Statement
"A pursuit started on a paragon 2x occupied, we had AIR-1 above it at all times and the paragon did multiple stops through the pursuit and the passenger could easily get out from, when we arrested them I asked the passenger why she didn't get out and she said that the driver was her son and didn't wanna leave him alone and that she was fully aware that they were evading so officer Bezrukov went ahead and added the appropriate charges for her.
Detailed Reasoning = Hearsay. Officer is providing a statement made by someone other than himself, in this case the defendant.
Sincerely,
Ruwin "Quiet" Korbel
Junior Defence Counsellor
[/quote]
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 27 Jan 2023, 01:53
by Antonio McFornell
San Andreas Judicial Branch
"HERE FOR YOU | SAFE FOR YOU"
|
- Dear Justice Daniels,
In relation to the motion to suppress, the prosecution would like to request that you disregard the first two requests given that none of the statements made in relation to the existence of the blades and/or knives actually imply that they were owned with illegal intent, or not. In other words, it seems as if the defense is under the impression that what makes a knife legal or not is its length -which is not at all implied in the prosecution's discovery-. It should be made clear to the defense that the element that determines whether posessing a certain item (a knife or blade, in this case) at times -like in this case- makes it illegal is the intent or the use that was given to it.
As for the motion to suppress exhibit #3, the prosecution would like to kindly request that you disregard said request given that the statements that the defense attacks are actually not coming from the defendant, but rather someone who identified as being a member of the defendant's family. While we understand that statements at times may not constitute definite proof, we believe this statement in particular might enlighten the decision-making process.
Finally, and not in response to the Motion to Suppress, we would like to make it known to the Court and anybody who has access to this docket that the defense did not provide any evidence during the discovery phase to prove the defendant's innocence.
Best regards,
Prosecuting Attorney
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 553-8869 — [email protected]
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 27 Jan 2023, 02:23
by Ruwin Korbel
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 28 Jan 2023, 04:15
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. Lennox Jet
#23-CM-0001
A decision was reached in the above case on the 28th day of January, 2023.
In relation to the Motion to Suppress filed by the defense on the 26th of January, 2023, I will be denying the request to suppress a portion of Exhibit 1 & 2, the court believes there is no problem with these statements as it does not violate the rules of evidence and any arguments related to the lack of evidence that shows the length on the blade itself and should wait until this case goes to trial.
In relation to the request to suppress a portion of Exhibit #3, I will be partly approving the suppression as the statement made constitutes Hearsay. The following will be suppressed, "when we arrested them I asked the passenger why she didn't get out and she said that the driver was her son and didn't wanna leave him alone and that she was fully aware that they were evading"
At this time I will allow 48 hours for any further motions, if none are made, or both parties inform the court of their readiness to proceed before the time frame has elapsed, I will proceed to schedule trial.
Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 31 Jan 2023, 03:43
by Colt Daniels
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"
NOTICE OF SCHEDULING
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
#23-CM-0001
An attempt to schedule was made and recorded by the court on the 31st day of January, 2023.
All parties in this case are encouraged to complete the following Scheduling Tool in an attempt to schedule a trial on the above case.
In the event all parties have overlapping availability the Presiding Judge will determine the best date and time to have a trial take place and post a Notice of Trial informing all of the upcoming proceeding.
In the event some or all parties do not have overlapping availability, the Presiding Judge will continue to attempt to schedule the proceeding or seek alternative avenues to conclude the case.
Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 03 Feb 2023, 03:34
by Colt Daniels
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"
NOTICE OF TRIAL
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
#23-CM-0001
A trial date was set on the above case on the 3rd of February, 2023.
In accordance with the availability reported by both parties in response to the Notice of Scheduling, this trial shall take place at 7:00 PM on the 5th of February, 2023 at Rockford Hills City Hall, Carcer Way, Metro Los Santos, SA.
Both parties are ordered to be present in the Judges Chambers no later than 15 minutes prior to the above listed date for pretrial arrangements. If complications occur that must result in a delay or cancelation of the trial, you are ordered to inform the court no later than 12 hours prior to the above listed date.
Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 05 Feb 2023, 10:29
by Roderick Marchisio
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
"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 acting as the co-counsel of Senior Prosecuting Attorney McFornell representing the State of San Andreas in all the proceedings pertaining to the underlying case.
Respectfully,
Deputy Attorney General
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 372-7719 —
[email protected]
Re: #23-CM-0001, State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
Posted: 06 Feb 2023, 01:20
by Colt Daniels
San Andreas Judicial Branch
Superior Court of San Andreas
"EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW"
ISSUANCE OF VERDICT
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS
State of San Andreas v. Lennox Jet
#23-CM-0001
A decision was reached in the above case on the 5th day of February, 2023.
During a trial held on this case the prosecution provided numerous witness statements by officers of the Los Santos Police Department providing their interpretations of the events that took place on September 9th, 2023 leading to the arrest of the defendant. Throughout the trial and presentation of this evidence the prosecution made mention that multiple times it states that the pursuit stopped at multiple points which allowed the defendant to exit the vehicle. As well as stating that the defendant only got out and was arrested after the vehicle ran out of fuel.
However, the prosecution was unable to provide the amount of time the vehicle was stopped during the pursuit. They also failed to provide evidence that the defendant ever did anything to prove a willingness to partake in the pursuit. It is the courts belief that the defendant did not have ample time to exit the vehicle during the periods in which it would stop and could lead to injury if done so.
Due to this the court believes that the prosecution in this case has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was a willful participant in this crime which is a requirement for the charge of VF01 to be applicable.
It is with the above considerations that I issue the following verdict:
- On the count of VF01 - Evading an Officer, I find the defendant, Lennox Jet, not guilty.
Chief Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
(909) 402-9713 — [email protected]
