San Andreas Police Department | Q&A

[Pingster]

If a lawyer is not acquirable, you are allowed by law to continue an investigation without one or if the suspect does not want one, jail them without an investigation.

What am I reading here?

1) If the suspect doesn't want a lawyer, they go straight to jail? I'm sure there's an error in the wording, if not, what is going on here? Since when is "may" equal to "must" (in regards to "you may ask for an attorney")?

2) By law, you are allowed to continue an investigation without a lawyer if there is none available? What law, I've never heard of this law, and quite frankly that's ignoring the rights of the citizen as far as the constitution goes.

3) (unrelated to the quote) - What is the status on a lawyer provided by state, who actually pays them?

Other than that, great work, Sushi!

[Huntsman]

ARPD Officer Regulations

1. Does that mean that the new rules will apply not only to SAPD staff?

I've noticed it too, and i wish to protest it. Why? I dont think SAPD Regulations should apply to ARPD Staff, only the common ARPD procedures, such as fire-arm usage , no suspect abuse and so on should limit ARPD Officers.

[Plam Knight]

ARPD Officer Regulations

1. Does that mean that the new rules will apply not only to SAPD staff?

I've noticed it too, and i wish to protest it. Why? I dont think SAPD Regulations should apply to ARPD Staff, only the common ARPD procedures, such as fire-arm usage , no suspect abuse and so on should limit ARPD Officers.

Truely I get mad, when after spending countless of hours writing, people fail to even read it.

Aren't you guy who was saying you have 100000 years experience around here ? Then use that experience of your and check those regulations/procedures for ARPD officers. WAIT A MINUTE they are actually same to what we sticked so far, just now they are wroten on paper :O.

ARPD Officer Regulations

1. Does that mean that the new rules will apply not only to SAPD staff?
2. I think SAPD staff(me for example) will need some time to carefully read and understand new rules, will they be enforced right away or we have some time?

1. please but really please READ the darn document and tell me which current ARPD rule differece from what was so far put as a server rule towards the ARPD officers ?
2. That's why its left open for a while, so you can read it until it gets approved.

If a lawyer is not acquirable, you are allowed by law to continue an investigation without one or if the suspect does not want one, jail them without an investigation.

What am I reading here?

1) If the suspect doesn't want a lawyer, they go straight to jail? I'm sure there's an error in the wording, if not, what is going on here? Since when is "may" equal to "must" (in regards to "you may ask for an attorney")?

2) By law, you are allowed to continue an investigation without a lawyer if there is none available? What law, I've never heard of this law, and quite frankly that's ignoring the rights of the citizen as far as the constitution goes.

3) (unrelated to the quote) - What is the status on a lawyer provided by state, who actually pays them?

Other than that, great work, Sushi!

Read it and read it again and notice sentence parts:

If a lawyer is not acquirable, you are allowed by law to contine an investigation without one(LAWYER) or if suspect does not want one(INVESTIGATION), jail them without an investigation.

To be honest out of all those replies only JHardy once might be taken as proper one, due to fact rule is confusing, rest you people just didn't read, but rushed to comment.

[Huntsman]

Eh, no need to get mad ;(.

[Anthrax]

Eh, no need to get mad ;(.

I can see why staff gets so frustrated when they've spent tons of hours on it..

[Pingster]

Read it and read it again and notice sentence parts:

If a lawyer is not acquirable, you are allowed by law to contine an investigation without one(LAWYER) or if suspect does not want one(INVESTIGATION), jail them without an investigation.

To be honest out of all those replies only JHardy once might be taken as proper one, due to fact rule is confusing, rest you people just didn't read, but rushed to comment.

The wording was confusing indeed, thanks.

Still though, question does stand, there isn't really a law that permits ignoring the player asking for a lawyer? Even if there is none available, should try and figure something out, ask a fellow officer to go off duty or something :p

There's very good reason for that too - some players do not know the law well enough to be able to defend themself in an investigation, and could do with a lawyer, but if there's none..

[Sushi]

Read it and read it again and notice sentence parts:

If a lawyer is not acquirable, you are allowed by law to contine an investigation without one(LAWYER) or if suspect does not want one(INVESTIGATION), jail them without an investigation.

To be honest out of all those replies only JHardy once might be taken as proper one, due to fact rule is confusing, rest you people just didn't read, but rushed to comment.

The wording was confusing indeed, thanks.

Still though, question does stand, there isn't really a law that permits ignoring the player asking for a lawyer? Even if there is none available, should try and figure something out, ask a fellow officer to go off duty or something :p

There's very good reason for that too - some players do not know the law well enough to be able to defend themself in an investigation, and could do with a lawyer, but if there's none..

This is why I've submitted it to the public so I can fix any badly worded sections. When it means one is not acquirable, it also includes that fact that no players are willing to RP one. This is to prevent our officers having to sit in a room for 4 hours waiting for someone who wants to RP a lawyer to come online. Compromises.

I've reworded it to make it a bit cleared now. Anything else like this in the new RPP that is badly wordly should be immediately reported so I can correct it.


I don't know who posted the thing about all the regulations applying to ARPD officers as well, but it's clearly written above each section that there are ARPD Officer regulations and nothing more. The rest of the RPP are for SAPD Personnel.

[Pingster]

Yeah, that sounds like common sense, though it's still a valid cause for a court case against the officer. Luckily, it should be a rare enough incident, where there are no attorneys available.

With your encouragement, I'm taking a deeper look at it! :p

Suspect idle - Suspect must be told to surrender, or force will be used. If the suspect fails to comply, the use of LTL to take down the suspect is granted. (If suspect is idle with weapon showing 1.1 applies but refer to procedure X.X)

Work In Progress/Forgotten sidenote? As the procedures under the sections are not marked as 1.1.1, 1.1.2 etcetera, it loops back, I'm sure there a formatting was intended but forgotten/missed.

The drive-by'able vehicles - could the list be expanded for rangers, and more importantly - bikes? Since bike's max speed can vary depending on the way of driving (Tapping up or not), and you can shoot from it as a driver, definitely should include some regulations on that.

Unsuspections will not be given for things such as a fine being paid, server related reasons (Eg. Events and killbugs) or murder (This includes self defense resulting in death)

As this contradicts the constitution, disallowing an outcome guaranteed by the Civil Rights (Depending on the outcome he shall serve a prison sentence or be cleared of crime.), there should be very specific circumstances where this is permitted. For example, expansive role-play and evidence of unnecessary weaponry being used (You defended yourself with a bat, fists, or pepper spray, for example.) to allow the other person to leave with his life still intact.


And this is just nitpickyness, but hey..

usually threatening death if a specific random is not paid within a certain time.

And that really is the extent of my 'situation with RPP'

[J Scott]

Unsuspections will not be given for things such as a fine being paid, server related reasons (Eg. Events and killbugs) or murder (This includes self defense resulting in death)

As this contradicts the constitution, disallowing an outcome guaranteed by the Civil Rights (Depending on the outcome he shall serve a prison sentence or be cleared of crime.), there should be very specific circumstances where this is permitted. For example, expansive role-play and evidence of unnecessary weaponry being used (You defended yourself with a bat, fists, or pepper spray, for example.) to allow the other person to leave with his life still intact.

Fine Paid  Officers should never suspect a person they plan on issuing a ticket, they should pull over. Remember the purpose of a suspection, as stated by Gandalf, is preparing a suspect for jailing.
Server Events    This simply means we are not Administrators, we dont have access to death logs, and can not confirm killbugs, as well as event attendance. This is why we may not unsuspect for this unless requested by a member of the Administration Team.
Murder     The only thing that can be done is issue a reduced sentence, that's the policy. The best suggestion is, if someone is attacking you /call 911.

[Pingster]

I understand the first two parts, however, on the murder, no policies, regulations or rules are permitted to contradict the Constitution, which is the ultimate ruling.

[Plam Knight]

Well I don't know which part of constitution is that, when we have even been told by president and 4 generations chiefs back, that murder even in self-defenes is still man slaughter and if it is self-defense best we can do is lower jail sentence.

[Pingster]

I'm referring to Section III, Act XIX, "Defence of propriety and belonging is authorized. Any destruction of private propriety or any damages caused to it is of criminal resort. However if a citizen kills another citizen while defending his propriety, he shall be trialed for use of unreasonable violence. Depending on the outcome he shall serve a prison sentence or be cleared of crime.".

According to this, the constitution guarantees an option of being cleared of crime, while organisation doing the clearing does not.

[Marcus Ferreira]

[...]if a citizen kills another citizen while defending his propriety, he shall be trialed for use of unreasonable violence. Depending on the outcome he shall serve a prison sentence or be cleared of crime.".

If the person will provide an RP evidence in which he will prove defending his property and using all means by necessary to don't kill the trespasser he can be cleared as far as I know, but killing is an autosuspection, so really, really convincing evidences are required -which unfortunately are never given to the SAPD staff. For example, before you will shoot, call 911, don't use combat shoot-gun- deagle instead or pepper spray, warn person to leave your property and for crying out loud, remember to /gu right after the situation.

More than 1,5 year of working in SAPD and I never cleared anyone of murder, for one simple reason: each person, while got caught he was never inside his house, so how's that defending your property?

That's why Gandalf told us to don't clear anybody of auto-suspection and that's what we doing, our job is listen to what Goverment says. Constitution can't punish us, Mr. President and his closest staff can.

[Def Perry]

I often see ARPD officers driving way too fast in civilian vehicles. Citizens don't get warned, as these vehicles do not have sirens and lights. My question reads:
 ' Are ARPD officers allowed to speed in civilian vehicles on duty?'


Then I have another question regarding the new regulations, which aren't clear to me.
What if an SAPD officer reported their selves out of service, but another officer reports in a ' c30 ' and the officer was still AFK. Is that okay?

[Plam Knight]

I often see ARPD officers driving way too fast in civilian vehicles. Citizens don't get warned, as these vehicles do not have sirens and lights. My question reads:
 ' Are ARPD officers allowed to speed in civilian vehicles on duty?'


Then I have another question regarding the new regulations, which aren't clear to me.
What if an SAPD officer reported their selves out of service, but another officer reports in a ' c30 ' and the officer was still AFK. Is that okay?

Police officers are not above the law, so no ARPD Officers same as SAPD officers are not allowed to speed in any kind of vehicles while on duty.

In this case I will say a simple rule the admin team has, which is if you are going to be AFK for more then 5 minutes then simple leave game, that's how it should be in SAPD as well. Honestly even I get annoyed when I see officers standing for 1-2 hours doing nothing while they are IG and even I have seen officer, I won't share name that was AFK FOR A DAY. Imagine how mad are you going to be if you request backup and it turns out 3/5 officers are AFK, but still IG.

[Sushi]

I look into possibly adding a section that looks into unsuspection IF valid evidence is provided, but for the time being, the same rule still stands.

As for the AFK, this more or less is the rule. Officers should not be going AFK for extended periods of time.

Being AFK (Away from keyboard) is not an acceptable excuse for an SAPD member to not be responding to a situation. If you go AFK for long periods of time you will be disciplined if a major situation happens whilst you are away for the amount of time. If you are gone for a short time, it is understandable, but if you are purposely leaving yourself logged in and something happens that required your assistance; you will be punished for it.

And here's the part that dictates ARPD Officers must follow laws like anyone else.

[3] Attitude towards San Andreas citizens:
As a police officer, regardless of being a member of the SAPD, you are required to behave as a police officer. This means that things such as unwarranted hostile attitude towards random civilians, misuse of authority, breaking laws and anything that goes against the Argonath rules will result in punishment.

I will look into adding regulations for drive-bying in ranchers and on bikes, the same rules generally apply as with cruisers. But I will look into it.

[Huntsman]

Hello

Since i'm part of Argonath Traffic Police, i usually come up with this question - what shall i do about SAPD staff that violates traffic laws?

I've cleared it with Paul that i'm allowed to pull over FBI agents that have no badge shown, no siren on and are speeding. However, what should i do about SAPD?

[Plam Knight]

Spotted a traffic violating:
Officer/Senior Officer - Report them to any of the SAPD Sergeants.
Sergeant - Report them to any of the SAPD Lieutenants
Lieutenant - Report them to any of the SAPD Captains
Captains - Report them to any of the SAPD Deputy Chiefs
Deputy Chief - Report them to the SAPD Chief.
Chief - Ah well I would guess ARPD Commissioner

[Huntsman]

Spotted a traffic violating:
Officer/Senior Officer - Report them to any of the SAPD Sergeants.
Sergeant - Report them to any of the SAPD Lieutenants
Lieutenant - Report them to any of the SAPD Captains
Captains - Report them to any of the SAPD Deputy Chiefs
Deputy Chief - Report them to the SAPD Chief.
Chief - Ah well I would guess ARPD Commissioner

I see. Do we have a right to pull them over if they're not in the emergency?

[Plam Knight]

You could, but I would say straight head to someone who can really assist you rather then trying it. Because you know guilty person will never agree he is guilty.