Eclipse Government

DEFENDANTS NAME:Cameron Batten
DEFENDANTS PHONE:3207728
DEFENDANTS ADDRESS:I prefer to not release this in public
ATTORNEY NAME:None
ATTORNEY PHONE:None

OFFICERS NAME: Luka the supervisor and Jim Daniel of SD with 2 PD officers
RANK: N/A
BADGE NUMBER:N/A
ATTORNEY NAME:N/A
ATTORNEY PHONE:N/A

DATE AND TIME OF INCIDENT(s):
17/8/2021 3:43 and the hour or so beforehand.
CHARGES BEING APPEALED:
(Attempted) Grand theft auto
Reckless operation of a road or marine vehicle
DEFENDANTS STORY/OPENING STATEMENTS:
Near DOC I encountered an abandoned vehicle. I saw it was in a weird position and had no windshield.
I searched for the owner thinking he might have gotten injured or something.
This is when I heard a dog from the trunk of the car.
While trying to open the vehicle an unknown SD officer passed and was conducting a 10-55 on a bifta next to me.
I yelled at the officer that I needed help with said dog. He had called in to dispatch that I was attempting to steal the vehicle.
His backup arrived and I also indicated to that officer there was a dog stuck in the trunk.
At no time was anything done about the dog in the trunk. All the officer seemed to be interested in was adding charges and arresting.

When told I was being arrested i made a choice to try and evaded. During said evasion I got charged with a Reckless operation of a road or marine vehicle charge twice. Both at 4:23 Something I would consider Double Jeopardy.
Only after my arrest did someone check for a dog by knocking on the trunk.
Keeping in mind that an outside temperature of just 70 degrees is hot enough for the inside of a car to become dangerous and since dogs do not sweat a small amount of time can be deadly for said dog. I am fairly certain the dog, unfortunately, died in said car.
Signed,
Cameron Batten

---

• Cameron Batten,
  
  This case is now pending Review. The listed attorney "Luka Ryker" cannot represent you in this case as the specific listed name does not have a accreditation nor license held within the state of San Andreas. Additionally, since the listed person cannot represent in this case would you like to self-represent or receive a public defender?
  
  
  Chief Justice James Mayfeld
  Supreme Court
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

---

• Mr. Batten,
  
  Good afternoon. My name is Hank Holt, and I will be your attorney for this case. I shall contact you shortly to try to set up a meeting and go over the events that have occurred, as well as discuss possible next steps to follow.

---

• Respectfully,
  
  
  Hank Holt
  State Attorney
  Head of Recruitment
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

• Case Number: 21-08-17-AP-004
  Incident Date: 17/AUG/2021

• Name: Jim Daniel
  Date of Birth: 09/JAN/1998
  Phone Number: 385-3479
  Occupation: Deputy Sheriff

• Here is my explanation of the events that occurred on August 17th, 2021 with Cameron Batten. I was attempted to pull over a unrelated Bifta due to speeding. The Bifta pulled over right beside a Raiden and a Warrener. The suspect later identified as Cameron, was pick locking the driver side door of the warrener. After he spotted me, he jumped into the Raiden and and pulled up to me. He told me there was a dog in the car. I already had backup units on-route so I waited and told the arriving unit to pull over the Raiden. First, the Raiden pulled up the road and appeared he was about to flee. He then stopped the car and I conducted a traffic stop on the Bifta to speak with her about her speed while the other unit conducted a traffic stop on the Raiden. I then pulled up to the other deputies traffic stop with the Raiden to help and the Raiden took off. After a lengthy pursuit that led into the city, he was apprehended and identified as Cameron Batten. I took him back to the Warrener to check for a dog. I looked into the windows to the interior and listened to the trunk for any noise while knocking. I did not hear or see any evidence of a dog so I had the vehicle secure impounded and took Cameron to the DOC. A short video from my bodycam will be uploaded from the moment I seen Cameron pick locking the vehicle.
  Spoiler

  https://streamable.com/dowl9b
  (( proof of bodycam - https://i.imgur.com/tv636dP.jpeg))

• I, Jim Daniel, 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 coersion. ((I affirm that all information submitted has been obtained via In-Character means.))
  
  Signed,
  
  Jim Daniel
  Deputy Sheriff 1
  
  Date: 30/AUG/2021
  

---

• Representation,
  
  In the matter of the case will you please layout all evidence, including sending in chambers collected testimony from the notice of action. Be prepared to write an argument for the disputed charges. Second for clarity, is the second speeding charge the only one being disputed? Please have these task completed in the next 72 hours for review of this case with judgement issued in a closed chambers setting. Thank you and hope to hear back from representation.
  
  
  Chief Justice James Mayfeld
  Supreme Court
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

---

• Your Honor,
  
  My apologies for the delay. My current exhibits include the notices of action submitted by Mr. Rosselli, Mr. Daniel, and Mr. Malkin. I have a physical exhibit I wish to introduce into evidence, but I need my clients cooperation to get it ready. I also have a copy of car catalogs for Hayes Dealership as well as a listing of import vehicles I wish to introduce into evidence.
  
  My client is wishing to appeal both the Attempted Grand Theft Auto charge, as well as disputing the second speeding ticket he received. He believes that due to the timing of both the first and second tickets, that it was the same speed camera that tagged him twice for the same offense. Meaning he was punished twice for the same crime. And given how closely together the tickets were, he didn't even have the opportunity to slow down and react to the first one before he got hit with the second one.

---

• Respectfully,
  
  
  Hank Holt
  Court Clerk
  Head of Recruitment
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

---

• Representation,
  
  I will plan to speak with you this Sunday at 8PM to introduce/review evidence and all other information needed for judgement on this case.
  
  
  Chief Justice James Mayfeld
  Supreme Court
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

---

• Your Honor,
  
  Both myself and my client are ready for the hearing on Sunday at 8 PM. I would like to introduce the two following pieces of evidence that I have been able to gather with the help of my client, Mr. Batten, that we believe will raise some questions as to the veracity of the claims made by the State in this case. As a reminder, your Honor, the burden of proof in this case rests on the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the claims they make: I believe these two recordings, plus the additional pieces of evidence I will be submitting, and with our arguments in chambers, will satisfy you that the burden of proof is not met, and that thus my client must be found innocent. ((Proof of RP is in each clip)).
  
  Valuation of the Raiden

  https://streamable.com/xiz5k2
  Scene Recreation

  https://streamable.com/f9mt2a
  Valuation of a stock Warren, as per Hayes Dealership

  https://imgur.com/C0N1gZp
  Valuation of the stock Raiden

  https://imgur.com/B4maP6h

---

• Respectfully,
  
  
  Hank Holt
  Court Clerk
  Head of Recruitment
  San Andreas Judicial Branch

---

---

• The case of 21-06-23-AP-007 - Cameron Batten Vs Los Santos Sheriffs Department has hereby been resolved.
  
  Both Parties are hereby notified that the Appeal of the following charges has been amended. The amendment is due to the evidence submitted to the court outlining that the appellate was in fact charged with "Attempted Grand Theft Auto"" not "Attempted Burglary".
  
  After a lengthy review of all evidence and statements collected a Summary Judgement was passed that the Charge of Attempted Grand Theft Auto will be stiction from the record and the applicable charge "Attempted Burglary (Auto)".
  
  This being evident by the provided evidence of the defendant "lock-picking the vehicles" passenger door. Grand Theft Auto in this case being applicable if the drivers door was the one being picked. In ordinance of the penal code, the law highlights if the vehicle is being stolen then will fall under Grand Theft Auto. Had the drivers door been attempted then the charge "Grand Theft Auto" being more applicable to the situation. Though in this case based on the provided evidence and admission, the defendant was attempting to gain access to the rear door of the vehicle absent consent. This making the criminal charge Attempted Burglary (Auto); more applicable to the situation based on the evidence and testimony provided.
  
  Penal Code Sections mentioned:
  Grand Theft Auto

  Grand Theft Auto
  Taking someone else's vehicle without consent.
  Burglary

  Burglary
  Entering a residential room, vehicle, building or house without uncoerced consent.
  
  
  Thus, the charge "Attempted Burglary (Auto)" will be considered time served and the amount of $6,500 being issued back to the defendant from the change of the charge.
  
  Based on the provided evidence the charge of "Reckless operation" will be upheld. Despite the underlapping times between charges.
  
  • CHARGES BEING APPEALED: RECKLESS OPERATION & ATTEMPTED GRAND THEFT AUTO
  
  
  James Mayfeld
  Chief Justice J. Mayfeld
  Supreme Court
  San Andreas Judicial Branch