[CLOSED] LCPD Deputy Chief Steve Seagal

ARPD IV:MP - Complaints Section
1

1. Your full Roleplay name:
Dav Nixon

2. LCPD Officers’ name & rank:
Steven Seagal
LCPD Deputy Chief

3. Time and date of the incident:
4:40PM
6/15/2019

4. Short description of the incident:
I tried to solve my complain with a simple talk with officer Mac but after I failed to find justice I had to do this.

The incident occured on my patrol, while I tried to pull over a guy who was driving with his vehicle on high speeds (120kmh+ city side), changing lanes like maniac and ignoring my megaphone calls I rushed and suspected him as fast as I could in order take him out of his vehicle and secure that no one will get hurt.

In my rush I used /su reckless driving, while I could use ‘ts evade’ as they informed me but the point still the same,
I had to deal with a guy who was putting in danger every single citizen on the road.

Laws that the suspect has broke before being suspected

And with all the above facts, we come to the momment that I was on a pursuit against the suspect as he was trying to escape from the police stop,
suddenly officer named Steve appeared without being involved into the scene and was not aware of what was going on and unsuspected the guy as ‘invalid’ blaming me that ‘I should pull him over and write him a ticket’ without even comming in contact with me via police radio and avoiding any roleplay intention to solve the confusion

My point is that yeah, technicaly the fact that the reason was reckles driving instead of ts evade is a true fact, but telling me that I should pull him over and write a ticket without even asking about the situation and taking acts this randomly it’s atleast unethical in my eyes, especialy if you blame the freecop for this.

Officer Steve could handle it way more proffesionaly and in a way that could be involved in a roleplay instead of just ‘invalid’ while we was clearly on pursuit
and the suspect was clearly braking the laws. A small typo mistake doesn’t mean that the law brake hasn’t commited, Please take care!

5. Witness(es):
MadMike aka UC (Real name will be remain covered for obvious reasons)

6. Evidence(s):

And after 5 minutes we were already in pursuit and suspect was already trying to evade
suddenly unsuspected..

Signed,
Dav_Nixon

2

Friendly greetings,

I am Captain Peter Kovacs and I will be taking your report.
Before proceeding, the dashcam footage provided in this case is heavily distorted to where I cannot get an entire aspect of what happened. However that doesn’t mean the report cannot go on. I am awaiting a statement from Deputy Chief Steven Seagal.

3

Greetings,

The reason was indeed wrong, nothing refrained you to re-suspect your target again fixing the reason upon given instructions from the higher ranked though. You instead found better to threat me with the following statement: “I don’t want to argue with you, Do not again.” instead of talking me about any roleplay scene you were conducting, I find this pretty unethical too. I would also like to add that the improper usage of a command doesn’t include any roleplay.

4

Greetings

Mr. Steven, I would like to apologise if you though that the way I responded to you was rude, but instead I would like to point out that you should
consider your actions too, I neither flamed you neither said something bad beside that I don’t want to argue with you.

And only because I knew that what you did was an rushed judge without giving any oportunity to your fellow officer to respond for the
‘invalid reason’, so believe me, I was more insulted than you with what happend, it’s my first time I have to deal with something like this.

Taking as fact that it could be more valid and without a problem to respond via our radio and inform me of what is going on
you instead decided that it’s better solution to unsuspect the ongoing pursuit and with the only respond ‘next time pull over, and write ticket’

After this you already have destroyed our ongoing roleplay and I lost my interested to re-suspect as you saying above. as I found it
uncessary measure, and somehow out of place. Everything could be cleared out in an investigation or even beter on a simple communication on our radio

Greetings to Peter Kovacs

Evidence of the pursuit are missing due to a problem of my dashcam, but there is no doubts that what I said is absolutly true and without
anything extra sauces in it.

Let me clear out that I’m not looking for any punishment or anything beside that you must start considering the cooporation with your fellow officers
even in the cases that there is an invalid reason, you MUST! still take a full idea of what’s going on before you take any judgments this is all I’m looking for
In the end, did you understand that you marked a suspect that broke every single law as an invalid over a single typo?

If you feel proud for this action or anyone who taking part in this case feeling that this thing was absolutely handled with the best solution
then please withdraw my complaint.

Dav Nixon

5

I didn’t say I felt insulted, I said that there was no reasonable attitude coming from you toward me in radio. You’re turning this into a useless drama which could have been solved right on the moment telling me that you just mistaken reason and fixing the reason through re-suspecting the target again with the right reason.

6

Greetings Dav,

I am Sergeant Mac Tylor, and I do have permission from command staff to reply here.

Alright so let me again explain to you in more clear way what I already explained in the office at DPD, today..

There are two situations :

First one :

A normal civilian reckless driving on the road, and a cop passes by and immediately suspects him for reckless driving without any attempts to pull him over..(And yes, we have seen many cops doing that before, and we take the same actions every time.)
So another high ranked cop immediately un-suspects him and points out the mistake over the radio.
after that the cop fixes his mistake and instead pulls the suspect over, instead of suspecting him..

Okay, that is for the first situation and how should both of the normal cop and the high ranked cops do..

For the Normal cop, he should immediately fix his mistake after being told about, and not ignoring it nor execusing it with “Lost Interest in pulling him over” that could put that cop in an internal affairs investigation for his misconduct (roleplayly or would have been reported to admins since freecops are under administration team) anyways, If the cop left that reckless driver without pulling him over after the unsuspection, then that cop is abusing his duty, and not working properly..but the traffic offense should be punished by a ticket as soon as possible and not ignoring it..

For the high ranked who responded immediately and un-suspected him without asking for any explanations over the radio, is a right action from his side..why? let me state the answer in points..

Let’s assume the cop or the free cop who suspected the other driver for reckless driving is new to the police duty and new to the whole server, what would he do once he find a suspect? He will only kills him, right? or what do you think? When you were newplayer and firstly joined the server/police, any suspect you see, you would only shoot him down? why ? because he is a suspect…That free cop (who is new to the server and duty) is not aware of the LCPD procedures that says we should warn and bla bla..

Then the freecop would shoot the suspect without warnings or anything..
now to the upper situation, if the high ranked didn’t respond immediately and didn’t /cs, what would have happened if that freecop is new? he would have killed him which may ends up that the suspect who got false suspected raging out in the main chat..whose mistake? it is the high ranked cop’s mistake and not the freecop..why? Freecops can do mistakes yes, we all do mistakes..but for the high ranked who is well experienced, he should have un suspected immediately to avoid that whole drama..and then ask for explanations over the radio or guide the freecop to a better solution…

That is for the first situation, for the second situation, the same thing would happen but only difference is that the freecop attempted to pull him over but the other driver didn’t stop, and then the freecop suspected that driver for reckless driving instead of evading TS..
And that is our case here..Yes, mistakes may happen at anytime, but why are the high ranked cops here? to solve those problems, fix those mistakes immediately and guide/help the freecops in their careers, right?

I would have done the same if I were steven..why?
Because..

  1. You are new to us, we haven’t seen you before, hence we think that you are just new to the police duty and a freecop who is not aware of all situations and such just same as the situation one I told you about above..
  2. Our thoughts will immediately be the same as the first situation..you are new to us, you are new to the cop duty hence, you may shoot the suspect immediately, and maybe the suspect is innoncent..but who knows?
  3. I would immediately un-suspect just to avoid that mistake from happening.

At the end, What you should have done are the following :

  • Re-suspect the person for evading TS instead of giving up on catching him which may result in troubles for you for not chasing a suspect.
  • Explain over the radio that it was suspecting reason mistake..nothing would happen, wouldn’t it?

There is no need for this whole thingy for just a very small thing…

Stevens’s actions are reasonable, he did that just to avoid what would happen as stated in the first situation, nothing more..

I hope you understand us, and understand this reply..there is nothing against you personally, we are all here to just have fun doing our careers…and a personal advice and I hope you don’t understand it wrong..if we are going to stand for every and each small thing we all do, then nothing will work out fine..there should be team work..someone did a mistake? whoever is able to help and fix that mistake immediately will do..that’s it..he only tried to fix your mistake..you know that the other driver could really take you to the court which may result in a fine and revoking your badge too? You can check the court on main forums to see old and similar cases..
So now he is wrong because he tried to fix that small mistake?

That’s all for now, thanks for ready, apologise if it is too long..

7

Greetings Mac

I can’t hide my dissapointment over your luck of seeing the situation of the both sides, the only think I see is that you trying to cover the Steven side
ignoring the fact that he acted by hiself without noting any of active officers, and without informing us to ‘re-suspect due of invalid reason’

As I mentioned to you, his respond was ‘next time, pull over and write ticket’ excuse me but if I’m not wrong he clearly said
‘next time’ and never said or asked of the ongoing situation he just responded without having a full idea of the situation, can’t you see this?

One last think to take note, the reckles driving is stated as traffic law, but compining it with rejecting police calls, speeding dangerously, and in general
putting in risk the citizen life can’t be taken anymore as invalid even if it’s statement as ‘reckles driver’ it’s totaly valid and explains clearly the reason of the suspection.

Nothing personal with you either Officer Mac, I higly respecting you but from in game to forum response you clearly pointed only to my
mistakes witch I accepted them, and never responded to officer Steven and his rushed actions.

I believe and no one will change my mind that Officer Steven could enforce this situation in a different propier way and
as fast you will realise this the case will close as simple as that.

Dav Nixon

8

Hello Dav,

This is Jack Parker the Chief of Liberty City Police, I have been reviewing this issue. Firstly welcome as a newcomer, we do highly like to see fellow freecops patrolling and protecting the streets of Liberty City, well done :slight_smile:

Now on this issue being raised, as I learn that Deputy Chief Steven has unsuspected the suspect as ‘invalid’, your reason has not been clearly stated as using the /su command properly, as LCPD standards do state using the megaphone 3 warning signals to pull over the driver and you must state clearly what the reason is, as ‘wreckless driving’ is a invalid term in this issue as that is a offence under the Ticketing system, you may read more in the link: http://arpd.argonathrpg.com/forum/index.php?topic=36683.msg330067#msg330067

My suggestion in future for your terms to be clearer and precise is to state “failure to pull over” if the driver has continued to avoid multiple warning signals with your sirens/megaphone as this will help our experienced Officers understand the situation more smoother and this matter would not have triggered.

As experienced Officers, we have this issue time to time when on most occasions on newcomers, use the in-valid terms for suspecting drivers as similar to your instance which can bring many issues and further so on… Yes this ‘driver’ may have broken the law and such, but this means that it needs to be a precise reason for all other Officers to respond is appropriately termed.

I understand that Steven may not have handled this issue to your satisfaction, this is a common problem as it’s happened many times in the past, I’m aware of many Officers understand why, this why the /cs decision was made instantly. I would suggest a chat with Steven asking why was decided or any LCPD Command Staff could in fact help understand this issue.

To take action to this issue your concerned with, I will be adding how to use the /su command to this topic, for any future newcomers: http://arpd.argonathrpg.com/forum/index.php?topic=37225.0 and remind Staff with the /cs problem. This does not mean our Officers have made the wrong decision, this is due to the terms of misunderstanding the problem of occurrence.

Regards,
Jack Parker
LCPD Chief of Police

9

Greetings Jack Parker

Thanks for your responding, please withdraw my complaint

10

Friendly greetings once again,

With the explanation given by Chief Jack Parker, are both parties satisfied with current situation ?

11

Complaint withdrawn.