IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF RIDGEWAY
State of Ridgeway
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
DOCKET NO. RSC-CV-531
Prosecution
against,
kaikjs
Accused
MOTION TO STRIKE
Comes forth the Accused in this case, requesting that Exhibits B, C, D, H and G.
INTRODUCTION
On the 13th of July, 2022, after a true bill of indictment was returned by the grand-jury,
the accused was charged with 42 counts. On the 14th of June, 2022, the prosecutor assigned, Mr
DavidLClarke filed the State’s discovery document. The aforementioned Exhibits are irrelevant
in nature. Exhibit G is also prejudicial by nature. This prejudice highly outweighs the probative
value of the document, and thus must be excluded.
ARGUMENT
I. EXHIBITS B-D AND H IS NOT RELEVANT AND THEREFORE MUST BE
EXCLUDED FROM ADMISSION
Antecedent to admission of evidence, a determination must be undergone to ensure that
evidence adheres to the rules of evidence. The rules of evidence forbids the admission of
evidence that is irrelevant. See Rid. R. of Evid. Rule 11 (“Irrelevant evidence is not
admissible.”). The test for relevance is not a hard nor nebulous one. The party that proffers the
evidence to prove a fact must show that “1) it has any tendency to make a fact more or less
probable than it would be without the evidence; and 2) the fact is of consequence in determining
the action.” See Rid. R. Evid. Rule 10(1-2).
To determine which fact each Exhibit is being proffered to prove, it becomes necessary to
look to the State’s discovery document. Exhibit B is listed as “[accused] Discussing Dealing
Method and Other [sic] over VC.” Based on this description it appears that Exhibit B is being
proffered to make the, alleged, fact that the accused dealt more likely. However, there is no solid
way to identify the speaker in Exhibit B. Thus, Exhibit B cannot serve any real purpose in
making facts more or less probable. It merely shows that someone decided to say they were
dealing. Exhibits C and D fall within the same parameters as Exhibit B. They all are proffered to
make the fact that the accused committed the, alleged, crimes; however, they do not make
anything more or less likely. Thus, the aforementioned Exhibits must be struck.
Exhibit H posits its own issues with relevance, however the same basis applies. Exhibit H
is a recording of a voice call with what appears to be the defendant, however, there is no
indication that the identity seen to be streaming is truly the Defendant. Secondly, there is no way
of telling what account is being utilized by the mystery discord user. For these two reasons,
Exhibit H does not make anything more or less likely, and thus is not relevant.
II. EXHIBIT G OUGHT TO ALSO BE STUCK
Exhibit G is a police report from the State Bureau of Intelligence (SBI), regarding the
aforementioned issues. This report does not make anything more or less likely either. It merely
shows the action was investigated—which is standard practice.
However, if this Court was to find that Exhibit G is relevant to the case at hand, it still
ought to also be struck. The Ridgeway Rules of Evidence provide that “The court may exclude
relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of
the following: unfair prejudice.” See Rule 22. Exhibit G creates unfair prejudice as it induces
guilt, despite it not being fully proven the the prosecution. It creates prejudice that exceeds it's
probative value.
This idea is nothing new to our judicial system. Striking police reports has been common
practice. See State of Ridgeway v InfinityTurtleXD, RSC-CM-350 (2022); State of Ridgeway v.
mIssfire, RSC-CM-436 (2022)
CONCLUSION
For the forgoing reasons, we respectfully petition that the court deny pre-admittance to the
aforementioned exhibits.
Respectfully Submitted,
/s/ HolyRomanRyan
HolyRomanRyan,
Attorney At Law
R.W. Bar # 17105
Ryan!#8903
