Attorney General Uriel Whitlock

CR 24845
CR 24692
CR 24002
CR 23866
CR 21548

I replied to you multiple times asking for the photos from these. We even had a phone call about this. You said you would get them to me.

As previously stated, I am locked out of evidence lockers from your side.

I've attached above what I can see in each report and 0 of these have the evidence locker provided. Some in the report even say Evidence: and then it is blank.

They are attached to the investigation 4639.

Attorney General Uriel Whitlock A photo from afar doesn't show me anything about the guns

They've been updated.

Results of the Pre-trial Hearing

Motion to Dismiss is denied in-part. Please see the dismissed bail conditions and court order here: https://docket.unscripted.gg/d/103-snowman-chill

Motion for Suppression of Evidence Based on Fourth Amendment Violations is denied in-full. This Court does agree with the State that the warrant is needed. The exigency is believed to be done in-good faith, and that while the properties were harder to get into, it is not impossible. Along with direction from the Justices of the Dep. of Justice, this exigency is valid.

Motion for Probable Cause Hearing has been heard. This Court finds that Probable Cause exists for the following charges:

2x Battery against an LEO
1x Evading
1x Failure to stop
1x Weapon Trafficking
1x Manufacturing of Weaponry

This Court does not find Probable Cause in the following Charge:
1x Reckless Endangerment

This Court does not consider LEOs into the charge, nor was there substantiation or any evidence granted that further lives were put at risk due to Mr. Chill's driving.

This will proceed to trial.

SO ORDERED.

Here is the link for the full trial: https://docket.unscripted.gg/d/160-state-v-chill-hut

Please complete the availability link within 72 hours. It is the responsibility of the lawyers/DAO/AOs involved to ensure all necessary individuals have provided their availability to the court.

@Ferst Temple @Attorney General Uriel Whitlock @Theodore Lars @580 A. Sharpe

Availability added.

It looks like both sides of this case are on the opposite schedule and neither side carries a majority for scheduling. In looking at the reports listed in the filing, the search warrant was started around 4am ET and the investigation started around 8am ET. The Defense is available around this time, but the State is not.

@Ferst Temple @Attorney General Uriel Whitlock @580 A. Sharpe @Theodore Lars

Ferst Temple Also noting for the reference, Harold has since changed his legal name to Harold Halloway, so we will be calling him as one of the witnesses (listed as Harold Finklebottom)

Ferst Temple

Approved, but we will not be scheduling the case around them. If it's necessary we can depose or get affidavits for them.

I will note here for the court that Elmer Quirk is confirmed missing, assumed deceased as was discussed during the PC hearing.

Attorney General Uriel Whitlock

Is the State still pursuing these charges without his testimony at trial?

M. Sparks Yes Your Honor, the State has deputies Leah Evans and Arthur Sharpe as witnesses.

We would ask at this time for evidence to be provided as to Captain Quirk's missing status. He is a key witness in this case, with a large bulk of the evidence provided relying on his testimony.

My client deserves the right to face his accuser, and we would ask for that right in court.

A rebuttal from my end for the above.

Snowman Chill's accuser is not Elmer Quirk, it is the State. Sergeants Arthur Sharpe and Leah Evans are there to provide testimony on the behalf of all established work done by Captain Elmer Quirk.

As Sergeant Sharpe believes his testimony, along with Leah Evans will stand on their own as per the rebuttal. We move for the following.

Motion to suppress evidence
We move to suppress and strike from the record any and all reports written by Captain Elmer Quirk in relation to this case.
Specifically, reports 4639 and 4637. These reports are filled with eyewitness testimony that we would otherwise wish to challenge in a court of law to prove my client's innocence.

REBUTTAL TO MOTION TO SUPPRESS

Both Arthur Sharpe and Leah Evans have first hand knowledge of all the events included in these reports. The assertion that they are filled with "eyewitness testimony" only attested to by Elmer Quirk is unfounded. The State asks that the court reject this motion outright and questions why we are duplicating motions already made at the pretrial hearing that were overturned by the Judiciary.