Report: Andrew Mason, Max Adams, Lily Scotto

[Nexxt]

DATE: TIME: LOCATION:

16/03/2013 7:10PM CET Los Santos

Dear prosecutors and defendants,

As a result of my Law Research, Andrew Mason did not break any regulations written in the SAPD procedures and regulations, nor did Max_Adams. Although a disciplinary punishment from Andrew Mason towards the ARPD officer would have been suitable, as the procedures (and server rules) were broken during this arrest.

Question I'd like to be answered: why did Andrew Mason refuse to punish the officer, responsible for the kill. He must have seen it, was it because they were in a patrol together and hoped no-one else saw it? If so, it would be disappointing as a SAPD Command Staff member should be able to be 'neutral' and punish these violations.

Signed,

Ryder Scanlon
Law Enforcement Scientist

[James Collin]

DATE: TIME: LOCATION:

16/03/2013  7:10PM CET  Los Santos

Dear prosecutors and defendants,

As a result of my Law Research, Andrew Mason did not break any regulations written in the SAPD procedures and regulations, nor did Max_Adams. Although a disciplinary punishment from Andrew Mason towards the ARPD officer would have been suitable, as the procedures (and server rules) were broken during this arrest.

I'm not fully involved in this, but I have a question: why did Andrew Mason refuse to punish the officer, responsible for the kill. He must have seen it, was it because they were in a patrol together and hoped no-one else saw it? If so, it would be disappointing as a SAPD Command Staff member should be able to be 'neutral' and punish these violations.

Signed,

Ryder Scanlon
Law Enforcement Scientist

Rules state you are not allowed to post here. Please stick to them.
Although, Thank you for your concerns and posting it here.

I believe the Deputy and Chief have enough evidence to post a decision. Further arguing would be useless.

[Huntsman]

Frank Hawk had his gun equiped and kept brandishing it which officer Scotto could have taken as an assault attempt.

"kept brandishing it". I was just amused how Mr. Max can lie just like that...

I take that as brandishing. Enough warnings to conceal a weapon has been given. And it would also be common sense not to wave that thing around

Yet i still did not break a single regulation. I can defend and deny anyones guilt as much as i like to. There is no such regulations that says im not allowed to.

[James Collin]

You mentioned, that he was warned multiple times and he was aiming the gun. Also that he was shot while he was 'evading'.

The evidence clearly showed you lied.

That's what this all is about now.

[Huntsman]

You mentioned, that he was warned multiple times and he was aiming the gun. Also that he was shot while he was 'evading'.

The evidence clearly showed you lied.

That's what this all is about now.

I still broke no regulations.
And as i said, he had a gun equiped and refused to remove it. I take it as an agressive action towards LEO

[James Collin]

Sir. Let's be clear. You guys did not ask him to remove the gun. I don't see that in the video. You guys did a simple /s2 asking him to surrender.
Let's be clear. He tried to tell you it was an accident. But you guys did not listen. That's the hard truth, and you cannot deny that. You keep saying he had a gun, and he was going to shoot. In fact you even went to the extent of saying he was aiming it all over the place and that he was running and evading away while he was shot.

It is true, and you should admit that you were lying. There's no hiding from that now.
Your claims of "he had a gun" are a simple excuse now.

Earlier you even said "we gave him a good minute to surrender" when in fact it was 21 seconds. In that time he and his friend tried to explain the accident. Did you bother to listen to him? No. That's not how SAPD should operate.

It is quite clear you did not care what happened. The guy died for nothing and you go away with your free cop saying oh well. That is not professional behaviour. You did not investigate like you were supposed to. You did not listen to the suspect like you were supposed to. You did not care about the innocent civilian, and you did not carewhen he was shot while standing still.

You lied in the entire report to hide the truth. This may sound rude, and I am utterly sorry. But it is still the truth.

[James Collin]

I'll make the breaking of regulations clear. For both Andrew and Max.

1) Suspecting for an invalid reason. (Only for Andrew)
2) Failing to investiage what had happened.
3) Refusing to talk to the suspect when he tried to explain.
4) indirectly causing the death of the suspect. If you had talked to him, the free cop wouldn't have shot.
5) Unprofessional behavior. You look like you came to kill orange dots instead of protecting and serving.
6) Lying about the incident.
7) Risking lives by provoking a group which vpuld have caused a Code 30.

There may be no exact rules defining this, but this sure was unacceptable.

This incident could have easily provoked a massive code 30. Mr. Andrew should know that it is not allowed. Free cops are punished if they directly suspect a big group, threatening them, knowing that they will retaliate. This situation could have easily resulted in a big Code 30 resulting in deaths of other officers and civilians at idlwood.
Not to mention the crime was invalid as it was a misclick, but they apparently did not care about that.

[Tom Adams]

I dont see how is firing firearm is public INVALID crime. The person had enough time to surrender and ask for investigation 'till the ARPD officer opened fire and executed him. Instead of surrendering STRAIGHT AWAY, subject decided to ignore us and turn back to us, I start any investigation if the main suspect just goes away and doesnt give a shit. I belive thoose two or three shots came in a row fast, when he was already shooting the person, It would've been too late for him to see the text If you use a little common sense.
 We did not come intentionally there to kill the suspect, we stopped nearby Idlewood as we spotted a person firing with firearm and we found it to be danger for public, we did not provoke them, I just advise you to re-read a dictionary about such word as provoking. Subject was suspected after we spotted him firing firearm so we did not come to orange dot, you need to make yourself clear that difference. I belive a person who takes out a firearm out of nowhere is a bigger danger to public, than us attempting to neutralize visual threat, we did serve and PROTECT public from a possible danger.
 'Lets be clear he tried to tell us that it was accident' ? Well, that was one hell of attempt trying to tell us that it was accident after he just ignored us.

I assume your FBI agent and If you are a proper one, you should know that we dont have any freecops around here, we have ARPD officer, make yourself that clear enough before you attempt to call them by such names.

[Huntsman]

I'll make the breaking of regulations clear. For both Andrew and Max.

1) Suspecting for an invalid reason. (Only for Andrew)
2) Failing to investiage what had happened.
3) Refusing to talk to the suspect when he tried to explain.
4) indirectly causing the death of the suspect. If you had talked to him, the free cop wouldn't have shot.
5) Unprofessional behavior. You look like you came to kill orange dots instead of protecting and serving.
6) Lying about the incident.
7) Risking lives by provoking a group which vpuld have caused a Code 30.

There may be no exact rules defining this, but this sure was unacceptable.

This incident could have easily provoked a massive code 30. Mr. Andrew should know that it is not allowed. Free cops are punished if they directly suspect a big group, threatening them, knowing that they will retaliate. This situation could have easily resulted in a big Code 30 resulting in deaths of other officers and civilians at idlwood.
Not to mention the crime was invalid as it was a misclick, but they apparently did not care about that.

I have still done nothing wrong

2) Failing to investiage what had happened.

Nobody has ever asked this matter to be investigated. And if you did want it investigated, you should have reported the officer that killed him instead.
In any case i am not a command member and i have no right to investigate such matters.

3) Refusing to talk to the suspect when he tried to explain.

Stop blaming officers for suspects' ignorance and suspects being stubborn. Even admins clearly classify what you have to do if you feel abused - you surrender and request for an investigation. Our job is to take him in, and if he wants an investigation, he surrenders and does so, in which case he failed to do. This point is invalid.

4) indirectly causing the death of the suspect. If you had talked to him, the free cop wouldn't have shot.

I hope you do realise this point makes no sense at all? How are we responsible for the death of the suspect? How the hell were we supposed to know that the officer in question was gonna shoot him just like that?

5) Unprofessional behavior. You look like you came to kill orange dots instead of protecting and serving.

That point over here can get you punished for provoking. I might also want to take you in courts for such accusations, as i feel offended by this point.
You know nothing about how we work and that is not for you to judge. You did not see me and Andrew talking with each other on the scene because we were talking on TeamSpeak at the moment.
You're not the one in position to judge me if i am proffesional or not. How about you tell your buddy Frank to show signs of compliance if he feels abused instead. Now what he has done (and what he also always does) is after being suspected just has his gun out and ignores the cops, which is pretty much the reason this has happened. If he would have hidden his gun and shown signs of interest and compliance, this all could have been prevented. How about you look at what YOU GUYS have done, instead of blaming it all on the cops as you always do.

6) Lying about the incident.

I can lie as much as i want to, no regulation broke here.
And as i said - the suspect had his gun in hand, which made him potentially dangerous and it is understandable the ARPD Officer might have taken that as an agressive behaviour.

7) Risking lives by provoking a group which vpuld have caused a Code 30.

That point over there makes no sense at all as well. We are not going to let a suspect get away just because you guys feel provoked. And there was nothing provocative in our behaviour, the only one provoking was Frank, whose ignorance has caused this incident.

[KhornateMonkey]

[gmod]If you are not participant in this report, then dont post, you know that.[/gmod]

[James Collin]

I myself am a freecop and have nothing against them. ARPD is just a fancy term for them.

Mr. Andrew and Max, you both are respected members of SAPD with ranks achievable by only a few
 I respect you both and have nothing against you. However I am against your actions on that day.

As this report continues, you will come up with more explanations and excuses. Lets be very clear. What you did was clearly wrong. The video explains it fully.

Can you just answer this 1 question in a simple sentence and not a long derailing paragraph?

Why did you both initially lie in this report?

Don't say no. Because its very clear that you did. You guys came up with his evading and aiming of his gun and whatever.

[Huntsman]

I myself am a freecop and have nothing against them. ARPD is just a fancy term for them.

Mr. Andrew and Max, you both are respected members of SAPD with ranks achievable by only a few
 I respect you both and have nothing against you. However I am against your actions on that day.

As this report continues, you will come up with more explanations and excuses. Lets be very clear. What you did was clearly wrong. The video explains it fully.

Can you just answer this 1 question in a simple sentence and not a long derailing paragraph?

Why did you both initially lie in this report?

Don't say no. Because its very clear that you did. You guys came up with his evading and aiming of his gun and whatever.

I have never lied, i told what i have seen, Frank refused to put his gun down which is the treath to the public safety, the officers safety and the aggressive attitude. Words such as "aiming around" or "brandishing" might have been used incorrectly,but my point was still expressed, as i added a screenshot of Frank refusing to put the gun down

[James Collin]

Honestly, you sound like this right now:
"I did not lie because I lied".

You said he evaded. You said you warned him many times. You said you gave him a good minute before shooting. You said he was aiming and brandishing the gun.

He didn't evade. He was warned like once using /s2. He was barely given 20 seconds. He wasnt aiming.

Call it incorect usage of words, or anything that you like. Its still lying.

You provided fabricated information to derail and misguide the leaders to hide your actions.

[Tom Adams]

I myself am a freecop and have nothing against them. ARPD is just a fancy term for them.

Mr. Andrew and Max, you both are respected members of SAPD with ranks achievable by only a few
 I respect you both and have nothing against you. However I am against your actions on that day.

As this report continues, you will come up with more explanations and excuses. Lets be very clear. What you did was clearly wrong. The video explains it fully.

Can you just answer this 1 question in a simple sentence and not a long derailing paragraph?

Why did you both initially lie in this report?

Don't say no. Because its very clear that you did. You guys came up with his evading and aiming of his gun and whatever.

Video proves our actions were right, we did not execute the person and he was suspected for valid reason.
Dont try to put words in my mouth, I am expressing my opinion about this, this is alread the second time you try to force us to say things you want.

[James Collin]

Since you're not going to answer, I'll do that.

Mr. Andrew and Mr. Max provided fabricated information because they knew what happened was wrong. Knowing the fact that no screenshot will prove that he did not evade, they kept lying in this report.

What happened is crystal clear according to the video. Mr. Andrew and max did not bother to investigate.
Now all the times I mentioned this, they do not seem to understand what investigate is. It is trying to find the truth.

The truth was, the gunshot was a simple misclick. Something in a non-roleplay context which makes the crime invalid. Mr. Andrew and Max, did not try to find out the truth. What they tried was to neutralize the suspect. I don'tmmean killing specifically. But that's what happened. 20 seconds is a very short amount of time. Yes, agreed that Frank could have typed /GU to satisfy the needs of these officers. But let's not forget its something that makes him deserve to die. Knowing the fact that he tried to tell it was a mistake and was given a mere 20 seconds.

The wrong doings of these officers is very clear. If they had professional behaviour, at least one of them would have talked to Frank when he tried to explain. They did not. They just stood there waiting for him to /GU. The inexperienced free cop shot him while he was standing still, which is pure rule breaking.
Upon questioning Andrew, he starts protecting the free cop with claims like the suspect was evading, running, and doing some imaginary things that Andrew hallucinated because according to Andrew thatd what he 'saw'
 
I don't mean to disrespect you sir, but if you see things that aren't happening it's a real problem. You might shoot a cop thinking he's a suspect.


That is all sir. I do not want any severe punishment. We are all here to enjoy. If Mr. Andrew and Max admit their mistakes, apologize to frank and make sure they are careful from now on, its all good.
I don't want to fight with anyone. I just wanted everyone to know what the truth is. You guys are great, but then incident and your actions were wrong. Then I really started hating how you kept lying here.

I would like Sushi, to continue with this report and take the decision he seems fair
 This arguing could go on forever. Let's be fair and end it and look forward to fun and enjoyment in the community

[Huntsman]

I rather get the report handled, as i have nothing to apologize for and nothing to admit. I did nothing but perform my SAPD Duties. I have not fired a single shot or did anything wrong. Lying is not a violation, defending the accusing officer isnt either. I have done nothing wrong and what you're seeking for by this report is to prove that i have been a witness to a situation but refused to state that Officer Lily did something wrong in a public chat, which breaks no server or the departament rules.

[James Collin]

Oh cmon. I told you a whole list of accusations you both committed.

We're just going in circles with the argument now. I suppose we should wait for a decision. Peace.

[Huntsman]

Oh cmon. I told you a whole list of accusations you both committed.

We're just going in circles with the argument now. I suppose we should wait for a decision. Peace.

And i gave you a truckload of arguments that we're innocent.
In any case, we were supposed to get a verdict in 24 hours last time i checked, but two weeks nearly passed now

[Sushi]

I have attempted to find the time to check over this report several time the past week but have not been able to.

Real life is obviously my priority, so please be patient whilst I try to finalise a closing statement.

[Sushi]

Okay, so I'm going try and speak about what happened as well as I can, from the information that has been provided.

A single shot was fired (or was it three?) and Frank was suspected for assault (The use of /su is the decision of the officer, if a shot was fired, Andrew had the right to suspect him if he thought it was a dangerous enough situation).

After this, the three officers disembarked from the vehicle with weapons drawn (a suspect, who had also fired a shot already) and aimed at the suspect and asked them to surrender. The suspect, stated 'oh man' and proceeded to move and stop in the crowd of civilians near by.

The suspect did not raise their weapon (still had it in hand) and the two SAPD Officers did not open fire. An ARPD Officer with them on patrol fired three times in succession and killed the still standing suspect.


The officers, not knowing the situation but visibly seeing someone fire towards someone else and having a weapon still in hand were within their right to use the suspection command as well as be suspicious and cautious.

Lily Scotto was in no doubt the wrong and will be suspended from duty for 5 days because (Severe punishment due to past actions).

There is no official regulation about how SAPD Officers should discipline ARPD Officers, they should do so at their discretion. So the question I will ask (before I address the accusation of lying) is why SAPD Captain Andrew Mason and SAPD Cadet (at the time) Max Adams not discipline the ARPD Officer at all for an obvious break in procedure (as well as server rule). The offence that Lily committed was an instantly indisputable suspension or at the very least a questioning as to why they did it.


Now I will go into speculation. SAPD Cadet Max Adams attempted at first to approach with LTL force with someone covering him, as per our procedure and once the suspect moved; Max switched to his sidearm and moved back appropriately.

I will also add that I saw Frank move whilst crouched but this can easily be addressed as he was being shot at (hit twice already).

In addition, I will ask why none of the officers on scene tried to tell the suspect to surrender and/or put his gun down at all after the initial call out by Captain Mason. This however, can be attributed to a lack of hands free communication and it is common for officers to aim a little while before it is established who is the one lowering their weapon to speak.

An odd question that can easily be passed off as speculation; was why neither of the two officers turned to see who was firing shots at a still standing suspect. (But again, this can be attributed to the fact that there was an armed and presumed hostile suspect in front of them).


The defense of life, especially if it results in a dead fellow policemen is at the discretion of the officers on scene as it is impossible to know what was going through their heads at the time.

I will check over the posts that have been made and see what details conflict with the evidence provided (which I will ask where it was gotten from).