Argonath RPG - A World of its own

GTA:IV => IV:MP Court Hall => IV:MP - Liberty City Government & Businesses => People's Court => Topic started by: badgirl.dhia on August 14, 2019, 11:58:03 pm

Title: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: badgirl.dhia on August 14, 2019, 11:58:03 pm
From:
BadGirldhia
Liberty City

To :
State of Argonath, People's Court

Dear court, i am Mrs badGirldhia , Lawyer of Mr badboydhia ! On (14/08/2019) badboydhia was parking his sultan, as soon as he start driving his car  and he saw the police sirens and got pull overed! at first the officer requested my client documents and checks them ! then mr badboy asked to know the reason of the traffic stop and the officer completely ignored him and asked him to step out of his vehicle !
as soon as badboy steps out of the vehicle the officer attempts to frisk him
my client refused , since the officer didnt mention the reason of the traffic stop and didnt provide any warrant to frisk , the lovely officer keep screaming and forced mr badboy to frisk him , when he didnt found anything on him he also attempts to abuse his duty right again an frisk the vehicle , but my client refused and didnt allow him to
i also want to mention that mr badboy requested a supervisor to be present at the scene and of course the officer completely ignored him
so this amazing officer
- performed a traffic stop on my client for no reason
-forced him and frisked him without any warrant or a reason
-attempted to frisk and search his vehicle without any warrant
-refused to call for a supervisor

hopefully the dashboard camera was running the whole time , also my client was equiped with a body camera
your honor here is a video footage
https://youtu.be/haNjcNN4rF0

Requests
requesting a copban for this freecop for abusing rights and duty against citizens.


signed
BadGirl Dhia
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 15, 2019, 12:56:59 am
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

The Defendant has 48h to make his case on this situation.


Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 15, 2019, 01:08:56 am
For some side TL:DR, court uses LCPD procedures as standard on how officer should act.

9. An LCPD Officer is allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is stated as suspect.
B. When someone's life is in direct danger (example: hostage situations, robberies, chasing a criminal).
C. When the owner of the private property gives permission for it.

10. An LCPD Officer is NOT allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is NOT stated as suspect.
B. When a higher ranked LCPD member does not give permission to do so.
C. When the owner of the private property does NOT give permission (exception: life threatning situations).

13. An LCPD Officer is allowed to perform a traffic stop (using the 'yelp' siren):
A. When the driver's speed is not within the limits of the Liberty City law.
B. When the driver is driving recklessly.
C. When the driver is a suspect.


For all officers who will read this, please follow the procedures or in case of lawsuits you will be found guilty of abuse of power, for all changes that are badly needed as procedures are very old, court is not responsible for them and we cant as such change them.

To perform a search you must find weed on site (in the pot/ *growing or ready to harvest is irrelevant*), also knows as a valid crime, from there you can search the person and his property.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: ronman on August 15, 2019, 01:13:04 pm
Mr. Kowalski will be representing me as my Attorney in this case.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 17, 2019, 04:48:13 am
((Apologies for not responding sooner, had some matters come up IRL that took up my time))

Greetings to the Liberty City People's Court,

I'm Kowalski, Attorney of Mr. Ron. I'd like to start with my client's plea. NOT GUILTY.

I'd like to explain that my client had no true malicious intent, and was not attempting to abuse his rights in any way, but was, in fact, attempting to do the exact opposite, to ensure justice was served and that the laws and the constitution were upheld through his job as a policeman.

My client felt there were adequate grounds for a search as the plaintiff was in an area notorious for cultivation and production of cannabis. The plaintiff has alleged that they were awaiting a friend but has failed to provide any conclusive evidence that proves beyond reasonable doubt that said claims are true.

My client was attempting to ensure that there was no illegal drug production happening, and was not in any way abusing his rights. I'd also like to additionally point out to the Courts that Mr. Ron is also a reserve officer of the ARPD, and is not officially bound by their procedures, but the law only. Mr. Ron was frisking the plaintiff on grounds of suspected narcotics production and cultivation, which is a serious offense. My client feels that he had adequate grounds to take the measures that he took and does not regret his actions as they were in the interests of the Liberty State Constitution.

My client did not call for a supervisor because LCPD Sergeant Kawashty Gatsby was already on-scene in a Police Stinger, meaning the supervisor was present and could have intervened should the necessity have arisen, which it clearly didn't. We request the Sergeant to testify against the plaintiff, Badboydhia, regarding his presence on-scene. He was also close enough to clearly hear what was happening and didn't intervene due to no actual abuse.

To address the plaintiff's "summary":
so this amazing officer
- performed a traffic stop on my client for no reason
-forced him and frisked him without any warrant or a reason
-attempted to frisk and search his vehicle without any warrant
-refused to call for a supervisor

Bullet Point 1: My client performed a traffic stop with adequate grounds, suspicion of narcotics production, and possession.
Bullet Point 2: Again, my client felt there were adequate grounds for a search.
Bullet Point 3: My client is a reserve officer of the ARPD and therefore can't request a warrant, it'd be a very complicated process. However, my client once again felt there were adequate grounds for a search.
Bullet Point 4: Why would my client call for a supervisor when the said supervisor, Sergeant Gatsby is already on the scene?

My client is having a hard time understanding whether badboydhia is vision impaired, or if badboydhia is trying to defame his integrity by alleging that my client refused to call a supervisor despite one already being on-scene.

We demand this case be immediately closed, and my client wishes to press the following charges against badboydhia:

Code: [Select]
Act 5.10
A person spreading false news is guilty of spreading false news.

Code: [Select]
Act 5.8
A person who endangers the comfort, safety, property or lives of others is guilty of common nuisance.

Code: [Select]
Act 4.3
A person who willfully attempts to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of obstruction to justice.

Code: [Select]
Act 4.4
A person who gives contradictory or false statements to the government, courts of Liberty City or LEOs is guilty of perjury.

My client demands that badboydhia be charged with spreading false news (propaganda) against my client's character with defaming intent and that he be sentenced to two years (two minutes) in prison.
My client demands that badboydhia is also charged with common nuisance and is sentenced to five years (five minutes) in prison for common nuisance due to endangering the comfort of my client.
My client demands that badboydhia be charged with obstruction of justice and be sentenced to five years imprisonment.
My client demands that badboydhia be finally charged with perjury and be sentenced to five years imprisonment, leading to a grand total amount of time in prison being 17 years (17 minutes).
My client demands reimbursement of $250 for wasted time.
My client demands reimbursement of $250 for defamation of his integrity and accusations against his character creating an image to the public that my client is corrupt.
My client demands a further $250 due to sleep deprivation due to this case.
My client lastly demands another $250 for psychological stress due to this case, leading to a grand total of $1000.

Regards,
Kowalski
Attorney.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 17, 2019, 01:06:46 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

The court asks the defendant does he want to dissregard LCPD protocol, and be judged only per Liberty City constituation?


Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 17, 2019, 01:10:25 pm
My client says yes, as ARPD Officers are technically not bound by LCPD procedures but may choose to follow them. My client wishes to be judged based on the law, which is what he is actually bound by.

Regards,
Kowalski
Attorney
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 18, 2019, 05:31:14 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

Will the plaintiff respond to the defendants statement?


Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: badgirl.dhia on August 19, 2019, 03:48:36 pm
Quote
My client did not call for a supervisor because LCPD Sergeant Kawashty Gatsby was already on-scene in a Police Stinger, meaning the supervisor was present and could have intervened should the necessity have arisen, which it clearly didn't. We request the Sergeant to testify against the plaintiff, Badboydhia, regarding his presence on-scene. He was also close enough to clearly hear what was happening and didn't intervene due to no actual abuse.
as we can see from the video footage that the sergeant wasnt involved in the situation at all ! he also was far enough so he can hear us !
looks like the defendants attorney  talks too mush (lot of useless blah blah)
i am not going to waste a line to convince him that 1+1=2!
i just wanted to add that according to this
For some side TL:DR, court uses LCPD procedures as standard on how officer should act.

9. An LCPD Officer is allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is stated as suspect.
B. When someone's life is in direct danger (example: hostage situations, robberies, chasing a criminal).
C. When the owner of the private property gives permission for it.

10. An LCPD Officer is NOT allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is NOT stated as suspect.
B. When a higher ranked LCPD member does not give permission to do so.
C. When the owner of the private property does NOT give permission (exception: life threatning situations).

13. An LCPD Officer is allowed to perform a traffic stop (using the 'yelp' siren):
A. When the driver's speed is not within the limits of the Liberty City law.
B. When the driver is driving recklessly.
C. When the driver is a suspect.


For all officers who will read this, please follow the procedures or in case of lawsuits you will be found guilty of abuse of power, for all changes that are badly needed as procedures are very old, court is not responsible for them and we cant as such change them.
9
A. my client wasnt suspect!
B. no ones life was in direct danger
C. my client clearly refused and didnt give permission to get frisked
10
B. the defendant didnt get any permission from a higher ranked LCPD member , he also refused to call his supervisory when my client asked

13
A. my client wasnt speeding , he got pull overed as soon as he start driving
B. my client wasnt reckless driving
C. he wasnt suspect too

Quote
To perform a search you must find weed on site (in the pot/ *growing or ready to harvest is irrelevant*), also knows as a valid crime, from there you can search the person and his property.
no weed or any type of drugs were found at the spot !
also the defandant attempted to frisk my client vehicle of course without any warrant , but my client refuse and insist !

so its clearly this freecop abuse each procedures above! and after doing all this , he simply run to his cruiser and went away.


Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 19, 2019, 04:30:34 pm


I'm sorry @badboy.dhia, you will need to re do your statement, once again i'm sorry, I was sure you will use constitution rights only as mentioned above.

The plaintiff wants to use only base constitution as his reasons for search those are following.

Ordinance IV:
The right of the citizens to be secure in their own belongings against unreasonable searches shall not be violated without probable cause. A citizen may neither be arrested without a legal reason. A law enforcer is allowed to question a person if he has any reasonable motive to think this person is doing a suspicious act. The law enforcer cannot force a person to be put in detention in the only goal to interrogate him. If, in any case, the law enforcer had to transport the person to another area in order to interrogate him and the person is found not guilty, it is the law enforcer responsibility to transport or pay for a transport to carry the person back to his initial location where he was when he was approached to be interrogated. A law enforcer may interview people present at a scene as witness.

Ordinance X:
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and safety of their person. A person cannot be deprived of those rights except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice or the interests of national security.

Ordinance XI:
A law enforcer can search and seize any illegal material. The search can only be justified by reasonable doubts and reasons. The citizen must be informed before the search. If he feels the reason is not lawful, he may request a superior authority such as sworn officer, police chief, federal agent or government official, to come and take a decision. The decision can be contested in court if the decision taken cannot be explained by valid reasons.

Ordinance XII: 
In the case of arrest or detention, a citizen must be promptly informed of the reasons, must also be informed that he has the right to a lawyer and must be allowed to use that right as soon as possible. He shall also have the validity of the detention controlled by the present law and to be released if the detention is not lawful.   

*Ordinance XII is here just cuz it is included in the police and public interactions, its only realted to the case and has no effect in this case as there was no arrest carried out.*
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 20, 2019, 12:44:02 am
Quote
My client did not call for a supervisor because LCPD Sergeant Kawashty Gatsby was already on-scene in a Police Stinger, meaning the supervisor was present and could have intervened should the necessity have arisen, which it clearly didn't. We request the Sergeant to testify against the plaintiff, Badboydhia, regarding his presence on-scene. He was also close enough to clearly hear what was happening and didn't intervene due to no actual abuse.
as we can see from the video footage that the sergeant wasnt involved in the situation at all ! he also was far enough so he can hear us !
looks like the defendants attorney  talks too mush (lot of useless blah blah)
i am not going to waste a line to convince him that 1+1=2!
i just wanted to add that according to this
For some side TL:DR, court uses LCPD procedures as standard on how officer should act.

9. An LCPD Officer is allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is stated as suspect.
B. When someone's life is in direct danger (example: hostage situations, robberies, chasing a criminal).
C. When the owner of the private property gives permission for it.

10. An LCPD Officer is NOT allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is NOT stated as suspect.
B. When a higher ranked LCPD member does not give permission to do so.
C. When the owner of the private property does NOT give permission (exception: life threatning situations).

13. An LCPD Officer is allowed to perform a traffic stop (using the 'yelp' siren):
A. When the driver's speed is not within the limits of the Liberty City law.
B. When the driver is driving recklessly.
C. When the driver is a suspect.


For all officers who will read this, please follow the procedures or in case of lawsuits you will be found guilty of abuse of power, for all changes that are badly needed as procedures are very old, court is not responsible for them and we cant as such change them.

Sergeant Gatsby was able to hear you and my client clearly, yet didn't intervene as there was no abuse according to the constitution. We request the said Sergeant, Kawashty Gatsby, to confirm this.

According to Ordinance IV, your right to be secure in your belongings can't be violated without probable cause, which Mr. ronman had. He suspected as an officer that you were growing narcotics and therefore had every right to search you and your vehicle to ensure the law wasn't being violated.

Ordinance XI also allows said actions to be carried out. You had the right to request a supervisor who was already on-scene ensuring all actions were lawful. Sergeant Gatsby was able to hear you and see what was happening, and didn't intervene as there was no abuse from my client's end.

We therefore wish to add the following charges against badboydhia and his lawyer, badgirldhia:

Code: [Select]
Act 4.3
A person who willfully attempts to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of obstruction to justice.

Act 4.4
A person who gives contradictory or false statements to the government, courts of Liberty City or LEOs is guilty of perjury.

Regards,
Kowalski
Attorney
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 21, 2019, 03:50:34 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

According to Ordinance IV, your right to be secure in your belongings can't be violated without probable cause, which Mr. ronman had. He suspected as an officer that you were growing narcotics and therefore had every right to search you and your vehicle to ensure the law wasn't being violated.

Ordinance XI also allows said actions to be carried out. You had the right to request a supervisor who was already on-scene ensuring all actions were lawful. Sergeant Gatsby was able to hear you and see what was happening, and didn't intervene as there was no abuse from my client's end.

As per defenses claims, now the defense must present there evidence, not guesses that will show that plaintiff did indeed break the law at the time he was pulled over and searched.

Court will only take into account facts, not guesses, and based on supervisors statement, he also can be charged with abuse of power.

The court calls the supervisor on scene to make his statement. @kawashty

The court gives the supervisor 48h to reply.

The Court asks the plaintiff to wait for supervisors and defenses response before making new submissions to court.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 22, 2019, 11:15:08 am
Sergeant Gatsby's testimony is what we'll await before proceeding further.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: kawashty on August 22, 2019, 12:02:49 pm
I am Sergeant Ray Fearon,


I was there at the scene that's right, i was in HP Duty as i got a call for backup for further situations.


I was observing from a distance through the mirrors and making sure that i am ready for any possible evasion as i am in HP Vehicle, i heared some shouting so i asked the officer through radio if everything is alright, he confirmed that everything is Good.


According to my observation i saw that the citizen was abit resisting the orders of the officer while frisking process.


The officer is free to follow our procedures, no restrictions on them for now.


Scriptly i can hear, if you tell me the script is perfectly done, nothing is perfectly made unless its by god, When the officer moved to his crusier and the citizen went to him, the conversation were cut out, i believe that an attorney should gather the info then evidence too before considering someone has done something.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 22, 2019, 12:12:46 pm
Thanks for the testimony. The conversation that was cut out from Sgt. Gatsby's hearing range was shown on camera.

Another note, LCPD procedures are simply rules enforced internally by the LCPD. They cannot be cited as laws or criminal ordinances. Should a breach of procedure be done, reporting the Officer can be done over the ARPD forum. In Mr. Ron's case, as he's not an LCPD official, he can't be reported and even LCPD officials can't be held criminally responsible for breaching internal procedures.

Therefore, the plaintiff's case is to some extent invalid unless they wish to prosecute my client based off constitutional ordinances and/or laws.
 
((OOC: The range is set so it's reasonable and so counts. Also, the evidence is shown on camera))

Regards,
Kowalski
Attorney
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 22, 2019, 10:22:12 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

The court thanks the Sergeant Ray Fearon for his testimony, the Sergeant has made it clear he didn't hear and see all that took place in this scene.

As for defenses solicitor , Mr Kowalski i would strongly suggest you get your self more familiar with Liberty City laws and constitution before taking another case.

You have 4 issues, court needs to resolve, and some of them are already listed but never answered.

1. As per defenses claims, now the defense must present there evidence, not guesses that will show that plaintiff did indeed break the law at the time he was pulled over and searched.
2. Your claim that Sergeant  Ray Fearon was able to hear you and my client clearly, yet didn't intervene as there was no abuse according to the constitution. Has been proven to be false.
3. There are no laws that state how Police officers should act, there is only constitution. As said before you even quoted and replied, when i said this.
4, You have signed and accepted that court will only use constitution as guideline's  to evaluate did and abuse of power happen.

Court would like to once again explain to defenses solicitor: Crime is an action described in this document and is punishable by the law. Quote from laws of Liberty City as they are just that laws, they are under constitution.
and only thing more important then constitution is server rules.

The court allows digression from the plaintiff if he feels that is something that needs to be mentioned.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović


 
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: badgirl.dhia on August 24, 2019, 01:45:54 am
we dont know why the spokesman dosent want to accept my statement !
while they are based on LCPD Procedures!


Quote
Ordinance XI:
A law enforcer can search and seize any illegal material. The search can only be justified by reasonable doubts and reasons. The citizen must be informed before the search. If he feels the reason is not lawful, he may request a superior authority such as sworn officer, police chief, federal agent or government official, to come and take a decision. The decision can be contested in court if the decision taken cannot be explained by valid reasons.
Looks like none of you guys watched the video footage
So i will write the conversation on a paper also i"ll read it outloud for thoes who cant read!

Quote from: paper :

ronman(1) said : my name is Ron , now please step out of your vehicle
badboydhia(5) steps out
ronman(1) said : you got anything on ya?
badboydhia(5) said : yes
ronman(1) said : weapons? weed?
badboydhia(5) said : no
ronman(1) said : alright
ronman(1) said : turn your face to the vehicle please
badboydhia(5) said : why?
ronman(1) said : i want to frisk you
badboydhia(5) said: why u want to frisk me ?
ronman(1) said : sir , no questions
ronman(1) said : face to the vehicle
badboydhia(5) said : first why u pull over me?
badboydhia(5) said : and now why u want to frisk me

ronman(1) said : face to the vehicle , then i will answer your questions
ronman(1) said : do it , NOW

badboydhia(5) : u are not allowed to frisk me without any reason and without any warrant
badboydhia(5) : call me ur supervisor right now
ronman(1) said : this is the last time i say it
badboydhia(5) : i request a supervisor
ronman(1) said : FACE TO THE VEHICLE
so as we can see, the lcpd freecop asked my client to turn his face to the vehicle in order to frisk him!
he must provide a reason for that ! he didnt
when badboydhia asked the reason of the frisk, the officer said clearly Sir Questions
means he gave a law order to my client to not ask any questions
badboydhia asked again the officer about the reason of the frisk also the reason of the pull over , and his answer is face to the vehicle , do it now
my client informed the lcpd freecop that he is not allowed to frisk him without any reason , and without a warrant
so he is aware that he cant do that, he he simply ignored and keeps screaming
Quote
If he feels the reason is not lawful, he may request a superior authority
there was no reason stated by the officer before he frisk badboydhia , thats why he requested a supervisor  2 times ! not only a single 1
and the officer answer is screaming : FACE TO THE VEHICLE , this is the last time i say it
at this moment my client complied so he dosent get arrested for failure to comply
dosent mean that he agree getting frisked
so as we can see mr badboydhia asked the officer 4 times (green msgs) about the reason of the pullover and the reasons of the frisk
the defendant refused to call his supervisor over the radio
didnt provide the reason of the pull over and the reason of the frisk
also attempted to frisk my client vehicles.

i saw that the citizen was abit resisting the orders of the officer while frisking process.
asking the reason of the pull over / and the reason of getting frisked and requesting a supervisor is resisting ???
also wanted to add my opinion about the sergeant who was observing there and didnt interfare on the abuse made by this freecop officer
what a shame on you sir  :app:
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 24, 2019, 04:11:23 am
Badgirldhia: Your client was given instructions by an Officer of the law. Failing to comply is a criminal offence.

we dont know why the spokesman dosent want to accept my statement !
while they are based on LCPD Procedures!

As a lawyer, I'd have thought you'd know that LCPD procedures are not laws and can't be used to press criminal charges. They are simply internal rules enforced by the LCPD within their department. If an LCPD Cadet+ (clearly not my client) breaches any of the said protocol, you can report them at the ARPD forums. (https://arpd.argonathrpg.com)

"The search can only be justified by reasonable doubts and reasons."

My client felt he had adequate reasoning to search you as you were at an area notorious for narcotics production. He didn't call a supervisor as he thought the Sergeant's presence was already considered supervisor presence.

To the Judges:
For proof, it's clear from Mr. Badboydhia's bodycam where he was, an area where cannabis is grown.

We dismiss our claims of Sergeant Fearon hearing what happened. ((scriptwise he could hear, i asked him over discord and hence why wrote that as /l range is specifically tuned by devs for roleplays))

((Also,
According to my observation i saw that the citizen was abit resisting the orders of the officer while frisking process.

Scriptly i can hear, if you tell me the script is perfectly done, nothing is perfectly made unless its by god, When the officer moved to his crusier and the citizen went to him, the conversation were cut out, i believe that an attorney should gather the info then evidence too before considering someone has done something.
how can he know of badboy's resistance if he couldn't hear the conversation? He could, scriptwise, which should be considered rp as that's what the script range is set for.))

My client's demands remain the same.

Regards,
Kowalski
Attorney
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 24, 2019, 11:21:54 am
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

The court would like to respond to both party's.
First the defendant:

Badgirldhia: Your client was given instructions by an Officer of the law. Failing to comply is a criminal offence.  This statement is false, please find me that law that says that.

Act 4.1
Resisting arrest is a crime in itself. *arrest in this case mean that man is wanted for committing a crime or a suspicion of committing a crime, plaintiff has not been suspected in this case.*
Act 4.5
Disobeying the order or court or government will result into a more severe punishment. *Government are managers not police officers.*

As i said before, simply being in a area, is not a valid reason for a suspicion of a crime, if you found weed in the area then by all means, frisk, search and arrest.

As for Sergeant Ray Fearon he has said in his official court testimony, he was there only to provide support in case of a chase. His presences wasn't anything else.*I will not go in depth why Sergeant Ray Fearon thinks plaintiff did a bit resist, as Sergeant Ray Fearon statement is how this court will look at his presence and actions.*

Now for the plaintiff:

Your statement is not ignored or not accepted, if you would look at past cases like this were dealt per LCPD protocols as base to determine did any abuse happen.

The defendant's solicitor asked for LCPD protocols to be disregarded as the defendant is not a LCPD member, as such we have gone to base on what the LCPD protocols are made and that is the Liberty City Constitution.

When you did read the constitution i'm sure you found it to be very similar to LCPD protocol, only in different wording. As is it just that.

I have watched the video you made and I do find it that defendant didn't have enough reasons to conduct that frisking and demand anything of you, as such i have been asking for defenses reasoning.

I have every intent of making this case a example of how Police officers should act, and as such i will try my best to explain why and where is anyone wrong.

That said, both sides have one final testimony to make for this case and one and only one reply to other sides testimony. Time given for this is 72h.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 24, 2019, 11:43:35 am
Judge, are you trying to tell me that failing to comply with law enforcement is acceptable by the law?

I feel that being in an area that's NOTORIOUS for narcotics production is fair. How do you see being near a cannabis plant as invalid suspicion?

I await your answer.

Regards.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 24, 2019, 01:02:08 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

The court would like to highlight the following to the defendants solicitor.

Crime is an action described in this document and is punishable by the law.

Perpetrator is a person who has committed or attempted to commit a crime.


Ordinance III:
Because of the ownership of a property, an owner may lawfully request a person to leave their property. This does not include businesses which are public markets. The above ordinance does not apply to enforcers of law who have probable cause to be on the property. If the trespasser appears hostile or threatening, refer to Ordinance II. A business owner can still use his right of propriety in circumstances mentioned in Ordinance VIII. [same here probable cause = valid  crime.]

Ordinance IV:
The right of the citizens to be secure in their own belongings against unreasonable searches shall not be violated without probable cause. A citizen may neither be arrested without a legal reason. A law enforcer is allowed to question a person if he has any reasonable motive to think this person is doing a suspicious act. The law enforcer cannot force a person to be put in detention in the only goal to interrogate him. If, in any case, the law enforcer had to transport the person to another area in order to interrogate him and the person is found not guilty, it is the law enforcer responsibility to transport or pay for a transport to carry the person back to his initial location where he was when he was approached to be interrogated. A law enforcer may interview people present at a scene as witness.

*The right of the citizens to be secure in their own belongings against unreasonable searches shall not be violated without probable cause. [read valid crime]*
*A law enforcer is allowed to question a person if he has any reasonable motive to think this person is doing a suspicious act. all a officer can do to a person who is driving in a "suspicious zone**
*The law enforcer cannot force a person to be put in detention in the only goal to interrogate him. [read you need a valid crime  to search and frisk a person and interrogate]*

Ordinance XI:
A law enforcer can search and seize any illegal material. The search can only be justified by reasonable doubts and reasons. The citizen must be informed before the search. If he feels the reason is not lawful, he may request a superior authority such as sworn officer, police chief, federal agent or government official, to come and take a decision. The decision can be contested in court if the decision taken cannot be explained by valid reasons. * The search can only be justified by reasonable doubts and reasons read [valid crime].*

Ordinance XII: 
In the case of arrest or detention, a citizen must be promptly informed of the reasons, must also be informed that he has the right to a lawyer and must be allowed to use that right as soon as possible. He shall also have the validity of the detention controlled by the present law and to be released if the detention is not lawful.

As you can see when LCPD procedures were made they knew the constitution means and they fenced them selfs off how they should act, weather you want to be judged by LCPD or Constitution they mean the same, just LCPD procedures are shorter then the actual constitution post.

9. An LCPD Officer is allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is stated as suspect.
B. When someone's life is in direct danger (example: hostage situations, robberies, chasing a criminal).
C. When the owner of the private property gives permission for it.

10. An LCPD Officer is NOT allowed to cross, search or raid private properties without a warrant:
A. When the owner of the private property is NOT stated as suspect.
B. When a higher ranked LCPD member does not give permission to do so.
C. When the owner of the private property does NOT give permission (exception: life threatning situations).

18. An LCPD Officer is allowed to suspect ONLY:
A. When a civilian committed a valid crime.
B. For roleplaying purposes (both sides must confirm)

1. An LCPD Officer is allowed to use their weapon in the follow situations:
A. When a suspect is refusing to surrender, after atleast two warnings.
B. When a suspect is trying to evade from law enforcement agencies (example: tire-shooting).
C. When a persons' life is in direct danger by being threatened by a suspect / dangerous civilian. The LCPD Officer is allowed to open fire without warning or suspectation and should always aim at non-vital organs.
D. When the LCPD Officer is off-duty and there is a direct danger to self or other lifes and there is no law-enforcement on scene.


Judge, are you trying to tell me that failing to comply with law enforcement is acceptable by the law?

Act 2.6
Anyone who commits or assists in committing a crime, attempts to commit a crime, or who helps the perpetrators to evade or hide or funds them, is guilty of that crime.
Act 6.1
A person who by omitting to perform his duty jeopardizes the lives of others is guilty of criminal negligence.
Act 5.8
A person who endangers the comfort, safety, property or lives of others is guilty of common nuisance.
Act 5.7
Causing disturbance on public places by shouting, fighting, screaming, swearing or using obscene language, being drunk or impede or loitering or molesting is a crime.
Act 3.3
A person who expresses, by his words or actions, seditious intentions, is guilty of sedition.
Sedition is an act that tends towards insurrection or rebellion against the established order by creating and promoting discontent and resistance to authority.


If a person is not taking part in a valid crime and isn't putting his or other lives in danger also isn't obstructing justice by aiding covering or some other form of help to a person who did commit a valid crime, a citizen isn't obliged to obey orders from LCPD, as in this case some orders could mean that police officer is using one’s powers to cause harm to others or pursue one’s personal goals.
Traffic offenses in this case count as valid crimes and can be a reason to carry out searches of vehicles and person. *if the driver rps they are drunk / drugged/ high/ sick or some sort of intoxication.

Example's
Police officers must stop all vehicles/civilians from entering a crime scene in progress or under investigation.
Police officers must stop and question all present witnesses to a crime that's on going or under investigation
Police officers cant search vehicles or persons unless there is a BOLO out on them, or they took a part in a valid crime by witness statements.

Reasonable doubt is driving same vehicle model and color as the vehicle that on BOLO, being in same zone as a BOLO suggest a group/one of criminal's/suspect's are. Being in same house/building as a suspect's are. Being seen by witness/LEO fleeing the scene of a  crime. Being wanted by court order, court warrant. LCPD warrant. Being a interesting party in a ongoing investigation into a crime group/crime.
A 911 call that asks for help in case of assault/threats w. w.o deadly weapons. 911 calls that say a weed dealer is in x zone with x vehicle ( interrogation of the caller must happen also.)

In some other case i failed to mention you can use common sense to see if the person did commit a valid crime and should he be stopped by LEO.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 25, 2019, 11:18:27 am
However, being within range of a cannabis plant surely raises suspicion and gives law enforcement the suspicion of narcotics production. My client argues that his actions were in the interests of the state and its laws, as well as the Constitution. He was ensuring that there was no illegal activity and simply wanted to make sure that the city was safe and that there were no underworld drug deals. If he's going to be punished for trying to prevent crime, then the said punishment is a disgrace to the Court, and to the government, as well as a disgrace to law enforcement in the state, in my client's eyes.

My client's demands remain the same.

Regards,
Kowalski
Attorney.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 25, 2019, 03:13:13 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin


From: Liberty State People's Court Jury, Spokesman of Liberty City Jury Mane Jugović

Please once again, lets go over this.
Were any narcotics found in the area? I have asked 3-4 times where is your evidence that supports your guess that a crime has been done by the plaintiff?

Act 2.1
Presumption of innocence - a person is deemed innocent until proven otherwise in the due process of justice.

And way its proven is by evidence, not guesses.

Thinking that if you a police officer you are entitled to things is shameful, nothing else.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: Kowalski. on August 26, 2019, 12:10:32 am
Badboydhia wasn't declared guilty by any means. There were no narcotics found, nor is there any hard evidence proving badboydhia guilty, which isn't even an allegation from our side. My client isn't calling him a drug trafficker or producer, I'm simply trying to explain the reasoning behind my client's actions and why he felt his actions necessary.

Regards.
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on August 29, 2019, 09:01:50 pm
From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin

Since both sides decides not to make last statments, court will now come with a verdict in next 72h.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović
Title: Re: badboydhia VS ronman
Post by: superh2o on September 02, 2019, 11:21:02 am

From:Courts of the State of Liberty
Frankfort Ave.
Liberty City, Algonquin

The court has reached a verdict in this case.

Te defendant police officer Ronman, has been found guilty of abuse of police power when performing a illegal search of the plaintiff.

He is suspended from active police duty lasting for 1 month (24h). From a moment of his choosing and coordinated with LCPD or Court directly.

Signed:
Mane_Jugović



SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2025, SimplePortal