Jason Lee

Name you used last as PD: Jason Lee/Steele
Previous rank within the PD:  Sergeant
Discord Name & #: Jason Steele #0526
How long ago were you a cop: 5 months ago
Did you leave on bad or good terms: Great terms.
Would you be considered by other players as a karen roleplayer/problem player?: I do not believe so. 
Are you in a group of problem players on civilian?: I didn’t really play civilian that much, so no.
Region: NA
Steam64ID: 76561198166458348

Just now, Tom Najail said:

Mr Berg and Mr Anderson’s motions are sustained.

The Court recognises the motion to enter discovery, however, having re-read the complaint and answer the Court believes that all claims made by the plaintiffs hinge on if the warrant was valid, bar the infliction of emotional distress claim which the plaintiffs pose the legal question as to whether or not the MSP was justified in pointing weapons at the plaintiffs based on the fact that the warrant was not labelled ‘armed and dangerous. If both parties agree, the Court is willing to make a judgment. If not, we can move to discovery.

 The only reason the Court is asserting this speculation is to save all parties some time, it makes no difference to the bench.

Do both parties agree? @Jason Lee @Mike Getreel

The defendant agrees.

@Tom Najail

The defendant stipulates that the question the court asks is the fundamental issue here, but also notes that some of the facts in the complaint are not correct to the defendant’s knowledge. Much of the plaintiff’s complaint contains opinion offered as alleged facts. 
 

At this time, the defense would like to motion for discovery your honor. 

1 hour ago, Mike Getreel said:

Your honor,

 

The plaintiffs would like to file a Motion for Summary Judgment.
 

The Plaintiff is filling this motion based on the following facts and reasons:

 

Below refers to  A. Answering the Claims for Relief:

In the defense’s response to paragraph 1, the defense has failed to cite materials to back the claims made and failed to provide the ‘state law’ the defense is referring to, therefore, this court shall not consider this argument as valid.

In the defense’s response to paragraph 2, the defense has failed to cite materials to back any relevant claims made, and has failed to make an argument that is relevant to the claims made by the plaintiff. The defense also failed to clarify the parts admitted and the parts denied and fails to provide the ‘state law’ the defense is referring to, therefore, this court shall not consider this argument as valid.

 

In the defense’s response to paragraph 3, the defense fails to provide a valid argument to the claims made by the plaintiff, therefore, the defense has not disputed the claims by the plaintiff and the court shall not consider this argument as valid.

 

In the defense’s response to paragraph 4, the defense has failed to cite materials to back the claims made, and has not made supporting factual rebuttals, therefore, this court shall not consider this argument as valid.

In the defense’s response to paragraph 5, the defense fails to provide an argument. While the defense did cite materials, the defense must provide a valid argument for the court and the defense has not, therefore, this court shall not consider this argument as valid.

 

In the defense’s response to paragraph 6, the defense has failed to cite materials to back the claims made, while also not making supporting factual rebuttals to the plaintiffs claims that the plaintiff has provided evidence to support, therefore, this court shall not consider this argument as valid.
 

 

The plaintiff wishes for this court to rule in favor of the plaintiff, granting the full relief requested, as the defense has poorly drafted a response of the claims made by the plaintiff, filled with invalid arguments that fail to, 1) provide arguments directly relevant to the claims made by the plaintiff, 2) provide evidence to back the arguments made against the plaintiffs claims, which must be presented in order for an argument to be considered valid. 

 

Furthermore, the plaintiff files a Motion for Sanctions, based on the argument provided by the defense claiming that, “The defendant also argues that police were forced to remain in the dwelling by being locked in there by the plaintiff.”
This allegation can be disproven in Exhibit A provided by the plaintiff. This false statement is in breach of the Rules of Professional Practice and Procedure § 2 Rule 204.
“An attorney shall not knowingly make a false statement or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to a party by the attorney.”

Thank You,

Jason Board

 

The defendant vehemently rejects the ridiculous claims made by the plaintiff. There is no reason to motion for sanctions or summary judgement because the defendant has responded to each pleading and addressed each allegation in the complaint, nor is the defendant required to detail why in the answer we reject or accept the facts offered by the plaintiff, which is just a pure failure of the plaintiffs understanding of civil law. Your honor, we humbly ask for the denial of the motion for summary judgement because there is clearly still a dispute of the key facts of the case, which prevents a decision. The motion for sanctions is frankly ridiculous and bordering on making the plaintiff appear as a vexatious litigant.

@Tom Najail

Motion for Judgement on the Pleadings

Your honor, the defendant motions for judgement on the pleadings in favor of the defendant as the pleadings and defenses reveal the baseless claims of the plaintiff. The argument from the plaintiff provides no clear evidence of their claims in the civil complaint and the defendant believes it appropriate to award no relief to the plaintiff, exude the defendant from liability, and dismiss the matter with prejudice.

@Tom Najail

Your honor, attached is the defendant's answer to the complaint.

1 hour ago, Mike Getreel said:

The plaintiff would like to introduce Exhibit I: https://docs.google.com/document/d/149tf26ibxNcPv0OCu4wxuICiv3ntzLvM1In8CxRXjqA/edit?usp=sharing

@Tom Najail

Your honor, the defendant objects to the introduction of the evidence offered by the plaintiff to be marked as a new exhibit under several concerns. The evidence has no foundation certifying that the exhibit is what it purports to be. Additionally, the defendant is severely concerned with the qualification of the affiant to make diagnoses and prescriptions typically made by a certified doctor, not a paramedic who provides emergency life saving services and first aid. We ask this evidence offered to be included on the record rejected due to the serious concerns for the qualifications of the affiant.

9 hours ago, Tom Najail said:

@Jason Lee will 72 hours surfice? 

Would we be able to get 96 hours your honor?

@Tom Najail

Your honor, the MSP Legal Team shall defend the MSP in this matter.

We will need considerable time to draft an answer to the complaint.

(Jason Lee, Chris Winters, Ross Lee, Peter Clark, Jackson Black, Kelvin Levington)

7 minutes ago, Peter Clark said:

Hello Paul, I hear you worries about the merger.  It's a different culture between CG and LDSO I feel you're mistaken on how it would change.  The CG culture would not simply disappear like when many cultures in today's age merge they don't disappear and many adapt cultures bring in new ideas, traits, and way's of doing things.  It will absolutely change though that's a fact but that I dare to say isn't a bad thing because change is good.  

Nick I completely agree is an great captain and his passion for the Coast Guard is unrivaled, I am excited to work together with Nick and the rest of the USCG command to accomplish big things.

As for the punishment system the LDSO has Anti Corruption Unit for the main source of punishments.  I'll say I live under a rock because Removal From Position Policy is always followed in the LDSO (If it's not we just appeal the punishment) and people always get a chance to defend themselves before they are punished.  We have an appeal section just like USCG does for any punishments that go through ACU or come from a command member in the faction.  One of our Majors would then investigate the punishment and make sure protocol was followed, the punishment was indeed a violation, and that the punishment is fitting for the violation.

Also cops don't have to give out tickets every 2 minutes for things like running a stop sign, officer discretion allows everyone in my Sheriff's Office to do what they think is proper in that situation if they want to give the tickets out.  With our Maritime and Aviation Division we're looking to add as a part of the merge you wouldn't be doing what you just spoke about and would basically be doing the same things you do now as CG.

 

One hundred percent agreed I hear what some of you guys are saying but legitimately it will basically be CG but with way more jurisdiction and benefits. 

14 minutes ago, Thomas Ivankov said:

PRE TRIAL
Tbh In my opinion this is going to hurt both factions, and will not turn out the wat we are thinking it will. However I am hopeful and want to see what this is going to be like but I do have my worries on what will happen with spec ops will there be more slots added for both spec ops departments or? Idk very nervous about what will happen to ranks and positions in the pd. 

 

*IF THIS WAS ADRESSED IN THE MEETING CALL ME STUPID AND IGNORE ME I WAS NOT THERE* 

Ur stupid this was addressed in the meeting big heart but yeah this is cap puddles

This is an amazing decision that I think most of us want to see on a permanent basis. No more guess work for jurisdiction and no more complications, we would all be in one faction united. I think this wouldn’t change much among comradery as the CG boys would have their unique division, if anything it will create the opportunity for more friendships to form among law enforcement and work with new people. A really great plus for this is the simplicity of law enforcement has one faction to worry about for the developers, no more of this they get that we don’t get anything business. I quite look forward to playing with the CG guys together and I believe many will find they are fully capable.

@Papa Pug

Motion for Summary Judgement

The state motions for summary judgement in favor of the prosecution as evidence is sufficient to warrant that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of the offenses he has been charged with. The defendant was given 48 hours to plea and has refused to act for 11 days since the court moved to ask for a plea.

Upon a successful motion, we request an arrest warrant to bring Mr. Lucas to prison as we believe he is evading these proceedings as a fugitive. 

Here is the criminal record, 

17 minutes ago, Papa Pug said:

Understood, Mr. Steele please research and respond. 

A criminal records check indicates that Mr. Lucas was charged and arrested for possession of a class 3 firearm and unlawful discharge. The state will motion to dismiss the two charges in the document but the rest stand.

@Tamem Lucas , serving notice of the above mention indictment against you.

52 minutes ago, Papa Pug said:

@Jason Steele please coordinate with @Loxxon Husky and the clerks to have this individual located and served.  He is no in my records here or on the other people search under that name.

I believe this is the person, your honor.

I don’t mind an economy wipe at all really, as I think it’ll revitalize some unused/uncommon functions like drug box drops in the ocean or give a lot of use to the new burglary system for example. 
 

I think a dice roll is honestly a bad idea, just because it seems so dumb to make a side be forced to suicide their whole team. I think the fundamental issue here is how majors are constructed in the first place, with indoor CQC in mind. Most majors make more sense to fight it out instead of stage this massive getaway plan. I’d love to see majors have a more “heist” feel to them and involve more open spaces in the outdoors. I do believe you have something like this in mind with the Aurora Labs concept of a different type of major/crime activity and things we haven’t even seen yet. 
 

I would be against hiding player reports, there’s a real value with transparency of how everything is handled. The transparency of seeing the results gives me peace of mind that issues are handled fairly. 
 

Being completely honest, I’m not a fan of the Kings Peaks map set up. Something about it seems off and the circular feel of the whole map made me feel tired of it quick. The pure infrastructure of Kings County roads and overpasses provided a much more satisfying look. I honestly wouldn’t mind some sort of new map that incorporated some of the aesthetics of Kings County but new at the same time with different cities and such. I also really enjoyed how each road had a name. No offense to the map developers but I just don’t believe Kings Peaks was a finished concept ever and I truly believe that map isn’t as enjoyable as Kings County because of how the map is set up. 
 

For Takistan, I don’t really play it, either way is fine.

Thanks for reading!

I have been the biggest proponent of putting more RP in the server but I do think it is clear that low-tier Class 3 Firearms need to be back in rebel. As long as it is balanced and there are still high tier guns you can craft that are not available at rebel, that nice middle ground would be beneficial for the player count IMO. Also, the Kamdan major crime rules need to make a return because there is no point pretending to negotiate when one side has nothing to bargain for.

+1 exceptional work by the developers

"Added slicktop versions of all cop cars "

I can't seem to find them. Have they be added into the cop shops yet?

POG, DOJ getting love??

Thank you development team and Doug!

Lets go roleplayers

Wipeeeeeeee