[DISMISSED][REQUEST TO THE COURT OF LAW] Callahan Security

[Maddy]

Growing power in the USA

Director of Callahan Security
Max Callahan

Your honour,

I, the Director of Callahan Security, would like to request the following terms to be copyrighted in my name

• Callahan Security - Private Military and Security
• You are safe, in our arms

Callahan Security or CS in short is still developing, we are currently recruiting people for our company, and we would like to get permission from the court of law for (the following reasons):

• Obtaining Private Patrol Operator's license[PPO License]
• Engage vigilante mode for FEDERAL CRIMES only.
• Engage pursuit with Federal Criminals only.
• Interrogation of suspects that only WE, the agents of CS have detained.
• Usage of the following weapons, to fight ONLY against hostile criminals and hostile civilians.
  -M4 Carbine
  -M14
  -FNFAL
  -MP5
  -Silenced Ingrams
  -Tec-9
  -Stubby Shotgun
  -Pump Action Shotgun
  -SPAS Shotgun
  -Laserscope Sniper Rifle
  -Sniper Rifle
  -Nightstick
  -Colt 45
• Usage of the following vehicles to pursue Federal criminal(s)/suspect(s) and/or usage for patrolling.
  -Admiral
  -BF Injection
  -Washington
  -Maverick
  -Sparrow
  -Squalo
  -PCJ-600
  -Comet
  -Stinger
  -Cheetah
  -Sentinel XS
  -Sentinel
• Right to lockdown area(s) which is a part of a Federal Crime
• FRA - Fugitive Recovery Agency, to help the court to recover fugitives avoiding court date

It'd be a great help to our Security agency if, your honour, would approve of our requests.
For more information, Click here

That'll be all, your honour.

[/list]

[Huntsman]

Vice City Police Department
Office of High Command
Desk of Chief Gabriel Adams

Notice of Objection
2018.01.30
TO: The Court of Vice City
FROM: Office of Chief of Police Gabriel Adams, Vice City Police Department, Washington Beach

Response to Current Demands

Honorable Court,

As the official law enforcement department of the State of Vice City, United States of Argonath, as well as the main prosecutor of the Court of the State of Vice City, I feel it is the Vice City Police Department's duty to object to these requests, out of which the majority are absurd, illogical and disproportionate.

The group is pretty much trying to be recognized as a law enforcement group, requesting authority that is available only to Vice City Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

First of all, let us begin with the demands to engage in pursuit with suspects. Your Honour, a Private Security and Militia group has no bussiness interfering with the duties of law enforcement. The owner requests for the right to engage criminals wanted for federal crimes, which is the jurisdriction of the Federal Bureau of Investigations and the Vice City Police Department and by comitting such acts the group would be in obstruction of justice by interfering with duties of a federal law enforcement agency.

The group is also requesting the right to lock down an area of a scene of a crime, which once again, is the competence of Vice City Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigations.

Your Honour, in short, the group is demanding rights that are simply not required for the execution of their security duties. A Security Group demanding the right to pursue or engage criminals is illogical and inadequate, and an attempt to compete with the Vice City Police Department, Federal Bureau of Investigations and respective suddivisions. This would interfer with duties of law enforcement and we strictly object to any of the law enforcement authority to be provided to this group.

We should also mention that the owner of the said group, Maddy Callahan, is not competent to handle such authority if it was to be issued, your honour. This man was fired from the Vice City Police Department twice under charges of corruption and is currently blacklisted from the department for two years. Mr. Callahan is also currently in criminal prosecution for illegal possession in which he already pleaded guilty. Your honour, with all due respect to Mr. Callahan, you would be providing a criminal with the right to enforce the law. You may only guess how would that affect the public safety.

Counter-Proposal

Vice City Police Department is willing to recognize the Callahan Security only and once again only as a private security firm. We're refusing and objecting to any law enforcement rights being granted to this group. We are, however, willing to settle on the right of corporate self defence for the firm involving heavy duty weaponry, when it is needed to perform their duties and when their own or the subject's of their protection lives are in imminent danger under the following conditions:

1) Callahan Security to be given rights to protect the lives of the protective custody subjects by deadly force only if met by deadly force. This means that unless they or their subjects have been attacked, they should call the police and await for the police to remove the threat from the premises.
2) Callahan Security is to be given the rights to display weaponry in public space when protecting their subjects only when it is needed as means of intimidation to make a possible threat back off.
3) Callahan Security must inform the Vice City Police Department of every situation when a weapon had to be discharged under the said conditions.
4) Callahan Security members must be prohibited from comitting any crimes. Crimes comitted by this security firm will classify it as a criminal organisation.
5) Vice City Police Department is to be given the authority to issue/revoke those rights to the said firm and reserves the right to revoke the said authority at any given moment if we feel like it is being misused or if the conditions are not being met.

[Maddy]

Growing power in the USA

Director of Callahan Security
Max Callahan

Your honour,

We mostly agree with the VCPD's Response to Demand, but:
i) Our agents have NOT INDULGED in any criminal activities since the launch of the organization. They have done nothing but prevent other crimes from happening.
ii) I agree that it is in our jurisdiction to protect and enforce laws to only our clients and to our client's threats. But our team wanted to have something more than that, we wanted to PROTECT the innocent.
iii)The VCPD is LITERALLY asking the court not to protect the innocent, but only our clients.When we are trying to protect both the civilian and our client when in danger. Our agents down at work were very disappointed at VCPD because of this, this shows that the Law Enforcers that we currently have in the VCPD are envious of our step taken towards the safety of civilians.

So, what will we do?
i)Response to Counter Proposal 1.

We will engage vigilante mode against suspects/criminals threatening the safety of innocent civilians ONLY when the VCPD are not around/when the VCPD are not responding.

ii)Response to Counter Propsal 3,

 The VCPD said:
"A Security Group demanding the right to pursue or engage criminals is illogical and inadequate, and an attempt to compete with the Vice City Police Department, Federal Bureau of Investigations and respective suddivisions. This would interfer with duties of law enforcement and we strictly object to any of the law enforcement authority to be provided to this group." and

"The group is also requesting the right to lock down an area of a scene of a crime, which once again, is the competence of Vice City Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigations."
Henceforth, we'll have to disagree to this Counter Proposal, and we WILL NOT spoon feed the VCPD of actions taken by us.

iii) In response to Counter Proposal 4 & 5:

In no way are we letting you have the authority to revoke our rights. If you feel that some of our agents are misusing their advantages. Contact our Higher Command with evidence, we'll have that agent fired and prosecuted at the court of law.

We agree to:
Counter Proposal 2 ONLY

"2) Callahan Security is to be given the rights to display weaponry in public space when protecting their subjects only when it is needed as means of intimidation to make a possible threat back off."

And please do allow us to display and use weapons when needed to protect the innocent civilians from attacks/possible attacks.

That'll be all, your honour.[/list]

[Huntsman]

Responded below.

[Maddy]

Growing power in the USA

Director of Callahan Security
Max Callahan

Vice City Police Department
Serving and Protecting the people of Vice City since 2008

Public Relations Issue to Callahan Security
2018.01.30

Dear Director of Callahan Security,

You are far overstepping your boundaries here. As far as the state of your agency goes at the moment, you are classified as a civilian organisation and will be treated as such. Any interference with law enforcement operations by your members will be treated as obstruction of justice and will be prosecuted accordingly. Callahan Security is not a law enforcement organisation and has no right noir power to proclaim themselves as one.

Callahan Security does not have the competence to protect the public. That is what the police department is for. Let me make it very clear once again - any attempt by Callahan Security to interfer with the duties of law enforcement and/or attempt to perform the duties of law enforcement without the legal legislation will be taken as impersonation of law enforcement and will have legal consequences.

You may want to check the definition of a security firm, Mr. Callahan, because a security firm has no bussiness interfering with official police duties.

Vigilante justice on its own is a crime and the fact that you intend to comit such crime is worrying on itself. Let me repeat ourselves very clearly once again - you are a civilian organisation and will be treated as such.

And that means our proposal no longer stands. We're withdrawing our proposal to settle under the incompetence of Callahan Security displayed. We have reasonable grounds to believe that such group holding such rights is a threat to public safety.

And our reply to that, your honour.

You may want to check the definition of a security firm, Mr. Callahan, because a security firm has no bussiness interfering with official police duties.

We never did interfere with Police Duty.

Vigilante justice on its own is a crime and the fact that you intend to comit such crime is worrying on itself. Let me repeat ourselves very clearly once again - you are a civilian organisation and will be treated as such.

Let us clarify ourselves. That is exactly why we have applied for a "Private Patrol Operator's license"(PPO License).

Callahan Security does not have the competence to protect the public. That is what the police department is for. Let me make it very clear once again - any attempt by Callahan Security to interfer with the duties of law enforcement and/or attempt to perform the duties of law enforcement without the legal legislation will be taken as impersonation of law enforcement and will have legal consequences.

And yet again, that is why we have applied for a PPO License.

And that means our proposal no longer stands. We're withdrawing our proposal to settle under the incompetence of Callahan Security displayed. We have reasonable grounds to believe that such group holding such rights is a threat to public safety.

"Protecting the civilians is a threat to public safety." -VCPD

We have no words to say other than... "Makes sense."[/list]

You see your honour, Vice City is in desperate need for organizations like us. The VCPD doesn't realize the difference between Civilian Safety and a Civilian's threat.

That'll be all your honour.

[Huntsman]

Vice City Police Department
Office of High Command
Desk of Chief Gabriel Adams

Response to Submissions
2018.01.30
TO: The Court of Vice City
FROM: Office of Chief of Police Gabriel Adams, Vice City Police Department, Washington Beach

Your Honour,

Based on the most recent submission by the Callahan Security firm, it is evident that these men have no competence to understand the concept of law and see no reason to respect the law.

Your Honour, let me put the situation rather simply: this organisation that was just founded good two days ago at most, under the ownership of a former Vice City Police Department officer fired twice under the charges of corruption, with a staff roster with no proper legislative or law enforcement experience, wish to receive law enforcement rights under the pretext of "protecting the public". This sounds even more absurd when we consider a fact that a citizen who was just recently taking part in illegal weapons traficking operation has been just accepted into the organisations ranks.

Your Honour, the Callahan Security management does not have the competence, experience and legislative knowledge to handle the rights that they request. Let's see this submission for what it is, your honour - an attempt of impersonation of the Federal Bureau of Investigations and other intelligence services of the Vice City Police Department. Is the state going to grant law enforcement rights to every group who wish to impersonate the FBI, your honour?

iii)The VCPD is LITERALLY asking the court not to protect the innocent, but only our clients.

You got that absolutely right, Mr. Callahan. It is not in your competence noir in the competence of your firm to enforce the law in the state of Vice City. I am afraid that your understanding of the term "security firm" is a little different from the common term.

Security firm - a firm which provides guards for buildings, and other security services and personnel

You have been offered the security firm license with the proposal issued, but you have rejected such proposal with ridiculous demands. Therefore, in the light of the incompetence displayed by the Callahan Security and their management, the VCPD wish to withdraw their proposal and are in complete objection of any rights of engagement to be provided to this organisation.

We wish to remind the Callahan Security that until the court is to officially address this case, this organisation still remains a Civilian Group and will be treated as such. Any acts of interference with law enforcement duties, impersonation of law enforcement, murder or discharge of firearm will result in prosecution.

[PulseEffect]

The Court will address the applicant with a decision shortly.

[PulseEffect]

Vice City Law Courts Argonath Federal Court

From: The desk of the Honorable Alexander Treblin Address: 143 Downtown State Street, Downtown Vice City, Florida Topic: "Re Callahan Security" Proceeding Number: VC-CIVIL0003/18

Medium Neutral Citation:	Re Callahan Security [2018] AFCR 3
Date of Decision:	30 January 2018
Jurisdiction:	Common Law
Before:	Treblin J
Catchwords:	CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - Designation of certain powers to private security organisation - held constitutionally impossible.
Legislation Cited:	Interim Constitution Law Enforcement Ordinance 2018
Cases Cited:	Re Grupp Sechs Rights [2018] LCPC 2 United States of Argonath v 'Ninth Avenue Razors' [2017] AFCR 5
Texts Cited:	None.
Parties:	Callahan Security (Applicant) Vice City Police Department (Intervenor)
Representation:	Legal Representatives/Counsel: Mr M Callahan (Applicant) Mr G Adams (Intervenor) Instructors: Callahan Security (Applicant) Vice City Police Department (Intervenor)

DECISION

[1].        This is a decision in response to a court application dated 30 January 2018, for various powers and other things by Callahan Security. (the 'Applicant') The Vice City Police Department (the 'Department') intervened on grounds that granting of an application would ultimately lead to the Applicant becoming a de-facto law enforcement organisation.

[2].        The Applicant has applied for eight powers and/or things. I will address each in detail.

Private Patrol Operator's License

[3].        The applicant relevantly submitted that it would be in the interest to grant a "PPO License" to contribute to public safety, yet it has not detailed what such a license would entail nor has it given any specifics of what such a license would enable/limit them to do. Therefore I reject this proposal.

Engaging Vigilante Mode for 'Federal Crimes'

[4].        There are two issues with this proposal, firstly there is a constitutional bar to allowing civilians to engaging in vigilantism for any crime at all; see Section III, Act IX(IV) of the Interim Constitution:

No person is to assist law enforcement if they are not on law enforcement duty themselves.

[Emphasis original]

[5].        Furthermore there is no distinction in criminal jurisdiction with respect to crimes as there is no definition of a 'federal crime'. Therefore I reject this proposal.

Engaging Pursuit with Federal Criminals Only

[6].        This request would essentially allow the Applicant's employees, officers, agents and otherwise to engage in reckless driving which would not be protected by the Interim Constitution¹ with respects to civil liability for any injuries arise out of such a pursuit. Furthermore as I have explained above, engaging in vigilantism is prohibited by the Interim Constitution. For relevant definition², the dictionary definition of vigilantism is: '[l]aw enforcement undertaken without legal authority by a self-appointed group of people.'³ Currently there exists no legal authority under Act IX of the Interim Constitution nor the upcoming Law Enforcement Ordinance 2018 for any civilians to exercise police powers without warrant. Thus I reject this proposal.

Interrogation of Suspects that the Applicant has Detained

[7].        I will not address whether or not the applicant can conduct interrogations or investigations of any accused criminal suspects because it will soon be clearly unlawful for any civilian to arrest or detain any individual without warrant under section 17A of the Law Enforcement Ordinance 2018. The Courts will also, as a matter of public policy and government institutionality, not be granting any warrants to civilian organisations. I reject this proposal.

Usage of Certain Weapons against 'Hostiles'

[8].        Again I refer to Act IX(IV) of the Interim Constitution. I must note that defence of property and others when requested by those owners and individuals respectively,⁴ may be permissible but subject to police investigation and ultimately may lead to prosecution.

Usage of Certain Vehicles for Pursuits and Patrolling

[9].        I have already detailed why pursuing an accused suspect would be not allowed by the Interim Constitution and open to civil liability in paragraph six, the Applicant however is allowed to use whatever vehicles they wish to use for business purposes.

Power to Lockdown Areas

[10].      There is no legislative nor statutory power that would enable me as a justice to allow such a request nor is there even a legislative or statutory basis for a private security organisation to lockdown areas where crimes occur. Only the Department and/or other law enforcement organisations may do so.⁵ I reject this proposal.

Fugitive Recovery Agency Request

[11].      The Court will rely upon the services of the Department and the State Government for enforcement of court orders and other related matters. This proposal is rejected.

Intervenor's Counter Proposal

[12].      The Department submitted the following with the Court:

Vice City Police Department is willing to recognize the Callahan Security only and once again only as a private security firm. We're refusing and objecting to any law enforcement rights being granted to this group. We are, however, willing to settle on the right of corporate self defence for the firm involving heavy duty weaponry, when it is needed to perform their duties and when their own or the subject's of their protection lives are in imminent danger under the following conditions:

1) Callahan Security to be given rights to protect the lives of the protective custody subjects by deadly force only if met by deadly force. This means that unless they or their subjects have been attacked, they should call the police and await for the police to remove the threat from the premises.
2) Callahan Security is to be given the rights to display weaponry in public space when protecting their subjects only when it is needed as means of intimidation to make a possible threat back off.
3) Callahan Security must inform the Vice City Police Department of every situation when a weapon had to be discharged under the said conditions.
4) Callahan Security members must be prohibited from comitting any crimes. Crimes comitted by this security firm will classify it as a criminal organisation.
5) Vice City Police Department is to be given the authority to issue/revoke those rights to the said firm and reserves the right to revoke the said authority at any given moment if we feel like it is being misused or if the conditions are not being met.

[Emphasis original]

[13].      The Court acknowledges point one as it has stated in paragraph eight.

[14].      Point two is rejected as there is no lawful purpose for a private security organisation to display arms in public unless it is actively defending one of themselves, property or clients.

[15].      Point three is not relevant nor appropriate for the Court to address.

[16].      As above for point four.

[17].      As above for point five.

Looking at the 'Grupp Sechs Rights' Decision of Liberty City

[18].      In Re Grupp Sechs Rights,⁶ the People's Court stated roughly the same things as I have just set out but did state there was the possibility of granting of a license, I reject this notion as any sort of license to a private security organisation is completely irrelevant and a burden of litigation for the Courts.

[19].      Laws are created by the government and enforced with governmental authority, there cannot be an outsourcing of such to the private sector without any substantial legislation, to which the Court will not be embarking on. Add the fact that there are significant constitutional issues with private security organisations attempting to use police powers or act as 'de-facto' law enforcement means that this application should be dismissed.

Conclusion

[20].      For the reasons stated above, I dismiss the application.

I certify that the preceding twenty (20) numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment herein of the Honourable Justice Treblin.

Registrar

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

[1].        That the application and proceedings be dismissed.

ORDERED, on this 30th day of January, 2018.

Signed,

Alexander Treblin
Alexander Treblin
Judge

_______________________
Footnotes
¹ See Interim Constitution s III, act XII.
² See United States of Argonath v 'Ninth Avenue Razors' [2017] AFCR 5.
³ Oxford University Press, Definition of vigilantism in English Oxford Dictionaries <https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/vigilantism>.
⁴ See Interim Constitution s III, act XVIII.
⁵ Ibid s II, ord VI.
⁶ [2018] LCPC 2.

JUDGEMENT SUMMARY
Today, the Argonath Federal Court dismissed an application for certain police powers and other related items on the basis that it would be constitutionally and soon to be statutorily illegal to grant such police powers.
 

• This statement is not intended to be a substitute for the reasons of the Court or to be used in any later consideration of the Court’s reasons.

~Distributed by authority of the Courts of Argonath~