[Non-RP] SO Anthrax - failure to follow the constitutiom

[Def Perry]

Hello. Steve McGarrett here, I am here to witness from AnthraX party.

Hello Mr McGarrett,

I would like to know if you witnessed the traffic violation that Chief Hardy made, that day. As you were there and Anthrax saw him illegally crossing the road, you must have seen it too, right?

Thank you in advance for answering and your cooperation,

Signed,

Lieutenant Perry

[Deluca]

As mentioned, Snr. Officer Anthrax and I were patrolling in separated vehicles. Which means I came in as I heard chatter about this in the TeamSpeak when Chief Hardy refused to comply.

[Anthrax]

Hardy do not make this report more confusing for Lt. Def then it already is with your irrelevant and speculating arguements.
This is very simple, you reported me for ticketing you for reckless driving, when you claim I do not have enough evidance to do it.
I DID NOT ticket you for speeding, so you may not use/say that at all here, unless you want this report closed for false accusements.

The answer is simple here, a witness is enough evidance to ticket a citizen for speeding, cause this is an infraction not a voilation that is jaileble, done.

[Pingster]

How do you know why I did anything? The only reason I'm bringing the speeding part up is because that was the only reason you pulled me over, you quickly thought of other things to fine me for when I dismissed it. Anyway, not once have I said that you ticketed me for speeding, so you can lay off that.

As to your last statement, if that's what you think, you really do need to read the law a bit more. First of all, an infraction is a violation of the law, a crime. Google it. Second, the Constitution does not differ any laws between what can be taken to jail and what can not. Third, it doesn't differ what law breaks are infractions and what are felonies. Fourth, you must be able to prove someone is guilty even if they're pissing in the street. Witness is enough evidence, but in a situation where your only witness is yourself, the objectivity, validity and bias of the witness can be questioned.

[Anthrax]

How do you know why I did anything? The only reason I'm bringing the speeding part up is because that was the only reason you pulled me over, you quickly thought of other things to fine me for when I dismissed it. Anyway, not once have I said that you ticketed me for speeding, so you can lay off that.

As to your last statement, if that's what you think, you really do need to read the law a bit more. First of all, an infraction is a violation of the law, a crime. Google it. Second, the Constitution does not differ any laws between what can be taken to jail and what can not. Third, it doesn't differ what law breaks are infractions and what are felonies. Fourth, you must be able to prove someone is guilty even if they're pissing in the street. Witness is enough evidence, but in a situation where your only witness is yourself, the objectivity, validity and bias of the witness can be questioned.

Then you are talking against SAPD procedures. And you are also talking falsely because infractions is not jaileble. Do you jail suspects for speeding? No.
Voilations of law is jaileble, and reckless driving does not require more then witnessing officer to execute. I strongly belive you will hear the same from the SAPD Command, because that is what I have learnt in police academy.

[Def Perry]

San Andreas Police Department
08/02/2013

STATEMENT IN REGARDS TO THE CLOSURE OF THIS REPORT

On the Febuary the 2th  2013, at 02:37 HOURS a report was submitted by Hardy as a lawful citizen of the United States of Argonath.
Since then, an investigation has been conducted by the SAPD command staff member:
- Deputy Chief Sushi
- Lieutenant Def Perry


The summary and conclusion of the report has now been decided and will be released to the public.

Senior officer AnthraX pulled Hardy primarily to warn him about his reckless driving, which has been proved from the logs. The speeding has been witnessed by Anthrax, but could not be proven. However, senior officer Anthrax saw Hardy crossing an illegal lane. Anthrax is known as a honest officer and we never faced any wrongdoings of him. Therefore he is countable as a valid witness, of course. This is enough to pull over a citizen and give a citation, if the officer feels that is necessary.

-- In conclusion, senior officer Anthrax from the SFPD is not guilty of this duty violation. As said in the synopsis, he had his reasons to pull Hardy over and hand out a citation to him. However, Anthrax should offer a formal apology to Hardy for accusing him of speeding, without the proper evidence to proof it.

If the verdict of this report seems unfair to anyone, you can report this to  a Deputy Chief via an ARPD Forum PM and we might reopen the case if your argument is valid enough.


Signed,
Lieutenant Def Perry