Heavily flawed penal code

[MasterChief]

6 minutes ago, Brett said:

It's hypotheticals like this along with a lot of other problems, why I'm and have been working on completely removing PD's ability to charge on their own. I'm working on getting a working DA system where people will have representation right from the get-go when they are charged and/or detained, and someone who is not a police officer and an actual BAR licensed Attorney from the DA's office will be ensuring that both PD are held to account, charges are correct, and things are handled in a more legalistic and fair manner. I've been drawing up plans for it for months, and hopefully should see implementation of it this month. PD has already been alerted to the idea, and I do think the public once they hear of it will also be satisfied with the result. 

 

An image of some of it is here for viewing. 

 

Point being, I'm actively working on fixing the PD charging mechanisms and making the system more fair. When people like earlier insult me in doing that, or assume that I'm just "Sticking up for systems of oppression," or something is when I get turned off from wanting to engage in more conversation. I'm not hard to work with, but you do have to diligently work with me to find a solution. Not saying this personally to you, just in general to anyone. 

This sounds amazing. This is a huge plus. I applaud your efforts. Looking forward to seeing more of it. 

Edited July 10, 2019 by Kestalas

[Bospy]

5 minutes ago, Jedai said:

However I pose a counter question, i, if someone did commit further crimes and a lead were to be presented during processing, is it still considered abuse for a Detective to then put someone in for 72 hours to further investigate that lead if the crimes committed are linked to the same situation? 

Depends on the context. I still find 72 hours to be excessive without a prison, but if it existed within Brett’s system functionally, I would be more than satisfied. If an environment existed where they had active interaction with both detectives and other inmates, it would definitely be fine with me - provided there’s some sort of gang investigation or felony involved.

Edited July 10, 2019 by Bospy

[Brett]

7 minutes ago, Bospy said:

Understandable, and I appreciate you revealing that. I’ve seen similar systems in the works before. I’ll just say this: as you can see, not responding can galvanize the opposition. I apologize for getting worked up as a result.

 

I’ve settled down now, but I feel like the 72 hour hold would be more suited to when representation does exist in the form of DAs/lawyers/etc. Personally, that’d be sick to exist, but when it doesn’t, it sort of leaves a criminal without much recourse and without a lot of interaction. Your outline looks superb.

Believe me, I was surprised to see 11 pages of this thread since I was originally going to just let it go and hence I felt compelled to come back and see if I found an argument I liked which is why I'm sorta grilling Mantle directly to get some of the answers I'm hoping for. I don't really care about the time limit itself per say, but I do care that we're issuing out punishments that are fully justified and not due to any OOC bias, grudges, or just outright incompetence in some cases. Things in the courts and law aren't subperb or even to the standard I wish them to be, hence why I have worked daily to ensure it gets better from rewriting the ENTIRE Penal Code myself from what it originally was (Which was a horror show I assure you), changing how warrants were dealt with, changing standards of what's required, holding officers and PD to account, etc. Believe me it's made a difference, but we still have a way to go and it just takes time. 

 

I'm someone who is very pro-reform to a lot of things, and honestly I can talk peoples ears off about everything I see that should be changed from top to bottom on a server, and I've found little opposition to my ideas when I would do that because at the end I'm not doing it for me, I'm doing it for others. I don't get IG, yet have been here working in the shadows for almost 1 year as the Chief Justice and I've gotten not a dime of money IG or any special benefits on a OOC level and yet I still engage. Things aren't perfect, but I'm working to get them better or as I've told everyone "My goal isn't to be entirely realistic, but to get us as close to a level of realism within the limitations of the game itself." And I hold true to the philosophy no matter what I advocate for or discuss. So now, at least you know something more about me and can maybe see where I come from on issues. And if anyone ever has further issues outside of the one on this thread with law in general, please shoot me a pm or discord message. I'm happy to answer and debate with you on anything you feel is an issue, don't be shy. I don't bite....much. 

[Mantle]

46 minutes ago, Brett said:

A detainment is not a substitute for an arrest, or an alternative method of holding someone who actually committed a crime.

I feel like this sums up my situation.

 

I feel one of two things happened in my situation:

• The detectives knew on day one I had committed a crime yet decided to just "detain me without charge for up to 72 hours" (ended up being closer to 48, still, shouldn't have been any at all) just to give me some extra time because... well, why not? Chances are nothing will be done about it. I was told at the time "You're being detained until the judge signs off on the warrant and they will by the way"... what warrant they were talking about? Zero idea.
• Since no new evidence was found in between the first hour of the crime and the last hour, I got in game after being approached to come in game. I was then convicted by the same detective after 48 hours to serve the time for my actual crime. 

So question, since no new evidence was gathered and they used all the evidence they had from day one to convict me as guilty... doesn't this situation match what you said? "alternative method of holding someone who actually committed a crime." their mind was made on day one. 

 

And yes, I agree, bringing it up to a court would've been amazing. That opportunity should've presented itself within those 48 hours but instead I was told "You can handle it after you've served your time" which was 50 hours later. When I requested a lawyer on the first day and didn't receive one for the next 50 hours, that's another problem. How can we expect these things to be settled in-character when all in-character representatives for people detained aren't available? 

 

@Jedai

 

Again, no idea who you are. Too many cops commenting but anywho. In no real situation, is someone going to be charged and found guilty with the charges I was given. I never left the scene. I was accused of using a knife on someone. When I was handcuffed and the whole area was searched by two K9s and 6+ officers (at the very least), no knife was ever retrieved. Main thing is: I never left that area. You realize that knife would HAVE to be found to support your dashcam footage considering how small the timeframe was between the footage and when my player was handcuffed in the exact same area? That is EXACTLY why in my interview with detectives, they kept asking "Where is the knife?" etc etc because realistically, those charges would not stick. The dashcam itself is super far away to pick up any knife clearly. Had a knife been retrieved? I'd say yes, my character is absolutely guilty. A knife was never retrieved though. A dashcam of maybe two/three pixels that is assumed as a knife (switchblade) is all that was gathered, from a cruiser far away. And yes, I do believe my "Thats my thumb" story (not a knife) at the time was creative. It was on you guys to prove different by finding this knife that couldn't be found.

 

At the station that first day my character was told only the following: "you're being investigated for assault with a deadly weapon", aggravated battery was never mentioned so no, I am not leaving out or mixing up any information here. I was detained for just that one two hour charge. Despite no new evidence appearing, 48 hours later, I was then actually convicted guilty by the same officer who led the initial detaining. This is obviously a case of abusing the detainment system. Law enforcements mind was made on day one if I was guilty or not yet decided to throw me into a jail for 48 hours without charge.

 

I believe a few things could've went better here:

 

• Don't offer attorneys if you cannot provide them. I requested one. 50 hours later? Still no attorney. Dealing with this situation in-character? Impossible.
• If you're going to detain people for 48 hours before charging them, you'd want to HOPE that you do not have enough evidence already to actually find them guilty and that during those 48 hours you'll find something. Otherwise, it is obviously seen as just abusing those 48 hours to elongate the time behind bars.
• Not to mention all of the errors on law enforcements side that ultimately would've had this situation thrown into a bin before anything could stick.

The question stands: What happened during those 50 hours that found myself guilty that wasn't already apparent in the first hour? Nothing. 

 

 

@Brett

 

I didn't actually see what questions you asked. Can you repeat?

 

Edited July 10, 2019 by Mantle

[Brett]

Quote

Okay, so. I can tell you that we don't use CA law for a lot of reasons here, so most arguments that fall on CA law are pretty much dismissed by default as we're trying to make this experience unique to SA and applicable only to SA. Just some information you may not have known, but that we've been practicing with the courts for a while since I became Chief Justice. And I think your point about a possible "no detainment period," is more rooted in idealism then reality of how it functions with people. The only people who really should be detaining are detectives, because I HIGHLY doubt that some POII on the beat is going to be doing an investigation into like gang violence or something which may warrant a detainment due to a pending interrogation or something. And to my knowledge, there isn't anyone who gets detained on a misdemeanor and if police officers are I would honestly say they may be mentally impaired. "Yea Bruh, gunna detain you on a DUI for 72 Hours, HAHAHA". Yea...I don't believe that happens, and would happily punish anyone who did it if made aware. 

 

And felonies in general shouldn't be separated based on mere severity, as they both are the same class of crime. At the end of the day, detainments are usually for investigations. Like for example if a criminal is brought into the station and needs to be interrogated but may not have time that night to get it done and may need to come back tomorrow or something, which happens. A detainment is not a substitute for an arrest, or an alternative method of holding someone who actually committed a crime. The only reason you should be detained is for purposes of a plea deal, interrogation, or maybe transportation in very special circumstances. If you're in detainment just for the sake of, "Well we know you have something, but don't know what. And we're going to hold you here for no other reason but to make your day harder," that's something you could bring up to a court. As all detainments must be given a legitimate lawful reason as to why you have not been processed to an actual arrest or let go, regardless of the period allocated. Simply put, if PD wastes your time with a detainment. Waste PD's time on a lawsuit. 

 

Although I can actually agree with you that it may be a little more "forgiving," for a 48 hour limit. What stops it from going lower? Imagine if someone came to you if you set it to 48 hours if you were in charge of the Penal Code, and tells you. "Hey, lower it to 24 hours." With the same exact reason and logic? They would be rather equally valid in the opinion, and let's say you cave and lower it further. Then another person comes and tries for 12 Hours, then 8, etc. My point being, what in your opinion is an objective standard for how low the time should actually be, while not making it too low to be unfair to investigations? 

My post again. @Mantle

[Bospy]

23 minutes ago, Brett said:

I'm someone who is very pro-reform to a lot of things, and honestly I can talk peoples ears off about everything I see that should be changed from top to bottom on a server, and I've found little opposition to my ideas when I would do that because at the end I'm not doing it for me, I'm doing it for others. I don't get IG, yet have been here working in the shadows for almost 1 year as the Chief Justice and I've gotten not a dime of money IG or any special benefits on a OOC level and yet I still engage. Things aren't perfect, but I'm working to get them better or as I've told everyone "My goal isn't to be entirely realistic, but to get us as close to a level of realism within the limitations of the game itself." And I hold true to the philosophy no matter what I advocate for or discuss. So now, at least you know something more about me and can maybe see where I come from on issues. And if anyone ever has further issues outside of the one on this thread with law in general, please shoot me a pm or discord message. I'm happy to answer and debate with you on anything you feel is an issue, don't be shy. I don't bite....much. 

I would much rather hear a counter-argument than be kowtowed. If I had known this about you, you would’ve found a lot more respect and less resentment. I do respect you for this work because it is significant work. I share the same philosophies as you - if things can get better, they should be made better. Most of the arguments in the thread for those 11 pages were against other players justifying long prison times, which if a prison existed, wouldn’t be that big of a deal in my book. So in my book as of now, I’m satisfied. It doesn’t mean too much from some random, but it did at least settle things.

 

Even still, reading about what Mantle wrote and what I heard from crybaby just ignited that flame in my brain to pursue this because of the nightmare I mentioned.

 

I’ll still keep track of this thread, and I’d like to see a temporary reduction in time at least until a system with a lot more recourses like you’ve brought up exists (in line with PD arrest hours), but I am more confident now that you’ve addressed things here.

 

Also, @Jedai, I didn’t doubt that PD could handle itself, but I was mainly arguing from a “what-if” POV, a worst case scenario. I hope you didn’t misconstrue it as me saying I expect it to happen due to specific people within PD, but it is good to hear there has been oversight.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Bospy

[Brett]

The new system may actually come sooner then later, so it may render that mute. But I get you @Bospy

[Bospy]

1 minute ago, Brett said:

The new system may actually come sooner then later, so it may render that mute. But I get you @Bospy

Great to hear. I look forward to it and wish you the best of luck in executing it. What matters to me most of all is balancing fun and realism. I think a well-executed court system will be both.

Edited July 11, 2019 by Bospy

[Mantle]

56 minutes ago, Brett said:

Although I can actually agree with you that it may be a little more "forgiving," for a 48 hour limit. What stops it from going lower? Imagine if someone came to you if you set it to 48 hours if you were in charge of the Penal Code, and tells you. "Hey, lower it to 24 hours." With the same exact reason and logic? They would be rather equally valid in the opinion, and let's say you cave and lower it further. Then another person comes and tries for 12 Hours, then 8, etc. My point being, what in your opinion is an objective standard for how low the time should actually be, while not making it too low to be unfair to investigations? 

 

Well, if you find a balance in what the majority want changed now, that majority will then support you when the next person comes along and says "I want it lowered (again)." and you'll have a larger following of those who will be of the mindset "No it's okay", as seen here, it is not a minority group talking about this. There is a lot of people that feel lowering it would be beneficial to the server. I do too. I'm not going to bite off more than I can chew personally and if a topic popped up looking for it to be lowered even more, I'd urge those to settle with what we've got. I think there is a perfect middleground. It doesn't need to be changed to absolutely suit those in favor of drastically reducing the detention time. It also doesn't need to not change at all to suit those who don't fancy change. A compromise somewhere in the middle is fair and probably best for the server. If it doesn't work out? Change it back. Give it a trial period. What's the harm?

 

I'd expect something more forgiving now, test the waters, if it works better than before, good thing it was tested, right? If it doesn't, change it back to 72. No harm done to anyone. 

Edited July 11, 2019 by Mantle

[Brett]

I'll run it by a few people and see if there is any real objections. I personally don't care for the time itself, as long as the job is done and fair. So we'll see how it goes, and I'll get back to you. @Mantle