Punishment Type: Warning
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @Efan
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: Not Applicable
Your Steam Name: McSnugget
Your Roleplay Name: Cynog-Llwyd Kringle
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:106373067
Why were you banned/blacklisted?: I was not.
Why should this appeal be considered?: As a police officer, Efan felt that I breached 4.1 when I charged him. I entirely disagree and please find a video attached of the situation as well as my justification and thoughts that I did not necessarily completely express due to the depth and quantity of them at the time. Also is a description of events and details of information. Please read and don't just watch the video.
An automated break-in incident was reported at Slums Apartment 2. Two officers arrived at the scene finding Efans car, a silver Tesla (7UE737G) parked with its engine running. A pink vehicle with the plate (MDCFVZ3) belonging to Ben Standish was also in the parking lot. There were no other vehicles parked at Slums. These facts were determined by officer Stevenson and told to me via radio.
Efan admitted that he did not live in any apartment within the Slums dwellings. Stating "I was taking a gun from my friend's apartment down to my car". When asked who his friend was he said Ben Standish. Ben was the property owner of Slums apartment 2 and Efan was aware of this. [This is an admission that Efan was inside of the burglarised property] When found in his property, Ben Standish was AFK, completely unresponsive and stood in a corner. He remained this way even when checked on at a later point.
I asked Efan why he lockpicked the door, he said he didn't and claimed to be unaware of who did, not providing any details of others he may have seen in the property. [As he is an alleged friend of the owner, he doesn’t seem concerned, or possibly capable of assisting our inquiry to not only prove his innocence or catch the person responsible.] Here, I asked Efan to prove to me that he has keys to the property. This would indicate clearly that Efan was permitted to be inside of the property. Efan said he didn't have keys. [It was here I placed him under arrest for 11.11 Aggravated Burglary. [Take note that according to him, he was taking a gun from Slums 2 to his car. This takes an incredibly short period of time and from his own words, places him inside of the apartment around when the burglar alarm was activated).
To clarify, according to the Paralake Penal Code, an arrest may be performed when or by probable cause a person has been suspected of committing a crime for information to be gathered. This is not confirmation of guilt. Furthermore, see section 1's definition of probable cause:
To have knowledge with facts that it is more likely than not that a criminal offense has been committed and that, if presented with the same facts, a reasonable person would draw a similar conclusion.
To layout the information to this point:
- A burglar alarm went off at Slums 2 meaning a door had been opened through means of explosion, battering ram, or lock-picking tool
- There were only two vehicles in the car park suggesting there were likely only 2 parties of people inside of the apartments
- Efan had been inside of Slums 2
- Efan did not have keys for Slums 2
Efan knowing the name of the owner did not prove innocence, it is only an indication that the alleged attack may have been targeted if conducted by himself.
The statements found above imply that the front door to Slums 2 was unlocked if Efan had been inside without possessing keys or that the homeowner let him in but left the front door unlocked. This means the person who burgled (if not Efan) was already in the property when Efan was inside, attempted to access the bedroom or bathroom whilst Efan was inside of the property or when he was walking downstairs to his car, and between when the alarm went off and when Efan was detained, escaped without being seen in the 30 second gap. Furthermore, this occurred without Efan being aware of the fact there was an alarm as he later denies that Ben’s door was broken into. [It is highly unlikely that Efan did not hear or notice the alarm or the sound of a door being broken into. This series of events that derive from Efans alibi to me were unrealistic.]
Here I took Efan to the interrogation room to question him regarding the situation. I admit, he asked me if every other door was unlocked in the apartment block, I answered yes under the assumption the officers had checked as I arrived late although I did not know for certain which is not a lie. It is an unbased assumption. However, when I said this, Efan corrected me, stating Slums 4 was unlocked. He said that he had keys to Slums 4 but did not live in it, that is how he knew it was open. [This was information that did not necessarily contradict his previous statement but seemed peculiar that he failed to mention sooner.] I questioned him on how he knew he had keys. If he didn't know who owned it, his response was "I check my keys to see if they fit in the door". [What reasonable person goes between private dwellings, forcing their keys into the locks to “see if it fits in the door”? To reiterate, he was found with crowbars. A man with equipment to burgle is going around to doors, seeing if he has keys.].
In this conversation, I repeat the Ben Standish's door was broken into to which Efan says "No, it wasn't." He then asks were the doors checked to see which one was broken and I imply it is highly likely, the front door. Efan says "so it couldn't have been any of the inside doors, correct?". He then says "you've seen someone come out several minutes after the supposed burglar alarm has gone off"[This is incorrect as explained in the next sentence]. There was exactly 35 seconds between the incident generating and a radio call from officer Sahbabi.
My next question is asking where he got his gun from, something he stated earlier he got from Slums 2 and was taking to his car. His response this time is that he got it from his car. [This contradicts his previous statement which means he has now been untruthful in this investigation] Now I ask him where he was transporting it to and his statement was as follows: "Slums 4, where I had keys, where I knew I had keys because before I took my gun out, I went into the property, checked which ones I had keys to, thereafter went back to my car, took the gun out, went up to Slums 4, found someone inside, realized I didn't know who was inside but I had keys so I have to return to my vehicle. At which point, I was gunpointed (by police). [This further contradicts his original statements where he said the gun was from Slums 2, not Slums 4).
At this point I charged him with 11.11 Aggravated Burglary:
11.11 Aggravated Burglary
Any person who commits a burglary and at the time has with them any firearm or imitation firearm, any offensive weapon, or any explosive.
Felony - liable to 9 years maximum imprisonment, $9,000 maximum fine and asset forfeiture.
11.5 Burglary
Any person who enters a property or any part of a property with the intention to commit theft, cause unlawful damage or to inflict unlawful serious injury.
Felony - liable to 6 years maximum imprisonment, $6,000 maximum fine and asset forfeiture.
Efan was unable to maintain a non-volatile story that did not contradict with events he had previously mentioned and as such, failed to properly justify to a reasonable expectation the purpose for his entry to Slums 2, and attempts to gain access to other properties. The very fact his stories did not match shows an intent to deceive police regarding their investigation of the crime he was suspected of. One line of self-admission placed him within the location of an active burglar alarm with a blatant disagreement of its occurrence. Finally, as he was appropriately equipped to perform the actions he was suspected of. As burglary is concerned with the intent and not necessarily the actions, I felt that the burden of proof was met and did not require further investigation upon the moment of charging/sentencing.
Additional Information: I fully believe that the arrest was lawful and that my actions did not oppose laws 3.1 and 3.2, 3.7, 3.8, 4.2, 4.4, 4.6, 6.1, or 9.4 or any other I did not mention. I may be wrong but 4.1 is not meant to be used in situations like this anyway and is to be used when taxis evade police or Road Crew kill everyone. My “lie” was not malicious and was an in-correct assumption. I did not know if those doors were locked or unlocked which implies I cannot lie as I never knew the truth to begin with regarding them. The PLPD has an Internal Affairs system for a reason and if Efan felt my investigation was not thorough enough and that I did not have enough proof to charge it should have been handled in-character, regardless of his personal emotions in the situation. There were 3 police including myself on the server at that time and although, yes, I could have extended my investigation but I stand by it, I met the criteria to charge and didn't want to waste time extending resources beyond necessary with how limited we were.
I entirely object to the statement that I failed to follow the law.
Appeal Type: Dispute[Evidence]
Which staff member issued the punishment?: @Efan
How long were you banned/blacklisted for?: Not Applicable
Your Steam Name: McSnugget
Your Roleplay Name: Cynog-Llwyd Kringle
Your SteamID: STEAM_0:1:106373067
Why were you banned/blacklisted?: I was not.
Why should this appeal be considered?: As a police officer, Efan felt that I breached 4.1 when I charged him. I entirely disagree and please find a video attached of the situation as well as my justification and thoughts that I did not necessarily completely express due to the depth and quantity of them at the time. Also is a description of events and details of information. Please read and don't just watch the video.
An automated break-in incident was reported at Slums Apartment 2. Two officers arrived at the scene finding Efans car, a silver Tesla (7UE737G) parked with its engine running. A pink vehicle with the plate (MDCFVZ3) belonging to Ben Standish was also in the parking lot. There were no other vehicles parked at Slums. These facts were determined by officer Stevenson and told to me via radio.
Efan admitted that he did not live in any apartment within the Slums dwellings. Stating "I was taking a gun from my friend's apartment down to my car". When asked who his friend was he said Ben Standish. Ben was the property owner of Slums apartment 2 and Efan was aware of this. [This is an admission that Efan was inside of the burglarised property] When found in his property, Ben Standish was AFK, completely unresponsive and stood in a corner. He remained this way even when checked on at a later point.
I asked Efan why he lockpicked the door, he said he didn't and claimed to be unaware of who did, not providing any details of others he may have seen in the property. [As he is an alleged friend of the owner, he doesn’t seem concerned, or possibly capable of assisting our inquiry to not only prove his innocence or catch the person responsible.] Here, I asked Efan to prove to me that he has keys to the property. This would indicate clearly that Efan was permitted to be inside of the property. Efan said he didn't have keys. [It was here I placed him under arrest for 11.11 Aggravated Burglary. [Take note that according to him, he was taking a gun from Slums 2 to his car. This takes an incredibly short period of time and from his own words, places him inside of the apartment around when the burglar alarm was activated).
To clarify, according to the Paralake Penal Code, an arrest may be performed when or by probable cause a person has been suspected of committing a crime for information to be gathered. This is not confirmation of guilt. Furthermore, see section 1's definition of probable cause:
To have knowledge with facts that it is more likely than not that a criminal offense has been committed and that, if presented with the same facts, a reasonable person would draw a similar conclusion.
To layout the information to this point:
- A burglar alarm went off at Slums 2 meaning a door had been opened through means of explosion, battering ram, or lock-picking tool
- There were only two vehicles in the car park suggesting there were likely only 2 parties of people inside of the apartments
- Efan had been inside of Slums 2
- Efan did not have keys for Slums 2
Efan knowing the name of the owner did not prove innocence, it is only an indication that the alleged attack may have been targeted if conducted by himself.
The statements found above imply that the front door to Slums 2 was unlocked if Efan had been inside without possessing keys or that the homeowner let him in but left the front door unlocked. This means the person who burgled (if not Efan) was already in the property when Efan was inside, attempted to access the bedroom or bathroom whilst Efan was inside of the property or when he was walking downstairs to his car, and between when the alarm went off and when Efan was detained, escaped without being seen in the 30 second gap. Furthermore, this occurred without Efan being aware of the fact there was an alarm as he later denies that Ben’s door was broken into. [It is highly unlikely that Efan did not hear or notice the alarm or the sound of a door being broken into. This series of events that derive from Efans alibi to me were unrealistic.]
Here I took Efan to the interrogation room to question him regarding the situation. I admit, he asked me if every other door was unlocked in the apartment block, I answered yes under the assumption the officers had checked as I arrived late although I did not know for certain which is not a lie. It is an unbased assumption. However, when I said this, Efan corrected me, stating Slums 4 was unlocked. He said that he had keys to Slums 4 but did not live in it, that is how he knew it was open. [This was information that did not necessarily contradict his previous statement but seemed peculiar that he failed to mention sooner.] I questioned him on how he knew he had keys. If he didn't know who owned it, his response was "I check my keys to see if they fit in the door". [What reasonable person goes between private dwellings, forcing their keys into the locks to “see if it fits in the door”? To reiterate, he was found with crowbars. A man with equipment to burgle is going around to doors, seeing if he has keys.].
In this conversation, I repeat the Ben Standish's door was broken into to which Efan says "No, it wasn't." He then asks were the doors checked to see which one was broken and I imply it is highly likely, the front door. Efan says "so it couldn't have been any of the inside doors, correct?". He then says "you've seen someone come out several minutes after the supposed burglar alarm has gone off"[This is incorrect as explained in the next sentence]. There was exactly 35 seconds between the incident generating and a radio call from officer Sahbabi.
My next question is asking where he got his gun from, something he stated earlier he got from Slums 2 and was taking to his car. His response this time is that he got it from his car. [This contradicts his previous statement which means he has now been untruthful in this investigation] Now I ask him where he was transporting it to and his statement was as follows: "Slums 4, where I had keys, where I knew I had keys because before I took my gun out, I went into the property, checked which ones I had keys to, thereafter went back to my car, took the gun out, went up to Slums 4, found someone inside, realized I didn't know who was inside but I had keys so I have to return to my vehicle. At which point, I was gunpointed (by police). [This further contradicts his original statements where he said the gun was from Slums 2, not Slums 4).
At this point I charged him with 11.11 Aggravated Burglary:
11.11 Aggravated Burglary
Any person who commits a burglary and at the time has with them any firearm or imitation firearm, any offensive weapon, or any explosive.
Felony - liable to 9 years maximum imprisonment, $9,000 maximum fine and asset forfeiture.
11.5 Burglary
Any person who enters a property or any part of a property with the intention to commit theft, cause unlawful damage or to inflict unlawful serious injury.
Felony - liable to 6 years maximum imprisonment, $6,000 maximum fine and asset forfeiture.
Efan was unable to maintain a non-volatile story that did not contradict with events he had previously mentioned and as such, failed to properly justify to a reasonable expectation the purpose for his entry to Slums 2, and attempts to gain access to other properties. The very fact his stories did not match shows an intent to deceive police regarding their investigation of the crime he was suspected of. One line of self-admission placed him within the location of an active burglar alarm with a blatant disagreement of its occurrence. Finally, as he was appropriately equipped to perform the actions he was suspected of. As burglary is concerned with the intent and not necessarily the actions, I felt that the burden of proof was met and did not require further investigation upon the moment of charging/sentencing.
Additional Information: I fully believe that the arrest was lawful and that my actions did not oppose laws 3.1 and 3.2, 3.7, 3.8, 4.2, 4.4, 4.6, 6.1, or 9.4 or any other I did not mention. I may be wrong but 4.1 is not meant to be used in situations like this anyway and is to be used when taxis evade police or Road Crew kill everyone. My “lie” was not malicious and was an in-correct assumption. I did not know if those doors were locked or unlocked which implies I cannot lie as I never knew the truth to begin with regarding them. The PLPD has an Internal Affairs system for a reason and if Efan felt my investigation was not thorough enough and that I did not have enough proof to charge it should have been handled in-character, regardless of his personal emotions in the situation. There were 3 police including myself on the server at that time and although, yes, I could have extended my investigation but I stand by it, I met the criteria to charge and didn't want to waste time extending resources beyond necessary with how limited we were.
I entirely object to the statement that I failed to follow the law.
