Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Brett last won the day on June 24 2017

Brett had the most liked content!


About Brett

  • Rank
    Veteran Member
  • Birthday 05/22/1998

MTA Information

  • MTA Account
  • Factions
    Superior Court of San Andreas
    San Andreas National Guard
  • Characters
    Greg Joplin
    Brett Kingsley
    Calil Wilson
    Jason Gordon
    Jannet Premble

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    United States of America
  • Interests
    Politics - Self-Explanatory
    Law - Attorney
  • Occupation
    Soldier in Army National Guard

Contact Methods

  • Skype

Recent Profile Visitors

3,344 profile views
  1. "Plea of VC021 and 1,000$ fine confirmed from the defense." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon @Cosa @Alfredas ))
  2. "Your honor, If there was factual evidence behind the prosecutions claim, then he wouldn't need to question it and could point to his own narratives and evidence provided at the beginning of this trial. So what someone is driving faster then the posted limit, in the same direction, next to each other? What does this prove? Are we also going to start charging people with being accessory to murder because they along with the murderer walked into the same establishment at the same time? I repeat my original objection that the prosecution is testifying, by claiming that the officer did indeed witness something the officer himself has denied and using this false pretense to question my client in this manner." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))
  3. "And further your honor, If the prosecution wishes to make a case for a simple speeding infraction, he is free to amend his charges to reflect that. However, speeding alone does not constitute the mens reas for our charges in anyway, and as there was no overtaking, no rewards being given out, or anything indicating this was planned, this question will merely serve to prove absolutely nothing other then that my clients were indeed travelling above posted limits. It's irrelevant your honor, and clearly just shows how poorly prepared the prosecution was for this case, more so then actually add anything substantial to the findings." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))
  4. "Your honor, objection. The prosecution is attempting to testify. The officer in my cross-examination clearly stated that he did not see them attempting to overtake each other, and thus the prosecution is arguing a false assumption he personally is making up." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon - This post for a link. ))
  5. "Your honor, I repeat my earlier objection that this line of questioning is not at all relevent to the events of the day in question, and seems to be jumping from various unrelated factors. I stand by my statements." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))
  6. "Your honor, objection. What is the relevance of this question? We went from a relationship between two people, to a conviction record? Does the prosecution have any point here?" (( @Zebulon @ThatGuy @Alfredas ))
  7. "In this kangaroo court? Go right ahead." (( @Zebulon @Zebulon ))
  8. "Objection your honor, Information of the crime, is irrelevant if the information does not hold to a standard of evidence for the charges pressed which this doesn't. And unless the prosecution has some quick and speedy evidence to pull out of thin air that does that, then this is a waste of the courts and my clients time. And on a quick side note, my hidden evidence comment was in regards to a question for the prosecution about what makes him believe beyond a reasonable doubt that street racing did occur, that so far I have proven to be lackluster. If this had been presented before, then it wouldn't be hidden evidence, your honor." (( @Zebulon @ThatGuy ))
  9. "Your honor, the prosecution is clutching at straws here. We arn't arguing VC021, and if that was the case then why can't this officer state that? What's being charged today is Traffic Felony Street Competition, which requires premeditation. And if what the prosecution says is true, why is this not any any of the narratives? Is the prosecution attempting to hide some hidden evidence we can't see? Your honor-...this is not the standard of how we conduct trials in this country. And I apologize is my language at the end to describe a report was a little "vulgar," it was none-the-less an accurate description and served to prove a point. I still continue my motion for summary judgement your honor." (( @Zebulon @ThatGuy ))
  10. *Calil Wilson sighs, as he shakes his head while looking at the officer.* "Officer, that statement holds as much weight as me claiming to be a police officer without actually wearing or possessing a badge. You're pretty much saying that you have some probable cause, yet cannot seem to provide such probable cause. And I know for a fact from the evidence presented that when you approached the very first vehicle, you were intent on charging them with street race, and your own testimony confirms it." *Calil Wilson would look to the judge, as he wipes off his glasses.* Your honor, I have no further questions for this witness and after this piss poor testimony from the leading officer, I honestly cannot see any reason to even attempt to argue against charges that are completely baseless and incomplete. Your honor, I motion for summary judgement of my clients, and to end this charade of misjustice that has been brought against them. It's a shame that an officer cannot even identify his own probable cause that is crucial to the prosecutions claim, and this court should not tolerate such a miscarriage of justice. And it is also a shame how the District Attorney's office has completely failed in it's duties of carrying out the dutiful process of criminal procedure, while also objecting throughout the entire process with baseless objections that had no basis in legal theory. Although I will not be using this time to call for a complete review of the prosecution's State Bar licensing, I will nonetheless call out his poor judgement in not actually having a mens rea for these charges, and failing to correct them after seeing the initial evidence from this officer who clearly does not even understand the basics of a simple question of explanation. I rest my case." (( @ThatGuy @Zebulon @Squirdo ))
  11. "Officer...I'm not asking you what we already can see in this court, I am asking you based on your experience and professional opinion at the time, of what lead you to believing that this event was pre-meditated? Please answer this question." (( @Squirdo @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))
  12. "Again officer, I ask again. What evidence do you have that this was pre-mediated?" (( @Squirdo @ThatGuy @Zebulon ))
  13. *Calil Wilson would turn from the officer to the district attorney and sigh.* "By asking an officer to determine how exactly he found out this was pre-determined with evidence, is fruit of a poisonous tree now? Have you read the narrative? The only thing it supports is a speeding violation, not a street race. And if we look at exhibit four, the officer on the scene clearly states that their under arrest for felony street competition. " (( @Zebulon @Franco @Alfredas @Cosa @Squirdo ))
  14. "Your honor...the officers professional judgement on the scene is critical in this case, as it was the officer who made the arrest and who decided to arrest them for street racing. If the officer cannot provide a lawful reason as to why the determination was made, then the District Attorney's Office case is in severe jeopardy and if I could put the District Attorney himself on the stand to answer these questions, I would, but that's not how the procedure works. The officer made the arrest, and thus he should be able to answer these basic questions. Period." (( @Zebulon @Franco @Alfredas @Cosa @Squirdo ))
  15. "Then officer, what evidence do you have that this was a pre-meditated?" (( @Zebulon @Franco @Alfredas @Cosa @Squirdo ))

Important Information

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