Eclipse Government

Defendant Name: Thomas Alfie
Defendant Phone: 3783037
(( Defendant Discord: huka97 ))
(( Defendant Timezone: +2:00 UTC ))
Type of Representation (Pick one): Public Defender

Charging Department: SD

Date & Time of Incident(s): 19/NOV/2025 , 18:46 ((UTC))
Charge(s):

• VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle

Narrative:
I was reversing back on the emergency lane as i dropped a crate by mistake, so I was searching on a low speed, then i got pulled over and sent to prison for reckless operation

---

I, Thomas Alfie, 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. ))

---

---

The Superior Court of San Andreas has received your filing and the case is now pending activation. Be advised that the bench trial court system operates off a time-slot scheduling system. Please look out for notifications from either the courts or your attorney in regards to scheduling your bench trial.

During this time, the defendant is encouraged to reach out to a licensed defense attorney in order to prepare a proper defense. 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.

Respectfully,

Court Clerk
San Andreas Judicial Branch
495-1265 — [email protected]

On Behalf of

Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

---

---

The case of State of San Andreas v. Thomas Alfie is hereby activated and opened by this Court.

Be advised that the bench-trial court system runs on a weekly time-slot system. The prosecution and defense are hereby ordered to provide their evidence to the Court via Motion for Discovery within the next 30 days or file a Motion for Continuance.

If at any point in time the defendant or prosecution wishes set precedence or desire a formal criminal trial, they are welcome to file a Motion for a Change in Venue.

So Ordered,

Court Clerk
San Andreas Judicial Branch
495-1265 — [email protected]

On Behalf of

Branch Administrator
San Andreas Judicial Branch
505-9925 — [email protected]

---

---

I, Jaz Owens, Interim Chief Public Defender with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, will be representing the Defendant, Thomas Alfie in the underlying case.

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


Acting Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧[email protected]

---

---

The State of San Andreas, by and through the undersigned attorney, filed this Motion for Discovery, and presents the following as evidence;

• Exhibit #1: Arrest report - Thomas Alfie, 19/NOV/2025

  

  ARREST REPORT
  

  MUGSHOT

  SUSPECT 1 DETAILS

  • 
    
    
    Full Name: Thomas Alfie
    Telephone Number: REDACTED
    Licenses Suspended: Yes
    • Driver
    • Trucker
    
    Charges:
    • VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle
    
    
    Additional Details (Suspect's vehicle, etc.) :

  
  
  VEHICLES INVOLVED

  • Vehicle A:

  
  
  DEPUTY DETAILS

  • Full Name: Callum Ryder
    Badge Number: 30409
    Callsign: PAPA-7

  
  
  INCIDENT DETAILS

  • Date of Arrest: 2025-11-19
    Deputies Involved: John Maverick and Will Grigg
    
    Provide details of the incident leading up to the arrest
    • Me and Deputy Maverick was asked to takeover a traffic stop by Corporal Grigg the driver had been seen reversing his vehicle down seonora freeway we charged Thomas Alfie with reckless operations and suspended license upon searching the vehicle we found 2 marijuana Plants in the trunk of the car

  
  EVIDENCE DETAILS

  • Location of Evidence Locker: Paleto Station
    Exhibit A: marijuana Plants
    
    Photo of the evidence in the locker (if applicable)

    

    ---

  ARRESTING DEPUTY SIGNATURE
  𝓒𝓪𝓵𝓵𝓾𝓶 𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝓻
  

  ---

  

• Exhibit #2: Witness statement - Corporal Will Grigg

  

  

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

  Case Information

  • Case Number: n/a
    Incident Date: 19/NOV/2025

  Witness Information

  • Name: Will Grigg
    Occupation: Corporal of the Los Santos Sheriff's Department

  Witness Statement

  • I observed the suspect back his vehicle up on the Senora Freeway going southbound in the northbound lane. Starting just South of the North Store ending at the exit of the single toll tunnel. I called in the backup unit to perform the traffic stop for me as I was on a guided session to become a supervisor and delegating traffic stops is a part of being the shift supervisor. I instructed the deputies to place the charge of Reckless operation of a road or marine vehicle due to the distance the suspect traveled in reverse, the fact that that part of the highway has a blind corner and there being an opertunity to turn around safely if the suspect had just driven past the North Store and performed a uturn after the median ends.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, Will Grigg, 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,
    
    
    Will Grigg
    Los Santos Sheriff's Department
    
    Date: 20/NOV/2025

  
  

• Exhibit #3: Bodycam footage - Corporal Will Grigg, 19/NOV/2025

  Footage
  ((Proof of RP))

• Exhibit #4: Witness statement - Deputy Sheriff Trainee Callum Ryder

  

  

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

  Case Information

  • Case Number: [N/A]
    Incident Date: [19/NOV/2025]

  Witness Information

  • Name: [Callum Ryder]
    Occupation: [Deputy Sheriff Trainee]

  Witness Statement

  • [My partner and I were Called on the radio by Corporal Grigg asking us to take a traffic stop which included Thomas Alfie upon arriving on scene me and my partner Deputy Maverick spoke with Corporal Grigg and he explained that he had witnessed Thomas Alife reversing down senora freeway. With me being the trainee i took over the traffic stop and spoke with Thomas Alfie i asked him why he had been reveresing down the freeway and he said its because he dropped something of value. With Thomas's Response i followed up with asking what was the valuable item that he had dropped Thomas Alfie Responded ' Meat' with this information I asked MR Alfie to bare with me for 2 minutes. I proceeded to go back to my cruiser i spoke with Deputy Maverick and said im going to charge him with Reckless operations of a motor Vehicle, Deputy Maverick agreed with this so i placed the charges and proceeded back to Mr Alfie where i asked him to step out of the vehicle and turn around where i cuffed him and read him his miranda rights. I then patted down Thomas Alfie and he didnt have anything illegal on him only gps mask radio and knife, I then proceeded to search the vehicle where i found Marijuana Plants and other chemicals Corporal Grigg checked to see if the other chemicals were legal which they were and we then sezied the Plants and proceeded to take the vehicle to impound where i then securely impounded the vehicle. During all of this Commander Thompson was present and so was corporal Grigg while the whole traffic stop was taking place.]

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, [Callum Ryder], 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 Ryder]
    [Title, if applicable]
    [Organization, if applicable]
    
    Date: [20/Nov/2025]

  

• Exhibit #5: Witness statement - Deputy Sheriff John Maverick

  

  

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

  Case Information

  • Case Number: N/A
    Incident Date: 19/NOV/2025

  Witness Information

  • Name: John Maverick
    Occupation: Deputy Sheriff Bonus I

  Witness Statement

  • My partner and I were called on radio by Corporal Will Grigg because he witnessed Thomas Alfie perform Reckless maneuvers on Senora Freeway and he dropped a backup and told us to handle the situation since my partner is a Trainee.
    
    We arrived at the location where we first spoke to Corporal Grigg and he debriefed us on the situation, Commander Thompson was also present on scene and he was watching our every move. We let my Trainee handle the traffic stop.
    
    My Trainee and I approached the vehicle and greeted Mr Alfie before asking him for his drivers license and gave him the reason for the traffic stop. He responded with a very lousy excuse that was along the lines of "I dropped something valuable to me so I was reversing and trying to look for it" and he did not want to elaborate any further.
    
    We instructed him to stay still as we went back to our vehicle and discussed the charge we were going to give him and then we went out and approached him with Corporal Grigg, we calmy instructed him to step out of the vehicle and that he is going to get charged with Reckless Operation Of a Vehicle and he cooperated at first, my Trainee read him his rights, patted him down and then we searched his vehicle.
    
    Among our search we found Marijuana Plants in his vehicle along with a lot of acids and chemicals, Corporal Grigg checked the chemicals and made sure they were legal before placing them back in the truck and seizing the marijuana. We detained Mr Alfie and I took him to Paleto Station while my Trainee was driving Mr Alfie's vehicle and secure impounded it. We processed him at the Station and put his items away in the locker.

  Witness Affirmation

  • I, [John Maverick], 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,
    John Maverick
    Deputy Sheriff Bonus I
    Los Santos County Sheriff's Department
    
    Date: 20/NOV/2025

  

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

---

---

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

• Reasoning: No argument in the facts of the case.
  • Detailed Explanation:
    
    To prevent an unnecessarily complicated explanation, the defendant has no disagreement in the material facts of the case or the admissibility of the evidence provided.
    
    Mr Alfie simply does not believe that his actions, found within the exhibits, meet the definition for 'VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle' which would be: "Intentional disregard for life and/or property through the operation of a road or marine vehicle." The respectful submission of the defense would be that Mr Alfie did not intentionally disregard life or property and the exhibits would not meet the definition of such charge.
    
    The mitigating circumstances for this case are:
    • Mr Alfie was not travelling at a high rate of speed,
    • Mr Alfie was mostly using the hard shoulder whilst reversing (as displayed in the bodycamera footage),
    • and there were no other road users at the time of the offense.
    
    
    Therefore, it is the submission of the defense that this should be resolved by matter of Summary Judgement.

Respectfully,

Acting Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧[email protected]

---

• Parties,
  
  The Court acknowledges receipt of the Motion for Summary Judgment submitted by the Defense. The Prosecution is hereby directed to file any objections or responses within seven (7) days of the date of this notice.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Court Clerk
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  495-1265 — [email protected]
  
  On Behalf of
  
  Superior Court Justice
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  274-6959 — [email protected]

---

• Honorable Judge Horton and pertaining parties,
  
  The Prosecution has no objections to the Defense's motion to resolve this case through a Summary Judgment, and will provide our argument brief after the Defense.
  
  Regards,
  
  Terence Williams
  Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  234-9321 — [email protected]

---

---

I, Jaz Owens, Interim Chief Public Defender with the San Andreas Judicial Branch, presents the initial defense arguments for the Summary Judgment;

As stated in the initial motion, the defendant does not disagree with any fact presented as evidence in this trial. The primary argument that the defendant holds is that the events evidenced in this trial do not reasonably fit the definition of the charge 'VM03 - Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle'.

The definition of this charge as as follows: "Intentional disregard for life and/or property through the operation of a road or marine vehicle."

In order for the prosecution in this case to secure a conviction, they must prove two incredibly important facts:

[1] That Mr Alfie had intention to disregard life or property.
[2] That Mr Alfie was operating a Road or Marine vehicle.

To prove intentional disregard requires a high burden of proof focusing on the intention behind the actions which led to the perceived breach of the penal code.

As stated in multiple exhibits, and as taken as instruction from him myself, Mr Alfie states that he was reversing his vehicle because he dropped some meat on the highway. Considering that the speed limit for all highways is 145kph, any reasonable person could deduce that loose debris on the highway would be detrimental to oncoming traffic.

As such, Mr Alfie took it upon himself to reduce the risk to oncoming drivers and reverse back, on the hard shoulder or as close to the edge of the road as possible, to remove this debris from the roadway. This shows that Mr Alfie did not have intention to disregard life or property but rather he acted out of an immediate, good faith belief that stopping or pulling over was insufficient and immediate action was the safest way to proceed with the predicament he found himself in.

Given that this is Mr Alfie’s reasoning, there is a clear alternate motive other than to intentionally disregard life or property - to reduce the risk to other drivers on the roadway by removing a perceived hazard.

As seen in the bodycamera footage, the roadway was entirely clear at that moment. Therefore, Mr Alfie had no intention of putting others in danger because, in his perception, there were no other road users to put at risk. From what Mr Alfie could see, there were no hazards behind him other than the one that he mistakenly left behind - therefore, he used this break in traffic to prevent harm to others.

To be proactive, if the prosecution wishes to put forward that this could cause a danger to the public due to possible oncoming traffic then it is the submission of the defense that this would fall into minor negligence at best due to the lack of intent behind the actions.

In summary, the Defense invite the presiding Judge to enter a summary judgement of Not Guilty on the basis of factual absence regarding Mr Alfie's intent to disregard life or property.


Acting Chief Public Defender
San Andreas Judicial Branch
📞429-1517 — 📧[email protected]

---

---

The Court will formally accept the Defense's Motion for Summary Judgment presented on the 30th of November, 2025.

Given that the Defense has already presented its initial arguments, the Court will now allow the Prosecution seven (7) days to provide its arguments. If the Defense has no further comments, the Court will then deliberate.

The Court would like to remind the Prosecution that for Summary Judgements, they are the party to provide initial arguments as they hold the Burden of Proof in a criminal trial. Given the prior notice from the Prosecution and subsequent submission from the Defense, the Court will accept, for this case only, the modified order of the Defense's initial arguments.

So Ordered,


Superior Court Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
274-6959 — [email protected]

---

• Your Honor,
  
  The Prosecution will file its arguments in a reasonable time. It will contain the Prosecution's initial arguments, but will also, due to the modified order of filing, also include comments on the Defense's arguments, incorporating initial and secondary arguments into one filing.
  
  Regards,
  
  Terence Williams
  Attorney General
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  234-9321 — [email protected]

---

---

Your Honor,

In its discovery for this case, the Prosecution has provided evidence that proves the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The evidence, bodycam footage from a sworn law enforcement officer, shows the defendant reversing in the northbound lane of Senora Freeway in what appears to be a Draugur, at a distance of approximately 700 meters, before being stopped by a responding deputy with lights and sirens.

The emergency shoulder should be used for one thing only - emergencies. This would be either a mechanical failure, where a vehicle has broken down or is unable to be operated safely, or a medical emergency, when the driver of a vehicle is in distress due to severe and acute health issues. Additionally, the emergency shoulder will be used as an emergency lane by first responders when the regular lanes are impassable.

The regular flow of traffic follows a single forward direction; going against the regular flow of traffic anywhere, though especially so on a freeway, creates a large danger to both the driver of said vehicle and other motorists on the road. Reversing anywhere on a freeway, whether in a regular lane or in the emergency shoulder, drastically reduces reaction time for other drivers, who may not be expecting a vehicle moving towards them in reverse. Such a maneuver increases the likelihood of a collision, especially if visibility is limited either by the weather or increased traffic and the presence of other vehicles, leaving the reversing vehicle vulnerable to rear-end accidents.

It is clear that the defendant's actions were not an accident, but deliberate; they were not in acute medical distress or experiencing a mechanical failure of their vehicle; they simply chose to abandon logic and reason and follow chaos by reversing on the road, putting both themselves and others at risk of injury.

As per the defendant's own testimony, given through the Defense's statements and arguments, the excuse behind the defendant's actions was that they had "dropped some meat" on the roadway, and that they wanted to remove it. While admirable, the testimony only goes to prove the Prosecution's case that the defendant was acting with intent to set aside common safety measures due to their own belief that "pulling over was insufficient". It is worth noting that no 911 call was received at the time, which follows the defendant's thought process that they know better than law enforcement. It is also worth noting that not only was the defendant reversing on the freeway, but they were also planning to exit their vehicle to remove debris from the roadway, debris they had created in the first place.

The Defense is absolutely correct in stating that debris on the roadway could affect oncoming traffic. But there is a vast difference between a small piece of meat dropped on the ground and something larger, such as a person or a large SUV-sized vehicle. As seen in the evidence, the defendant chose to reverse approximately 700 meters over the course of 50 seconds; vehicles travelling in the regular direction northbound and following the speed limit would have covered a little over two (2) kilometers in that time, and covered the defendant's distance in less than 20 seconds, and even less if they were going above the 145kmph speed limit.

Less than 20 seconds. The defendant could have been struck more than twice in the time it took them to reverse the section, as seen in the bodycam footage. Furthermore, at multiple points on the stretch of road the defendant was reversing, it would have been impossible for them to know if anyone was coming up on them if they had exited their vehicle, or even despite staying in it, as they were passing multiple bends with blind curves, meaning another vehicle could have approached the defendant easily without them knowing until it was too late. In their attempt to remediate a perceived hazard from the road, the defendant wanted to place another hazard on the road instead - themselves.

The Prosecution believes it is not only clear from the evidence, but also from the defendant's own testimony and the Defense's arguments, that the defendant had the intent to disregard common logic and perform actions that put themselves and others at risk, rather than contacting the appropriate authorities to avoid potential accidents. Deliberately choosing to reverse their vehicle an extended distance on the freeway in the emergency shoulder without any valid ongoing emergencies, the defendant would likely have been the center of an emergency if they were to have come across an unsuspecting motorist. Further, their testimony goes on to state that they were going to disregard all traffic laws and safety guides on how to drive and behave on a freeway, by intending to go onto the freeway on foot to remove an item, which they themselves dropped onto the freeway in the first place.

Due to the evidence and arguments presented above, the Prosecution urges Your Honor to see the intent behind the defendant's actions and the logic behind the arguments presented in this brief, believing there to be no other choice but to issue a verdict against the defendant.


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

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  Defense, as per the previous docket notice from the Court, you will now have seven (7) days to present any further arguments. This opportunity should be reserved for new arguments not previously made, not for reiterating prior arguments.
  
  If the Defense does not intend to provide any further arguments, please notify the Court of such at your earliest convenience.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Superior Court Justice
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  274-6959 — [email protected]

---

• Your Honor,
  
  The defense does not wish to provide any new arguments for this trial - we believe that all arguments that are to be made, have been made in the initial arguments.
  
  The defense will stick with the initial position that this is an act of gross negligence, not intentional disregard for life and property, and therefore the defendant should be found not guilty of this offense.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  Acting Chief Public Defender
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  📞429-1517 — 📧[email protected]

---

• Prosecution and defense counsel,
  
  The Court acknowledges the arguments from Prosecution and Defense. The Court will now deliberate and aim to provide a verdict within the next three (3) days.
  
  Respectfully,
  
  
  Superior Court Justice
  San Andreas Judicial Branch
  274-6959 — [email protected]

---

---

The Court has reviewed the entirety of the evidence and arguments submitted by both the Prosecution and the Defense following the activation of this matter and the granting of Summary Judgment proceedings. The Court notes that both parties agreed to resolve this case through Summary Judgment and that the Defense did not dispute any material fact presented by the State. The sole issue before the Court was the legal interpretation of VM03 – Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle.

The incident at hand occurred on the 19th of November, 2025, following observations made by members of the Los Santos Sheriff’s Department. Multiple deputies, including Corporal Grigg, Deputy Maverick, and Deputy Ryder, provided statements and body-worn camera evidence demonstrating that the defendant reversed his vehicle for an extended distance, on Senora Freeway, traveling against the normal flow of traffic in the northbound lane and emergency shoulder with no hazard lights on or visible.

The Defense argued that while the defendant did intentionally reverse on the freeway, his motive to retrieve a dropped piece of meat from the roadway negated the element of “intentional disregard” required under VM03. The Defense further asserted that the defendant believed removing the debris was a good-faith effort to protect other drivers from potential harm.

The Prosecution argued that the defendant’s own testimony, combined with the footage, demonstrated a deliberate choice to engage in conduct that inherently endangered life and property. The Prosecution highlighted that reversing on a freeway, particularly one with blind curves and high-speed traffic of up to 145 km/h legally, presents a severe and foreseeable risk. Moreover, the defendant’s decision to place himself and his vehicle against the flow of freeway traffic, solely to retrieve a personal item, showed an intentional choice to disregard established roadway safety principles.

The Court acknowledges the defendant’s explanation and attempt to be a good citizen and remove his personal item from the highway. However, VM03 does not require malicious intent. It requires intentional conduct carried out in disregard of the risks posed. The defendant intentionally operated his vehicle in reverse for a prolonged distance in an environment where such conduct is universally understood to be unsafe. The presence or absence of visible traffic at that moment does not diminish the inherent danger of the action, nor does a subjective belief that the action was justified convert a dangerous maneuver into a lawful one. The Court asserts to the defendant the possibility of drivers not seeing his vehicle while taking a blind corner in a possibly high rate of speed.

Therefore, the Court determines that the defendant’s conduct satisfies the statutory criteria of intentional disregard for life or property through vehicle operation, as defined under VM03.

It is with the above considerations that I issue the following verdict:

• On the count of VM03 – Reckless Operation of a Road or Marine Vehicle, I find the defendant, Thomas Alfie, guilty.

So Ordered,

Magistrate Judge
San Andreas Judicial Branch
495-1265 — [email protected]

On Behalf Of:

Superior Court Justice
San Andreas Judicial Branch
274-6959 — [email protected]