[SAPD Complaint] - TiMoN [Celso Williams]

[Jake Parker]

Directed to: SAPD Command Staff

Name: Jake Parker

Report against:
TiMoN - REGULATIONS BREACHED

Description of events:
Abusing weaponary on duty, failure to follow SAPD Regulations and Procedures, shooting standing still suspects with a combat shotgun. After talking to him over radio still fails to follow the rules in future.

Possible Witnesses:
FBI Field Cadet Matthew

Evidence:




Date: 22-1-2015
Time: 17:15 CET

I state that the information provided in this report is 100 percent truthful and accurate, I have also read through the report to leader rules and followed all the correct procedure before submitting this report.

Signed,

Jake Parker

[Jake Parker]

SAPD Officer TiMoN has been informed about the report on 22-1-2015 17:33CET

[TiMoN]

Hello, I'm Officer Timon and I'll be proving my innocence. I will be responding to each picture as Exhibit X, which X represents the image used.

Exhibit 1:
A recording which shows nothing, as Officer Jake has appeared to be recording after what he claims I did.

Exhibit 2:
I there state that I don't want to waste $1,000 because of regulations, which makes no sense as nothing of this recording shows me refusing to follow it.

Exhibit 3:
I stated that I do follow the regulations, but I sometimes, a little bit, don't. Which is in extreme situations that rarely happen.

In conclusion, Officer Jake has provided no succesfull claim of me:

• Abusing Weaponary on Duty - There is no evidence showing me misusing my weaponry on duty.
  
• Failure to follow SAPD Regulations and Procedures - Evidence shows me saying that I don't follow them in extreme situations, this not being one of them.
  
• Shooting standing still suspects with a combat shotgun - Officer Jake has provided absolutely no evidence of me: 1. Using a Combat Shotgun 2. Shooting standing still suspects
  
• Officer Jake claims that I continued to abuse my powers after talking to me which he doesn't show any evidence of nor can claim is true.

Should this reply not be deem enough to make me inoccent against such acts of lying, I demand a trial by combat.

[Jake Parker]

Abusing weaponary on duty. using combats on a standing still suspect infront of cityhall the incident earlier of misusing your combat on others has been witnessed by matthew also thats why he is the witness. and he will provide the evidence of you abusing your weaponary. And you agreed when i told you not to use combats, you failed to follow my orders which is another fact why you are on this complaint.

Edit: You didnt state in extreme situations which makes sence to the fact you aint following our regulations.

[TiMoN]

Abusing weaponary on duty. using combats on a standing still suspect infront of cityhall the incident earlier of misusing your combat on others has been witnessed by matthew also thats why he is the witness. and he will provide the evidence of you abusing your weaponary. And you agreed when i told you not to use combats, you failed to follow my orders which is another fact why you are on this complaint.

Edit: You didnt state in extreme situations which makes sence to the fact you aint following our regulations.

Your lack of evidence in your claims proves nothing but my innocence. Until you provide such thing, I do see no reason to continue replying. Should Mathew do provide evidence, I'll be happy to respond to your claims. As for him being a "witness", shouldn't really contribute much due to the possibility of lying.

[Jake Parker]

Lying? Hahah!! Why should i make a whole report against you with all lies in it? What the **** is the logic of that... will be waiting for matthew his part in this report

[TiMoN]

Lying? Hahah!! Why should i make a whole report against you with all lies in it? What the **** is the logic of that... will be waiting for matthew his part in this report

Nor that I am, but your evidence proves that I am not wrong. I bet you can figure out the rest.

[Matthew Carter]

I have indeed witnessed the excessive use of force by officer TiMoN.
He used combat shotgun against unarmed suspect who was using fists to assault another civilian.
Afterwards the suspected assaulter took a run for it and officer TiMoN used combat shotgun to neutralize him.

[TiMoN]

I have indeed witnessed the excessive use of force by officer TiMoN.
He used combat shotgun against unarmed suspect who was using fists to assault another civilian.
Afterwards the suspected assaulter took a run for it and officer TiMoN used combat shotgun to neutralize him.

Honestly I do not care if you're an FBI Agent, a SAPD Captain, or Gandalf himself, please provide evidence supporting your claims.

[David Gonzalez]

Hey there, I'm Lt. Celso Williams and will be taking in this report, full logs, and ss you might have, is to be sent to this report or my PM.

[Matthew Carter]

Aiming with combat shotgun on a standing still suspect

Aiming on fellow officers with the combat shotgun

[TiMoN]

Just because I aimed doesn't mean I used it on him, as for the second screenshot, it doesn't show me "aiming" at anybody. The report is for shooting standing still suspects which I didn't do and you're still unable to prove otherwise.

[Jake Parker]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

[TiMoN]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

"Not needed" doesn't mean a "not allowed". Can you prove the fact that I used it on anyone?

[Megamidget]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

"Not needed" doesn't mean a "not allowed". Can you prove the fact that I used it on anyone?

The image shows you aiming the weapon at a unarmed suspect. This can be considered Circumstantial evidence and it allows us to draw a conclusion that ,given the opportunity,  you may have used it on that suspect, and it is likely that you have done so before. Using these conclusions which is supported by the circumstantial evidence and witness statements rules out the need for Direct evidence (IE; A picture of you shooting an unarmed civillian with a combat shotgun)

[Jake Parker]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

"Not needed" doesn't mean a "not allowed". Can you prove the fact that I used it on anyone?

Not needed, the pictures show the evidence we need which is at least that you used it while it was not needed.

[TiMoN]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

"Not needed" doesn't mean a "not allowed". Can you prove the fact that I used it on anyone?

The image shows you aiming the weapon at a unarmed suspect. This can be considered Circumstantial evidence and it allows us to draw a conclusion that ,given the opportunity,  you may have used it on that suspect, and it is likely that you have done so before. Using these conclusions which is supported by the circumstantial evidence and witness statements rules out the need for Direct evidence (IE; A picture of you shooting an unarmed civillian with a combat shotgun)

So a picture of me is taken aiming a gun at a suspects who gave me a weapon seconds ago, which is undeniable proof that he is heavily armed considering that the weapon was a sniper rifle. Since you're basing your outcome on estimates, suggestions and possible outcomes, bear in mind what I just said. Oh and since everyone is fabricating evidence from witnesses, I can assure you the fact that the suspect tried to stab me in the neck with a knife and then proceeded to shoot.

[Megamidget]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

"Not needed" doesn't mean a "not allowed". Can you prove the fact that I used it on anyone?

The image shows you aiming the weapon at a unarmed suspect. This can be considered Circumstantial evidence and it allows us to draw a conclusion that ,given the opportunity,  you may have used it on that suspect, and it is likely that you have done so before. Using these conclusions which is supported by the circumstantial evidence and witness statements rules out the need for Direct evidence (IE; A picture of you shooting an unarmed civillian with a combat shotgun)

So a picture of me is taken aiming a gun at a suspects who gave me a weapon seconds ago, which is undeniable proves that he is heavily armed considering that the weapon was a sniper rifle. Since you're basing your outcome on estimates, suggestions and possible outcomes, bear in mind what I just said. Oh and since everyone is fabricating evidence from witnesses, I can assure you the fact that the suspect tried to stab me in the neck with a knife and then proceeded to shoot.

A simple post stating he was heavily armed would have been enough, if this was the case ask other officers on scene to make a statment regarding this and post it here

[David Gonzalez]

A Conclusion of this report will be posted shortly.

[JoshThePenguin]

Screenshots show you with your combat shotgun which is a heavy weapon which is not needed on a unarmed suspect

"Not needed" doesn't mean a "not allowed". Can you prove the fact that I used it on anyone?

You must be lucky if you make a screenshot right on the moment you fire the weapon.
I am not a part of this but I just want to mention it, the screenshot indeed gives a clear view that you had the opportunity to shoot him when you were aiming at him.
A weapon like a shotgun isn't needed in such situation when he's on the ground already.