RISING STAR ! The ultimate source to ace your NYPD Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain Exam Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to subscribe to our mailing list and get info on the next Sgt, Lt. or Captain Exam!
If anyone is even considering appealing questions send in your request for an appeals session. It's on the answer key. If you don't mail it in on time then you wont be able to view the exam again. Don't wait until the answer key comes out, it will be too late.
You don't have to go to the appeal session to appeal, that's just the only way to see the test. The directions are either on the take home sheet or will be posted by dcas - generally you have to make 4 copies of the appeal and send it to dcas. If you go to the appeals session they give you sheets that are in quadruplicate and depending on the person in the room they will make copies of the PG for you.
phantom question about short sleeves the scenario was about their hiring/appointment days one on jan1 the other on jan2. in the scenario 2 umos were observed on foot post but no season of the year...
I definately want to appeal 2 questions. The first one is the first question on the test with who to put in the robbery auto, I narrowed it down to 2 choices, 1 was on a priority post and the other was on the T/S. I picked the one on the T/S because nothing that I saw in the packet said that the T/S was a must cover and it said the priorty patrol posts should or must be covered. Strong sources tell me the answer is the cop that was on the priority post should have went in the auto, but why take him off the priority post to have to put someone else on that post when you could just put the T/S OP and replace the T/S OP with one of the 8x4 guys that were added. If I am wrong someone let me know if I'm missing something in regards to that
2nd is the question on who is going to investigate the complaint from the civilian about the summons he was written by the unnamed discourteous civilian attired umarked driving MOS, where on the summons there was never a tax number or signature so who wrote it is in question and if there's any doubt to the identity of the member the CO/D.C is to investigate, I believe the answer choice was for the PLT CMDR to investigate, I think thats wrong also.
that question was in the in basket and there was the patrol sgt i believe, the plt cmdr, the ico or admin lt, and the DI/CO......strong sources tell me the answer is the plt cmdr, but I believe it should be the CO from that fact pattern that was given
3rd wonder the correct answer choice is lt. plt commander in the pct. if a ccrb complaint for a) unknown umos or cod#requested and c/v is transient or homeless, so either one the investigating supervisor will either spec ops, or ico or lt. plt com the acronim in fastrack pg was S.I.P. Now if non of them available then the investigating supervisor will co or duty capt the correct answer was lt. burke. ops coordinator is wrong and co as well
I understand that but in the question itself did it say the civilian was trainsient or homeless and if he was, he got a summons for no seatbelt? step 17 under investigating supervisor in the patrol guide states to notify the co/dc if unable to ascertain the identity of the member against whom the complaint is being lodged, well what does the co/dc do, does he investigate or he just gets notified and thats it?............sig226 thanks for the feedback by the way
I understand that but in the question itself did it say the civilian was trainsient or homeless and if he was, he got a summons for no seatbelt? step 17 under investigating supervisor in the patrol guide states to notify the co/dc if unable to ascertain the identity of the member against whom the complaint is being lodged, well what does the co/dc do, does he investigate or he just gets notified and thats it?............sig226 thanks for the feedback by the way
-- Edited by 3yrWonder at 19:27, 2009-02-09
-- Edited by 3yrWonder at 19:47, 2009-02-09
The duties of the MOS taking the report (PAA, cop, Sgt, whatever) are to notify the investigating supervisor if doubt as to MOS or COD# and transient/homeless. That question falled under "doubt" due to the unsigned summons, unmarked car, plainclothes etc.
The investigating supervisor is defined as SOL, ICO or Platoon Commander. If none of those are available, CO/Duty Capt. The platoon commander was working and available.
Since the investigating supervisor will never be a Sgt, you shouldn't be worried about their duties.
I definately want to appeal 2 questions. The first one is the first question on the test with who to put in the robbery auto, I narrowed it down to 2 choices, 1 was on a priority post and the other was on the T/S. I picked the one on the T/S because nothing that I saw in the packet said that the T/S was a must cover and it said the priorty patrol posts should or must be covered. Strong sources tell me the answer is the cop that was on the priority post should have went in the auto, but why take him off the priority post to have to put someone else on that post when you could just put the T/S OP and replace the T/S OP with one of the 8x4 guys that were added. If I am wrong someone let me know if I'm missing something in regards to that
2nd is the question on who is going to investigate the complaint from the civilian about the summons he was written by the unnamed discourteous civilian attired umarked driving MOS, where on the summons there was never a tax number or signature so who wrote it is in question and if there's any doubt to the identity of the member the CO/D.C is to investigate, I believe the answer choice was for the PLT CMDR to investigate, I think thats wrong also.
The question with the rookies. In the body of the question it said that the scenario took place in august, hense why they were wearing short sleeves. It just said they were hired in January.
Hey, according to someone else, not sure if anyone else noticed this (I didn't) in regards to the rob auto question, the guy from the priority post that was the assumed correct answer is actually supposed to have been RDO according to the provided command roster. Wondering now if you were supposed to pick up on that and line him off the roll call or assume that he's on OT, or just chalk it up to DCAS screwup........anyone else hear about this one?
i didn't like that rob auto question for the simple fact that you were left with 2 guys one was on the TS and one was on a priority post, there was a memo for the priority post list but there was no memo stating the TS was a must or should cover, and the other memos were talking about experience and where to pick personnel from, why take someone off a priority post just to have to put someone back when you can just take the TS off. The way i looked at it was you have 2 guys, one on a priority post(regardless its the last post on the list its still a priority) the other one, TS, no mention of it's coverage, anyone agree or disagree? I think I have a valid argument
How easy is it to actually get a question thrown out tho if you appeal it? Is it done pretty often or is it REALLY improbable even with a good argument? I know last test there wasnt one question thrown out.
I also didn't like question #2 with giving the the dv cop admin sick. I believe the answer to that question was D, to remain at residence or other authorized location unless permission to leave is granted by surgeon or sick desk supervisor. Well the question was asking if she could go ADMIN shes going to get denied cause you can't go admin for an injury, but that answer choice applies if she was to go regular sick, no where in any of the answer choices or question did it say she went REGULAR sick. If she doesn't go sick then she doesn't have to remain at her residence. I believe it should have said she was going regular sick or the sgt has to deny her and tell her to go regular sick then that answer choice would apply. I think I have a valid argument there, anyone agree or disagree?
I agree with u 3yrwonder. The dv cop requested to go admin not sick. Do u remember how the question was posed? I think I got this one wrong and want to refresh my memory.
she was restricted sprained her angle going down the steps, something like that, and she was already RDO and scheduled to come in when she called to request admin
A friend got question 98 wrong I was thinking about protesting it based on the fact that it said two plastic envelopes and not property security envelopes because we do have jewelry security envelopes which r also plastic
YOU ARE CORRECT BECAUSE IT DID NOT SPECIFY AT ALL WHAT TYPE OF ENVELOPE. IT JUST SAID PLASTIC. THAT IS ONE OF THE BEST PROTEST I HAVE SEEN SO FAR. IT SHOULD BE A DEFINITE THROW OUT FROM THIS TEST. DO NOT JUST THIINK ABOUT PROTESTING IT JUST DO IT.
