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!

The tatoo cop said it was approved by the CO in his personnel folder and the girl was a brunette with a brown clip. Both were good, I picked the girl with the brown clip bc it asked who you would not have to report to the CO after your inspection, I figured you would have to ask the Co if that cop was actually approved or not, but I was probably reading too much into the fact pattern. Both should be correct.

The voucher, the weed was the only good one.

I put PAR and don't use the reference marker bc it was on a bridge. There was no condition of severity mentioned was there? Was any car actually towed or anyone taken to the hospital? Somewhat vague, I can't remember for sure if any vehicle was towed, but I do know a motorist was treated on the scene, never taken to the hospital.

A few others? Did you call the CO on the drug cop or invoice the orange syringe cap? It said most correct, you do both, but usually most correct means which comes first when there is more than one right answer. The invoicing is mentioned in the additional data of that procedure and refers you to a procedure in 218 for invoicing and adds you must make it investigatory. So how can telling the CO come before invoicing when its really two procedures combined into one question? I know they tell you to answer it from 205, but in the fact pattern the Sgt and Lt didn't follow the procedure in that two supervisors suspected drug use, yet they didn't do anything about it until the orange cap popped out? Not a fair question at all. Should get thrown out.

I told the lady complaining about garbage to call 311 herself.

I dropped the RD on the ECB it was 21 days, but got the C summons right, Murphy was transferred- VOID.

The PINS with ARS I am not sure what the correct answer was? I think I picked the stranded juvi didn't need a ARS? But I dunno if I am right or not? Also it never calls it a PINS Warrant, it just says "person in need of supervision", doesn't mention any warrant in the question.

The media incident was tricky. The desk does not notify DCPI, the member involved does. DO does notify CO, Plt Cmdr, Ops though.

I picked you do nothing for giving a speech of non-official, no dept business. I picked you do nothing for the off duty cop that called 911 that saw an assault.

Might have missed this, sorry... What was the DV one with the guy throwing a mirror.

House party detail question took me the longest. I went with B. the crime sgt who was eot@ 2057.

Last in basket question, quest 17, anyone remember what it was??

17. Anti-crime cop from 1st platoon for detail?

-- Edited by 1534sux on Monday 31st of October 2011 02:17:02 AM

yes black and white but lt.'s do not issue CD's, commanding officers do. Lt would just do a supervisor's complaint and the CO decides if a CD is appropriate. and retraining is not right b/c he blatantly blew the light and owned up to it. so that is my first item of protest to DCAS.
followed by the "biohazard" placard.
as for the juvenile report question, they are all 16, aren't judy reports for at least 7 but less than 16? and 16/17 PINS go on OLBS arrest report supplements. i call BS

17 was something like that I can't remember the particulars.

I am not good at protesting and articulating my reasons, I just switch into EDP mode and start spitting and breaking stuff whenever I imagine talking to DCAS people, so would somebody, anybody please go and protest Questions 1 - 100 for me?

PatrolGuideismyquide I chose to notify the co/duty captain because their reasonable suspicion was of poor work performance and in the additional data of section 205 took away the voucher answer, the medical division choice and anything elsemso being that the needle fell from this pocket I chose the next best thing which is notify the co/duty captain. You have to have permission first before proceeding with the procedure anyway.

I stand corrected. I mustve read that question wrong considering i was reading super fast just so i could finish the damn test on time

HB wrote:

---

RISING IDIOT wrote:

---

 

HB wrote:

---

Wasnt one of the summonses written for discon 1 or 3 degree? If it was wouldnt that be voided also?

---

 

Discon is fair game. It's certain provisions of loitering that must be voided

---

 

Yes i know. Discon 1, 3, 7 are no good n need to b voided. The summons was either for discon 1 or 3 im sure of it

---

  its loitering sub 1 3 7 not discon  as he said in reply

 and question 17 was the sol one at community meeting about kids breaking bottles.  There were many who put the sector car with cond and youth.  I assumed that sol does not depoy patrol guys and cond youth and crime guys under his control so he will put them on it, but I could be totally wrong. I think they were baiting people to say sector D because it was that sector.  They both would be correct if not for the reason I mentioned but who knows with this crap....

-- Edited by Shnaggles1 on Monday 31st of October 2011 03:11:42 AM

The drug one was a conversation over heard from another mos.  The LT did not actually see any indications in the fact pattern, untill he inspected for flashlights at roll call, this is why it was voucher the cap.  Other wise it would be triple anwser they had notify co/dc and iab as diffrent anwsers.  Those are both choices of suspecting mos which would be the mos that was having the conversation.  That is the way I read it, but again could go either way another PROTEST for the list 

No it was a whole long story and asked what to do when u saw it fall. IAB wasn't an option, the answer was notify the CO/DC. Have a cop voucher the para would have been correct also but that wasn't an option, it just said to voucher it.

IAB was not choice on my test for that question Shanaggles1

What'd everyone get for the temp removal firearm one

oneadditional wrote:

---

PatrolGuideismyquide I chose to notify the co/duty captain because their reasonable suspicion was of poor work performance and in the additional data of section 205 took away the voucher answer, the medical division choice and anything elsemso being that the needle fell from this pocket I chose the next best thing which is notify the co/duty captain. You have to have permission first before proceeding with the procedure anyway.

---

 That one was tough since in the fact pattern you as a Lt discuss this cop with a Sgt (2 supervisors) and believe he is on something but don't do anything yet. So right there they are disobeying the procedure by not implementing it. Then they have the Lt on another day conducting RC, no mention if the same Sgt you discussed this officer's poor work performance and possible drug use being at that RC? aN ORANGE SYRINGE CAP FALLS OUT? What next? You already skipped doing the procedure the right way in the fact pattern. In the additional data it does say that evidence of the cops's drug use has to be incoiced and to refer to 218?

I felt like picking tell CO/DC, since it is the first thing liste din the actual procedure, but they failed to follow it in the fact pattern and I am not sure if they want the evidence invoiced or to call the CO? vERY VAGUE, DEF SHOULD BE A THROW OUT!!!!

Yes the track search question

oneadditional wrote:

---

I agree Jimmy but you are not going to voucher it with out first notifying the co/duty captain. It states for the investigating supervisor to have it vouchered and you are not going to start an investigation without going past step one which is notify the co/duty captain. But with this test you never know. Something could have been wrongly capitalized therefore my answer could have been wrong .

---

 Really? Why? Do you not start to take steps before notifying the CO/DC? The procedure is not necessarily written in chronological order, it all depends on how you come to the conclusion the cop is using.

The invoicing the cap is something that must be done, but gives no guidance in the procedure for in what in order? It just refers you to 218 in the addtional data and make it investigatory. Would  a Lt invoice it? Doesn't say he can or can't and it is a job involving confirming your suspicions based on physical drug paraphenlia?

Obviously the Lt and Sgt did not notify the CO/DC when they discussed it initially and could have kicked in the procedure starting with calling the CO/DC, instead they gave it a piece of property causing you to believe he was high and the procedure give absolutely no order to when you invoice it? 

Jimmy McNulty wrote:

---

What'd everyone get for the temp removal firearm one

---

 Did they make that an incorrect step question? I forgot? I mean in one of them they had the supervisor doing a firearms removal report and in another taking the sgt's guns? But was it a least correct choice? I forgot what I picked...

Patrolguideismybible - that question said you were the special ops and asked which of the duties the cop should perform were incorrect. The answer (incorrect) was to make sure he put the call in the T/R. The other 3 were all true, mail it out next day, only email the pics if it's a complaint or arrest, and Query the vandals DB in all arrest situations.

wasnt it just a cap to a hypo? that isnt a contraband item, ****ing guy could have been a diabetic. The more I stop and think about this ****, the more I laugh, I mean seriously who the **** thought this was a good idea? How bout in the grammar, they said duck tape, instead of duct tape. SERIOUSLY??? the track question I messed up. Dont let the det in the inner perimiter without approval of the duty chief, other choice I remember was handle the job until transit PS shows up. I ****ed up, i chose handle the job which is wrong, I knew the duty chief controls inner perimiter for a hostage job but didnt think it was for a track search. 

-- Edited by HabidasheryAuto on Monday 31st of October 2011 04:13:05 AM

Okeedokee - the T/R is only to document the Email to vandals. The question said to document the call which is why it was wrong. The other three (next day mail, query every arrest, and only send pics if arrest/complaint) are all correct. Another insanely retarted question.

That was not easy at all.

Jimmy McNulty wrote:

---

Patrolguideismybible - that question said you were the special ops and asked which of the duties the cop should perform were incorrect. The answer (incorrect) was to make sure he put the call in the T/R. The other 3 were all true, mail it out next day, only email the pics if it's a complaint or arrest, and Query the vandals DB in all arrest situations.

---

 I looked it up, you are correct in the graffiti one, its very petty since the SOL does ensure the cop documents emails in the TR, not calls. But you got the right answer on that one, I got it wrong. Tough one.

The high cop was not fair though, it didn't follow the procedure in order in the fact pattern. So how can you have a correct order. Maybe you are right, maybe the Lt wouldn't actually invoice it?  Since it does say to "have it invoiced". It says to pick the "most correct", so that was another tough one.

Anyone remember the pregnant female cop? I think you had to pick the bad answer, forgot what the bad answer was there?

All in all the PG questions did hit a lot of irrelevant stuff. I am not making excuses for getting some of them right or wrong. But how frequently do cops report to their resident precinct when suspended? Pregnant female cop rules, that most of them only a district surgeon would need to know and advise the cop. Drug testing for cause, how often is that done at the precinct level?

No continous event, no LBB's, no 7 majors, hardly any lists, no real EEO (the judgement question was not a real EEO question since it didn't follow procedures), no CCRB, no Duties and Responsibilities at all, and suprisingly even though its hardly relevant for the rank of Lt, NO CIMS?!?!?!?

This test was bonkers and the PG stuff I found to be very hard...