[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]

The warning is there to inform yourself and current/future staff you have been told not to do a specific action in the future as the action in question is to the detriment of peoples enjoyment beyond what can be reasonably expected from normal gameplay.

I see no reason why this should be removed from your record as it is specificly informing you and others that you have committed the act listed, and have been told not to just run up and arrest the first person you see while searching for a suspect. 

Investigate, Confirm, Detain, Arrest.

@Doctor Internet

[Dan]

The warning is there to inform yourself and current/future staff you have been told not to do a specific action in the future as the action in question is to the detriment of peoples enjoyment beyond what can be reasonably expected from normal gameplay.

I see no reason why this should be removed from your record as it is specificly informing you and others that you have committed the act listed, and have been told not to just run up and arrest the first person you see while searching for a suspect. 

Investigate, Confirm, Detain, Arrest.

@Doctor Internet

This is in character. Why should this show up on my permanent out of character record if it breaks no rules?

[BlackDog]

From what i recall you arrested the first person you saw without evidence to prove they we're infact the person you we're looking for.

3.3: Failure to Roleplay


In the future if you feel a person is a suspect, detain them, check their claims, and investigate them, if you can confirm they are infact your criminal,then arrest them.

The warning is there to remind you,Current/Future staff you have been told to not do the action in question, and that should you do it again, you have already been talked to about it, so they can act accoringdly 

To sum up:

Your actions were to the detriment of peoples enjoyment/Roleplay beyond what can be reasonably expected from normal gameplay.

You we're Roleplaying as a police officer, and arrested the first person you saw whom you felt was the suspect, without investigating their claims to the opposite.

In the future: Investigate, Confirm, Detain, Arrest.

I have nothing more to really say on this situation, the amount of time that has passed has made the acquisition of the finer details in the case impossible unless a video of the situation can be found.

As Dr.Internet appears to be handleing the case I turn the floor to over to him for his decision.

@Doctor Internet

Edit: Should those handling the case require any information and what not feel free to contact me on steam

[Doctor Internet]

I actually passed this case over to @Overlewd, so we await his judgement.

[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.