[Dan]

Your Name: Dan

Warning ID: 3239

Issued by: Blackdog

Reason: 
When searching fora suspect, do not just arrest the first person you see without any RP what so ever

Why should it be removed?: 
Previous appeal:

I was in pursuit of a white Dodge Charger and lost sight of it. Myself and @IVIrCheetham split up on Grant Ave to search for the suspect's vehicle. I spotted it on Century St stuck on a curb. When I pulled up to him with my lights on, I blipped the siren, as he was trying to free himself from the curb. He got out and tried to free his vehicle with a prop. As he was doing this, in combination with him trying to drive his vehicle off the curb, I presumed him as trying to flee from me, so he must have been my suspect in my mind. I arrested him for the charges that I thought belonged to him. I was later informed by @BlackDog that this was not my suspect. There was another white Dodge Charger (I did not get the license plate on the one I was chasing), which was the suspect which I should have been looking for. There was no way for me to know that I had the wrong person. There is no rule about 'random arrest', but the whole situation should have been dealt with in-character. I made an in-character mistake of arresting the wrong person, and instead of getting staff involved in the situation, the victim should have brought the arrest up with my sergeant or the president. There was no reason for staff to get involved with an in-character situation.

My last appeal was denied with no information as to what rule I had broken. Everything that Blackdog stated on my last appeal is IN-CHARACTER procedures ("Investigate, Confirm, Detain, Arrest."). There is no such thing as a random arrest. Like I said in my last appeal, there was no way for me to know I had the wrong suspect, and he was falsely arrested, HOWEVER this should have been dealt with completely in-character. The victim should have spoken with my supervisor. No staff involvement was necessary on this completely in-character situation.

If this gets denied, please state the rule I broke.

Evidence:

[Doctor Internet]

The staff member who issued the warning is no longer with us, so this may take longer than normal. I will attempt to gain the input of the staff member however.

[BlackDog]

[Dan]

[BlackDog]

[Doctor Internet]

[Dan]

I thought I had the right suspect. False arrests should be dealt with in character.
Talk. To. The. Chief.

[Overlewd]

Being discussed.

[Dan]

Thorough discussion eh

[Overlewd]

After some discussion, will remove the warning, partly as it's been a while, partly because it's hard to judge a situation as subjective as this without more evidence, and partly as an apology for completely forgetting about this appeal. Though you should have bumped it sooner really.

This does not however mean you were fault-free in this incident. If you do not have information like a license plate to know beyond a reasonable doubt that the person you are chasing is the suspect you are looking for, you should put more effort into investigating. It is not uncommon for people to drive the same vehicle, especially Dodge Chargers back then. IC incompetence past a certain level can be considered being malicious or as FailRP, keep that in mind.