Action Request (Curak) on behalf of Segeco

[Samジ]

Your Steam Name: Samジ
Your Roleplay Name: Anna Morales
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:80659775

Player's Steam Name: Segeco
Player's Roleplay Name: Peter Sharinglot
Player's SteamID: STEAM_0:1:72214944

Why should this player be punished?: This player should be punished as he broke 2.5 as a tfu officer this player thinks its a good idea to shoot an unarmed civillian who was on the phone to 911 I was in a public car park and i was unarmed this player needs to explain why he killed me as i was crouching and in the middle of a public car park so he needs to explain why he killed a civillian here are two videos where you can see both perspectives

Evidence Link:

 

[flugs]

I would prefer if you'd have responded to the action request already open rather than making a whole new one. If @curak has broken the rules in this situation then I am perfectly able to judge that from the original post, however, the additional footage is appreciated.

@curak - Can you reiterate why you decided to shoot him?

 

[curak]

As you can see from my POV a shootout has been going on for a solid 2mins. When we drove past him he never even tried contacting me, as you can see he's indeed calling 911 however no one is answering it, so no way i could know he wasn't involved. In the first clip he used (my pov). Kay told me to watchout for them two at the office parking lot. I took a glanse around the corner and saw him there and decided to shoot him. I highly believed he was involved due to him failing to surrender when given the opportunity as well as officers had died at office, and them two where the only two civilians i've seen in the near vicinity. Him being unarmed is also completly false:

You dropped a gun on death.
Believe me i didn't want to shoot him but a splitsecond decision ended up in him dying, from previous shootouts of me encountering such non involved individuals. Also from my POV you can see me checking him look longer than from his pov. I believe he shouldn't have ran out in the middle of a shootout and should've tried more to perserve his life.

 

[Samジ]

As you can see from my POV a shootout has been going on for a solid 2mins. When we drove past him he never even tried contacting me, as you can see he's indeed calling 911 however no one is answering it, so no way i could know he wasn't involved. In the first clip he used (my pov). Kay told me to watchout for them two at the office parking lot. I took a glanse around the corner and saw him there and decided to shoot him. I highly believed he was involved due to him failing to surrender when given the opportunity as well as officers had died at office, and them two where the only two civilians i've seen in the near vicinity. Him being unarmed is also completly false:

You dropped a gun on death.
Believe me i didn't want to shoot him but a splitsecond decision ended up in him dying, from previous shootouts of me encountering such non involved individuals. Also from my POV you can see me checking him look longer than from his pov. I believe he shouldn't have ran out in the middle of a shootout and should've tried more to perserve his life.

So regardless of weather he had a gun on him or not he didn't have one in his hands that's not a good enough reason to shoot him you cant kill someone for suspicion of being involved he was in office car park and you shot him because you suspected him of being involved but he didn't have a gun out so you should have gone up to him and spoke to him you broke the rules and shot him for no good reason as he wasn't a threat or a gunman nothing yea maybe had a gun unequipped but that doesn't give you the right to kill him for standing in the street you broke the rules unless you can prove you shot him for a reason which you cant because he wasn't a danger didn't have a gun out if shooting someone for being on the phone in public is allowed then my bad but imp pretty sure you cant do that so you need to be punished.

 

[curak]

You seem to be defending yourself for standing in the middle of the road cause you were crouched on a call with 911. However no-one had answered your call so none of the cops alive had any idea you were trying to reach them. you decided it was a smart idea to go be in the open during a shootout, calling someone on the phone. From my POV i cannot know who you're calling, for all i know you're relaying officers positions towards your friends raiding the bank. You should've stayed hidden, made a text-based 911 call, cause no one was answering your call and surrender. Surrendering really shows us that you aren't a part of the shootout. Ducking somewhere inthe open with a phone out doesn't.

 

[matt]

So regardless of weather he had a gun on him or not he didn't have one in his hands that's not a good enough reason to shoot him you cant kill someone for suspicion of being involved he was in office car park and you shot him because you suspected him of being involved but he didn't have a gun out so you should have gone up to him and spoke to him you broke the rules and shot him for no good reason as he wasn't a threat or a gunman nothing yea maybe had a gun unequipped but that doesn't give you the right to kill him for standing in the street you broke the rules unless you can prove you shot him for a reason which you cant because he wasn't a danger didn't have a gun out if shooting someone for being on the phone in public is allowed then my bad but imp pretty sure you cant do that so you need to be punished.

As you are posting this on behalf of someone the replies should also be written by said involved user. You frequently refer to Segeco as “he” and “him” - in future please allow Segeco to write the replies, as non-involved users are prohibited from commenting on AR’s in which they aren’t involved.

 

[flugs]

https://perpheads.com/threads/action-request-curak-on-behalf-of-segeco.49112/