Jump to content

EvilScotsman

MTA Senior Administrator
  • Content Count

    253
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About EvilScotsman

  • Rank
    Experienced Member
  • Birthday 06/02/1994

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Glasgow

Recent Profile Visitors

1,023 profile views
  1. EvilScotsman

    [STATE] The People v. Martin Cunningham [11/05]

    "The defence claims he did not give Alpers access to the armoury by providing him with a badge, yet as seen in Exhibit. 4 regarding the bodycam footage, Fredrich Alpers says "It was in the locker, with all my gear when i went on". Martin Cunningham would have been the only person to allow Fredrich Alpers access to that locker and should have checked that said locker was clear of all non issues items. Fredich Alpers was also wearing equipment only issued to on duty PSS Troopers, if Fredrich Alpers wasn't hired then he would not have had any access to this equipment or a locker. The defence claims that no badge was given to Fredrich Alpers but if you'll direct your attention to Exhibit. 3, Martin Cunningham says himself "The guard lets everyone with a badge do so." if he didn't issue him a badge, how did he know Fredrich Alpers had a badge at the time? Mister Cunningham also states in the interview that he hired him due to his experience if he didn't hire him why did he imply that he was hired and given a badge?" (( @ThatGuy ))
  2. EvilScotsman

    farewell nick howard

    Not bad
  3. EvilScotsman

    Dinoco LTD v Los Santos County Government [11/28]

    *Justice MacIntyre peers between the duo before rubbing his temple. Adjusting himself before speaking.* "Mister Krakowski, there is no set criteria for use of Eminent Domain other than for "Public use". As stated in the Constitution specifically the Fifth amendment, "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Now from what evidence I have here, Just Compensation was given by the Los Santos Government to Dinoco. You claim that the value of the property is wrong by telling me these figures yet you have failed to provide me evidence of these figures. The use of Eminent Domain is protected in our Constitution and there is no evidence been provided in this court room to prove that it is being used unfairly. So to prevent further time wasting of myself and the courts, this court room is dismissed." *Justice MacIntyre bangs his gavel, leaning back afterwards.* (( @Blanco @Zebulon ))
  4. EvilScotsman

    [STATE] The People v. Martin Cunningham [11/05]

    "The only information we were provided was a date of October 31st 2018 of when this mandate was shown to the public. Nothing further from the Prosecution for now, your honour." (( @ThatGuy ))
  5. EvilScotsman

    Dinoco LTD v Los Santos County Government [11/28]

    *Justice MacIntyre enters the room, taking his seat before reviewing the documents handed to him and banging his gavel.* "Very well, Mister Krakowski. You have failed to show which law you believe the Government has broken in your evidence. Eminent Domain is protected in our Constitution and from the evidence provided by yourself, the government have fulfilled the Just Compensation Requirement. Now unless you can provide evidence showing that this building has more market value than the value that was given then this case will be dismissed. Your other two demands are not what this court is for so they will be dismissed also. So unless further evidence can be given, this case will be dismissed. *Justice MacIntyre peers at both parties, awaiting a response.* (( @Blanco @Zebulon ))
  6. EvilScotsman

    Charles Mancuso v. Lena Matthews

    "Very well, your request is approved Mister Drummond. Now we may proceed with opening statements." (( @Zebulon @SpaghettiMayne ))
  7. EvilScotsman

    Charles Mancuso v. Lena Matthews

    *Justice MacIntyre enters, observing the room before taking his seat and banging his gavel* "Are all parties present? Your Subpoena is approved Mister Drummond" (( @Zebulon @SpaghettiMayne ))
  8. EvilScotsman

    [STATE] The People v. Martin Cunningham [11/05]

    *Angus McGinnis stands up from his chair, adjusting his suit* "Your Honor, MartinCunningham was employed by the Government as Commissioner of Defence, part of his job requirements is running the Public Security Service. MartinCunningham hired Friedrich Alpers to work as a Trooper. Now Martin Cunningham knew of Friedrich Alpers criminal history specifically his Felonies and still hired him. Martin Cunningham failed to uphold his duty and allowed a known felon access to the Pubic Security Service Armoury with blatant disregard for the safety of his staff. I'd like to pass this document to the courts." *Angus McGinnis passes a document to the bench* "Now as you can see Fredich Alpers was hired without even holding the Basic Requirements set out by the government itself for the position of Trooper. Martin Cunningham was the supervisor at the time of Alpers employment. Martin Cunningham failed to carry out a basic criminal record check and allowed a felon access to a weapon. The prosecution believes that this is a clear case of Negligence of Duty especially from someone in a superior position of the government." (( @ThatGuy @maramizo ))
  9. "Very well, thank you for notifying myself. This court is dismissed." *Justice MacIntyre bangs his gavel before leaving the room*
  10. *Justice MacIntyre scratches his head before banging his gavel* "Very well Mister Flores." *Justice MacIntyre bangs his gavel once more before swiftly exiting the room.* (( @Zebulon @GamerX27 ))
  11. SUPERIOR COURT OF SAN ANDREAS Criminal Arraignment Court of San Andreas, District of Los Santos The People Versus Martin Cunningham Subpart 1. Title. In the matter of the Petition of The People, on the 5th of November, 2018, against Martin Cunningham. Subpart 2. Body. The People charge the subject(s) with: MO048 - Negligence of Duty WF012 - Furnishing/Attempting to Furnish Another With a Firearm Are multiple misdemeanors stacked for a felonious conviction? No Subpart 3. Request. The People demand of the subject Martin Cunningham to the following: 4 Years ((4 Days)) Five Thousand Dollar Fine Subpart 4. Evidence. Exhibit. 1 - Arrest Warrant for Martin Cunningham. Exhibit. 2 - Narrative of District Attorney Investigator Benjamin Nelson. Exhibit. 3 - Interview with Martin Cunningham. Exhibit. 4 - Bodycam footage of Alexander Burrows. Subpart 5. Narrative. The case against Martin Cunningham was forwarded to the District Attorney’s Office on grounds that the Defendant had violated San Andreas laws including Negligence of Duty & Furnishing/Attempting to Furnish Another With a Firearm . The Prosecution wishes that the court review the evidence held against the defendant, and come to a swift judgment regarding the allegations against them. Subpart 6. Recommendation. Parole Recommendation After Release No Grant Early Release Yes Release on Bail Yes Two Thousand Dollars Subpart 7. Declaration. I, A. McGinnis, District Attorney for San Andreas affirm that the foregoing is accurate and true to the best of my knowledge and belief. (( @ThatGuy @Urshankov @bartman @BremboBG ))
  12. *Justice MacIntyre enters the courtroom, taking his seat before banging his gavel* "Are all parties present?" (( @JameZ @Zebulon ))
  13. *Justice MacIntyre nods before turning to the defence seating* "Does the defence wish to begin their cross examination of the witness?" (( @JameZ ))
  14. EvilScotsman

    [STATE] The People v. Leo Carter [10/25]

    "Apologies your honour, the vehicle was seized until this trial had concluded then will be released to the owner of the vehicle." (( @Urshankov ))
  15. "Very well, would Officer Rodriquez please come to the stand." (( @mariuszxcv ))
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and follow our Guidelines.