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!

FranknBeans · Senior Member

Questions to Protest

crappants · Senior Member

sig226 wrote:
63ASAP wrote:
sig226 wrote:
That's 1 61 for Rob1

whats the outcome with surrogate court. I chose send them to kings county Where the property was.
Also was it usps truck or ups truck inbasket. I hear cv said one thing but cop put it differently in the details

It was Albany, 100% clear in the guide. I, like many, put Kings.
Yeah, they put UPS in story and USPS in C/V section. Fairly certain that was a typo and they still meant for it to be Burg, but I can see a potential double there if the Assault 3 was their answer.
What would the Assault 3 have been? The poorly worded and oddly placed comma under Assault 2, sub. 8 in the Penal Law leads me to believe it would be that charge (can you intend PI but recklessly cause SPI in one offense? I feel an "or" belongs there). I dunno, maybe I'm overthinking. I chose Burg.

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:45:53 PM

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:46:24 PM
Question with 61's sounds like a double answer. I believe the kid was 10yo and for it to be assault 2 he had to have spi
that typo thing is whole game changer.i feel that's where they tried to confuse us

-- Edited by sig226 on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:51:45 PM

Definition of aggravated assault upon a person less than eleven

You will have committed the crime of aggravated assault upon a person less than eleven if:

You are at least 18 years old
You assault someone who is less than 11 years old

sig226 · Senior Member

rookiebit_h wrote:
the guy died

I wrote that in general terms. I do remember it was a niece looking for Rolex

FranknBeans · Senior Member

crappants wrote:
sig226 wrote:
63ASAP wrote:
sig226 wrote:
That's 1 61 for Rob1

whats the outcome with surrogate court. I chose send them to kings county Where the property was.
Also was it usps truck or ups truck inbasket. I hear cv said one thing but cop put it differently in the details

It was Albany, 100% clear in the guide. I, like many, put Kings.
Yeah, they put UPS in story and USPS in C/V section. Fairly certain that was a typo and they still meant for it to be Burg, but I can see a potential double there if the Assault 3 was their answer.
What would the Assault 3 have been? The poorly worded and oddly placed comma under Assault 2, sub. 8 in the Penal Law leads me to believe it would be that charge (can you intend PI but recklessly cause SPI in one offense? I feel an "or" belongs there). I dunno, maybe I'm overthinking. I chose Burg.

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:45:53 PM

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:46:24 PM
Question with 61's sounds like a double answer. I believe the kid was 10yo and for it to be assault 2 he had to have spi
that typo thing is whole game changer.i feel that's where they tried to confuse us

-- Edited by sig226 on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:51:45 PM
Definition of aggravated assault upon a person less than eleven
You will have committed the crime of aggravated assault upon a person less than eleven if:
You are at least 18 years old
You assault someone who is less than 11 years old

You left out something out.

A person is guilty of aggravated assault upon a person less than
eleven years old when being eighteen years old or more the defendant
commits the crime of assault in the third degree as defined in section
120.00 of this article upon a person less than eleven years old and has
been previously convicted of such crime upon a person less than eleven
years old within the preceding ten years.

-- Edited by FranknBeans on Friday 25th of August 2017 11:34:13 PM

crappants · Senior Member

FranknBeans wrote:
crappants wrote:
sig226 wrote:
63ASAP wrote:
sig226 wrote:
That's 1 61 for Rob1

whats the outcome with surrogate court. I chose send them to kings county Where the property was.
Also was it usps truck or ups truck inbasket. I hear cv said one thing but cop put it differently in the details

It was Albany, 100% clear in the guide. I, like many, put Kings.
Yeah, they put UPS in story and USPS in C/V section. Fairly certain that was a typo and they still meant for it to be Burg, but I can see a potential double there if the Assault 3 was their answer.
What would the Assault 3 have been? The poorly worded and oddly placed comma under Assault 2, sub. 8 in the Penal Law leads me to believe it would be that charge (can you intend PI but recklessly cause SPI in one offense? I feel an "or" belongs there). I dunno, maybe I'm overthinking. I chose Burg.

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:45:53 PM

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:46:24 PM
Question with 61's sounds like a double answer. I believe the kid was 10yo and for it to be assault 2 he had to have spi
that typo thing is whole game changer.i feel that's where they tried to confuse us

-- Edited by sig226 on Friday 25th of August 2017 10:51:45 PM
Definition of aggravated assault upon a person less than eleven
You will have committed the crime of aggravated assault upon a person less than eleven if:
You are at least 18 years old
You assault someone who is less than 11 years old
You left out something out.
A person is guilty of aggravated assault upon a person less than
eleven years old when being eighteen years old or more the defendant
commits the crime of assault in the third degree as defined in section
120.00 of this article upon a person less than eleven years old and has
been previously convicted of such crime upon a person less than eleven
years old within the preceding ten years.

Lol i know u r good lol

Darkman · Veteran Member

i think it's assault 3 for the 61 with the kid....for assault 2 you have to recklessly cause SPI to the kid or the kid has to be less than 7....wasnt he 10?

FranknBeans · Senior Member

What did the story read for that Assault 3? Anyone remember?

Darkman · Veteran Member

i just remember pain and swelling caused to the c/v. no weapons.....maybe minor lacerations....

RS2323 · Senior Member

Wouldn't top charge have been endangering welfare of a child? Not assault 3?

Darkman · Veteran Member

assault 3 and endangering the welfare of child are both class A misdemeanors.....but assault 3 comes before section 120 versus 260.10.....is there something in the crime classification guide about this?

FranknBeans · Senior Member

Depending on who was the person that did the assault it could also be a felony...

City50 · Member

Didn't we say we weren't going to post questions and answers on here so that the people taking the makeup exam do not have the upper hand on us. Remember if and when they pass, their score will be 1 point higher by every question you guys post here. Leave the questioning to guys/gals you work with who you know took the test!

ohnoes · Senior Member

Make up is a different test.

City50 · Member

I highly doubt that there will be a total new 100 question test with no repeat questions, if so, doesn't that open up a debate on which test was harder/easier?

ohnoes · Senior Member

That's what they did for the sergeants.

Zeph · Senior Member

Did you guys notice that in the inbasket 61 question that they had the package on the sidewalk? That would make it petit larceny and not a burg. The location of occurrence said sidewalk.

-- Edited by Zeph on Saturday 26th of August 2017 01:25:15 AM

crappants · Senior Member

Zeph wrote:
Did you guys notice that in the inbasket 61 question that they had the package on the sidewalk? That would make it petit larceny and not a burg. The location of occurrence said sidewalk.

-- Edited by Zeph on Saturday 26th of August 2017 01:25:15 AM

Lol good one

MandM · Member

((((IDIOTS))))) DONT POST ANY ANSWERS HERE. DON'T COMPLAINT WHEN SOMEONE THAT TOOK THE MAKE-UP EXAM BUMP YOU OFF THE LIST!!!! NO ONE KNOWS HOW THE SECOND EXAM ITS GOING TO BE.

Zeph · Senior Member

People should start changing their mind thinking that test was easy. If you thought so, you got fooled and definitely failed.

crappants · Senior Member

They ask a question about 213-18 citiwide security alert levels! Answer was red severe risk of terrorist attack

PD2FD · Guru

crappants wrote:
They ask a question about 213-18 citiwide security alert levels! Answer was red severe risk of terrorist attack

The firearms question and processing CBRN evidence was rough too

crappants · Senior Member

PD2FD wrote:
crappants wrote:
They ask a question about 213-18 citiwide security alert levels! Answer was red severe risk of terrorist attack
The firearms question and processing CBRN evidence was rough too

The answer for cbrn incident was HIghWAY MOTOR CARRIER unit DICTATES THE LEGALITY . FIREARM ANSWER WAS 6 items 8 envelopes . 3 vouchers

ajvic21 · Senior Member

And I think they mixed up the evoke procedure with the unlawful evictions somehow.....with the wrong return dates, anyone else notice that?

ajvic21 · Senior Member

Ebike*

fodx · Guru

Zeph wrote:
People should start changing their mind thinking that test was easy. If you thought so, you got fooled and definitely failed.

You're 100% right. This wasn't am easy exam. Questions I thought were ground balls I ended up getting tricked on.

crappants · Senior Member

ajvic21 wrote:
And I think they mixed up the evoke procedure with the unlawful evictions somehow.....with the wrong return dates, anyone else notice that?

it was easy for the people that concentrated on reading the PatrolGuide rather than the packets. It was copy and paste from the patrol guide

InsideGuy · Senior Member

@crappants 100% spot on. It was a patrol guide test. I firmly believe the Dept is trying to make statement against these schools. Bottom line is you get 6-7 months to read the PATROL GUIDE. We need to start understanding these classes are simply an addition.

crappants · Senior Member

InsideGuy wrote:
@crappants 100% spot on. It was a patrol guide test. I firmly believe the Dept is trying to make statement against these schools. Bottom line is you get 6-7 months to read the PATROL GUIDE. We need to start understanding these classes are simply an addition.

The classes were really good too and the questions . speciacilly elite yanosik. His trimester were spot on. But the booklets are useless thats why he said u must read the patrol guide. The booklets are written in phrases . The apps were good as well the modules too . Classes are good but they wont push u pass the 70s . is worth the money

-- Edited by crappants on Saturday 26th of August 2017 01:29:13 PM

ManHands · Senior Member

You all have to relax. This test had a few tricks but way less than you guys are assuming. This was a challenging yet good test. There is no debate on that 250...you don't sign a 250 for Harrasment period. Most of the test was straight forward, think about it everyone is just pointing out 2-3 tricks over and over there were no other tricks! Always some drama after every test...this test was so fair that now everyone is turning it into "everyone failed and it was the trickiest test in history!!" not true!!

monkeybones · Senior Member

PATROL SUPERVISOR/ UNIT SUPERVISOR

SUPERVISORY AND ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTIONS:

28. Respond to the scene of stops when feasible.29. Discuss the circumstances of the stop with the member of the service and

review the STOP REPORT.

a. Determine whether all captions are completed and all relevant check boxes are checked.

b. Confirm that the STOP REPORT states in plain language a specific suspected felony or Penal Law misdemeanor.

c. Determine whether the officers description in the Narrative (Describe the Circumstances That Led to the Stop) caption includes the facts and circumstances relied upon by the officer to conclude that there was reasonable suspicion that the person stopped had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a felony or Penal Law misdemeanor.

d. If the person was frisked, determine whether the officers description in the Narrative (Describe the Circumstances That Led to the Frisk and/or Search, if Conducted. Include Area Searched) caption includes the facts and circumstances relied upon by the officer to conclude that there was reasonable suspicion that the person was armed and dangerous and, if a search was conducted, the facts and circumstances that provided the basis for the search, the area searched and whether a weapon or other contraband was recovered.

e. Complete the Supervisory Action (Must Complete) caption. Consider the facts and information as conveyed by the member and recorded on the STOP REPORT and in the members ACTIVITY LOG and determine whether:

(1) The stop was based upon reasonable suspicion of a felony or Penal Law misdemeanor

(2) If the person was frisked, whether the frisk was supported by a reasonable suspicion that the person was armed and dangerous; and

(3) If the person was searched, whether there was a sufficient basis for the search.

f. If appropriate, instruct member of the service and/or refer for additional training and/or other remedial action, including, disciplinary action and indicate such in the Follow-Up Action (If appropriate) caption.

g. Direct the member to make necessary corrections to the STOP REPORT if the report is inaccurate or incomplete.

h. Complete and sign the STOP REPORT.

monkeybones · Senior Member

Per patrol guide it doesn't have to be only the Patrol supervisor it also says /unit supervisor Also, it says basically check the stop report make sure its for a PL Misd or Felony, if not Instruct annotate and sign. PERIOD

rookiebit_h · Guru

how can you sign an improperly prepared report, one of if not the most scrutinized report in the department.

crappants · Senior Member

rookiebit_h wrote:
how can you sign an improperly prepared report, one of if not the most scrutinized report in the department.

He is quoting the booklets he is wrong

mike58520 · Veteran Member

The follow up action caption was not completed and the supervisor action box said that the stop was justified. This stop clearly was not. That's why I said don't sign but this question has potential for protest either way. Could be a candidate for a double answer.

monkeybones · Senior Member

crappants wrote:
rookiebit_h wrote:
how can you sign an improperly prepared report, one of if not the most scrutinized report in the department.
He is quoting the booklets he is wrong

That was copied directly from the patrol guide not the packets. Screw the packets.

monkeybones · Senior Member

Obviously the department wants a paper trail if you're forcibly stopping people without justification and the actions taken by the supervisor to correct improper stops. So it would get signed and submitted just like anything else. Essentially building a paper trail when that cop/dept gets sued

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:12 PM

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:34 PM

crappants · Senior Member

No they dont for level 2 and level 1 the don't want paper trail.

crappants · Senior Member

monkeybones wrote:
Obviously the department wants a paper trail if you're forcibly stopping people without justification and the actions taken by the supervisor to correct improper stops. So it would get signed and submitted just like anything else. Essentially building a paper trail when that cop/dept gets sued

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:12 PM

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:34 PM

He stop the guy on level 1 . Plus it was a violation no stop report

monkeybones · Senior Member

it wasn't a lvl 1 or 2 stop. the cop FORCIBLY TERRY STOPPED this guy for a violation which was wrong and the cop needs retraining. so it gets annotated that the cop screwed up in the "follow-up actions", signed and submitted into the database. and cop gets retrained.

mike58520 · Veteran Member

The problem is that this stop report did not have the documentation in the follow up captions. It was signed as a justified stop

crappants · Senior Member

monkeybones wrote:
Obviously the department wants a paper trail if you're forcibly stopping people without justification and the actions taken by the supervisor to correct improper stops. So it would get signed and submitted just like anything else. Essentially building a paper trail when that cop/dept gets sued

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:12 PM

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:34 PM

Here conversation over

monkeybones · Senior Member

crappants wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
Obviously the department wants a paper trail if you're forcibly stopping people without justification and the actions taken by the supervisor to correct improper stops. So it would get signed and submitted just like anything else. Essentially building a paper trail when that cop/dept gets sued

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:12 PM

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:43:34 PM
Here conversation over

You obviously didn't read my posts. I 100% agree that this should have been a lvl 1 or lvl 2 encounter and the stop report shouldn't have been prepared. BUT the cop escalated it into a lvl 3 stop when the guy wasn't free to leave. the cop created the stop report + forcibly stopped the guy for what should have been a lvl 1 encounter if anything at all. this now is a potential lawsuit. The cop screwed up and now gets retraining and annotation on the stop report for the unlawful lvl 3 stop he made. AND SIGNED

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:57:02 PM

-- Edited by monkeybones on Saturday 26th of August 2017 03:59:09 PM

monkeybones · Senior Member

For EVERYONES sake I hope its a double answer or throw out. best of luck to all. its in black and white.

63ASAP · Guru

monkeybones wrote:
it wasn't a lvl 1 or 2 stop. the cop FORCIBLY TERRY STOPPED this guy for a violation which was wrong and the cop needs retraining. so it gets annotated that the cop screwed up in the "follow-up actions", signed and submitted into the database. and cop gets retrained.

I'd agree, but the supervisor wrote that the stop was justified, made no note about retraining/discipline, and no mention that it was a bad stop. So, he improperly completed the form himself. Line "H" at the end says "complete and sign". He didn't complete the form as required. In any case, I think this has protest potential.

-- Edited by 63ASAP on Saturday 26th of August 2017 04:04:35 PM

crappants · Senior Member

So that cop should be discipline. The person that sign off on it as well

monkeybones · Senior Member

63ASAP wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
it wasn't a lvl 1 or 2 stop. the cop FORCIBLY TERRY STOPPED this guy for a violation which was wrong and the cop needs retraining. so it gets annotated that the cop screwed up in the "follow-up actions", signed and submitted into the database. and cop gets retrained.
I'd agree, but the supervisor wrote that the stop was justified, made no note about retraining/discipline, and no mention that it was a bad stop. So, he improperly completed the form himself. Line 30 says "complete and sign". He didn't complete the form as required. In any case, I think this has protest potential.

I hope we have a lot of passing scores, people sacrificed a lot of time preparing for this exam. protest what you can even if you see a passing score at the protest session lets help each other out.

63ASAP · Guru

monkeybones wrote:
63ASAP wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
it wasn't a lvl 1 or 2 stop. the cop FORCIBLY TERRY STOPPED this guy for a violation which was wrong and the cop needs retraining. so it gets annotated that the cop screwed up in the "follow-up actions", signed and submitted into the database. and cop gets retrained.
I'd agree, but the supervisor wrote that the stop was justified, made no note about retraining/discipline, and no mention that it was a bad stop. So, he improperly completed the form himself. Line 30 says "complete and sign". He didn't complete the form as required. In any case, I think this has protest potential.
I hope we have a lot of passing scores, people sacrificed a lot of time preparing for this exam. protest what you can even if you see a passing score at the protest session lets help each other out.

Trust me, I know! I waited nearly 2.5 years at a chance for vindication from the 2015 debacle. I want every point I can get. I just cant believe my confirmed wrong answers are some of the ground balls. I did the same thing on my 2011 Sergeant and told myself never again...and here I did it again. Problem is, we're trained to spot tricks and over time you learn to see them everywhere, even if they aren't.

Chico Escuela · Veteran Member

63ASAP wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
63ASAP wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
it wasn't a lvl 1 or 2 stop. the cop FORCIBLY TERRY STOPPED this guy for a violation which was wrong and the cop needs retraining. so it gets annotated that the cop screwed up in the "follow-up actions", signed and submitted into the database. and cop gets retrained.
I'd agree, but the supervisor wrote that the stop was justified, made no note about retraining/discipline, and no mention that it was a bad stop. So, he improperly completed the form himself. Line 30 says "complete and sign". He didn't complete the form as required. In any case, I think this has protest potential.
I hope we have a lot of passing scores, people sacrificed a lot of time preparing for this exam. protest what you can even if you see a passing score at the protest session lets help each other out.
Trust me, I know! I waited nearly 2.5 years at a chance for vindication from the 2015 debacle. I want every point I can get. I just cant believe my confirmed wrong answers are some of the ground balls. I did the same thing on my 2011 Sergeant and told myself never again...and here I did it again. Problem is, we're trained to spot tricks and over time you learn to see them everywhere, even if they aren't.

Did you fail again

monkeybones · Senior Member

63ASAP wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
63ASAP wrote:
monkeybones wrote:
it wasn't a lvl 1 or 2 stop. the cop FORCIBLY TERRY STOPPED this guy for a violation which was wrong and the cop needs retraining. so it gets annotated that the cop screwed up in the "follow-up actions", signed and submitted into the database. and cop gets retrained.
I'd agree, but the supervisor wrote that the stop was justified, made no note about retraining/discipline, and no mention that it was a bad stop. So, he improperly completed the form himself. Line 30 says "complete and sign". He didn't complete the form as required. In any case, I think this has protest potential.
I hope we have a lot of passing scores, people sacrificed a lot of time preparing for this exam. protest what you can even if you see a passing score at the protest session lets help each other out.
Trust me, I know! I waited nearly 2.5 years at a chance for vindication from the 2015 debacle. I want every point I can get. I just cant believe my confirmed wrong answers are some of the ground balls. I did the same thing on my 2011 Sergeant and told myself never again...and here I did it again. Problem is, we're trained to spot tricks and over time you learn to see them everywhere, even if they aren't.

You aren't the only one pissed you you dropped some ground balls, I did as well. the next 5 weeks are gonna be rough.

RS2323 · Senior Member

I don't remember the question too well or the answers.. I'm pretty sure I got it wrong but, one of the first steps for the suov is to make sure all captions are filled out and the narrative is written in plain language what led the cop to the stop.. Wasn't the narrative left blank? Leading me to believe he would hand it back to complete.. A 250 should not have been prepared but since the cop erroneously stopped him he must prepare it and the supv must sign it and document that there wasn't sufficient basis for a stop and follow up action whether it be training or other discipline.