Report a player - 655 (armed officers) - GTA RP

[SteveStacy]

Report a player 

Your In-game Name: Steve Stacy

Name and/or ID of the player(s) you are reporting: 655 (armed officers)

Which server did the incident take place on: GTA RP

Date of the incident: 06/11/23

Time of the incident (GMT) 24hr Format: 2100

What best describes this incident ?: G2.3 (Value of life) and (common sense)

Please (in detail) describe the incident: Let me begin with some good old context! So, a group and I decided we wanted to do "life invader" and thought it best to take a police officer as our hostage seeing as the negotiator would take our demands more seriously. We arrived with the hostage to life-invader where an armed officer thought it would be a good idea to enter from the back, which is fine at this point. We then zip tied the front door and told the negotiator that we want the armed officer inside to leave through the back door and we would zip tie it behind him. The negotiator made our demand clear on radio to which for some reason the armed officer refused to listen to. We then made it very clear that we were not messing around, and we will harm the hostage if our demand is not met. Again, the armed officer refused to listen. Finally, the hostage (a policeman) told the armed officer that he needs to leave as we have a knife to his throat and for his safety, he must meet our demand. Again, the armed officer refused and didn't leave. This threw us all off as we thought the armed officer completely disregarded our hostage's safety and was fueled by his own ego and hunger to shoot his weapon/win rather than have some good roleplay. We then also made it very clear to everyone; the negotiator, the hostage and the armed officer that if anymore armed officers enter the building, we will start to harm the hostage. We thought this would at-least make sure that there would be only 1 armed officer with us but no, no 4 more-armed officers decided to join us, they disregarded our demands and the safety of the hostage and entered anyway. I believe it's just common sense for them to listen to our demands and meet them and also a way to ACTUALLY "roleplay" a scenario out and not just go in guns blazing. We then realized that this roleplay scenario was completely messed up and couldn't continue as we planned so the negotiator told us that we would be allowed to leave if the hostage was left unharmed. We agreed to these terms and were planning on leaving, we thought we would "rob" the officer to try squeeze a little more roleplay from the situation, 2 members of the team had knifes/sharpened bottles pointed and held to the officer whilst he was dropping his stuff, when the negotiator asked us to stop, we complied and were getting ready to release the hostage from his binds. At this point one of the armed officers thought it would be best to, when melees were pointed to the hostage (officer), throw a flash bang towards us and the hostage, which is just beyond outrageous in a logical sense. This could have easily ended in the death of the hostage because of how badly the armed officer's ego and win mentality affected and clouded their judgements. This in my opinion was a clear breach of NVL from the armed officers onto the hostage and a severe lack of common sense when dealing with hostage situations. Seeing as these officers were high ranking, we wished for better roleplay from them and not just a win mentality type of roleplay.

(G7.1) Hostages -Taking hostages must be roleplayed to a very high quality. Aim to make the scenario enjoyable for everyone.
- it was also very difficult to maintain this rule seeing how poor the armed officers were roleplaying which made the entire situation very unenjoyable and rather distasteful.

I have no video evidence of the first interactions with the armed officer but I'm sure the hostage and negotiator can agree that what I have written is correct and true.

Link to any evidence (Youtube/Screenshot):

https://medal.tv/games/gta-v/clips/1dKU9wJHkiwer2/d1337riRpWDx?invite=cr-MSxQa1ksMTcyNTIzMTIzLA
The clip provided was from another member off the team.

This report is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth!: Yes

You tried to resolve the situation with the player(s) before reporting: No

This is not a revenge report (Abuse will lead to forum/community bans): Yes

 

[Brook]

Hello Steve,

In the video you have provided I am ID: 736 (Armed Officer).

Would you be able to provide any other video?

Originally at Abe Milton Parkway where you took the officer hostage, he panicked which alerted near by units and they were there before you made off to lifeinvader. On arriving at Lifeinvader officers entered approximately the same time as you (Rear Exit). We contained you inside the lobby (Easier to deal with a hostage situation when you have very limited places to move and we can see the hostage at all times) We began negotiating to which you requested multiple things which were agreed on. You did request some things we denied such as Megaphones and Speakers to which we denied. This was as not all of us have those to hand nor will we send officer to fetch those leaving us short at a hostage situation.

You were warned several times regarding threatening the hostage. You were given the option to hand over the hostage and be provided free passage to your vehicles. However you decided to rob the hostage as well. Which this then presented a further risk to both the hostage and those inside since that officer had a firearm. Even if that firearm is broken, it is still a firearm and will be treated as such.

Due to both the continued threats made towards the hostages life and the new threat posed to both the hostage and the officer with the introduction of the firearm, we made the decision to intervene. We did not instantly resort to this strategy nor is it one we use lightly.

As stated above if you are able to provide any additional video that shows more of the story. If this is not possible I'm sure myself and the other officers would be more than willing to liaise as the video does show little of the scenario.

 

[Zulufighter]

Good morning Steve,

I was 655 the firearms officer that you're reporting in this situation. Just to breakdown one of your misconceptions, having a hostage doesn't mean you win a situation. You kidnapped a police officer and immediately went to lifeinvader while actively being pursued by multiple units. You arrived at the same time as multiple other officers including myself. I am unsure if the side door is automatically locked or if you had ziptied it but seeing that there was no one at the door watching it I made entry through it in order to create a tighter zone of control. Upon being informed the officer was being injured by someone I pushed up further to the stairway to gain eyes on the officer. 

At this point you then confronted me and tried to negotiate with me, I apologise for not making more of an effort to negotiate with you and instead directed you over to the front door where there were more officers present, but I was struggling to hear over the radio and needed to take command of the situation and would be unable to juggle both negotiations and command and control. While we were talking another 4 people ran in behind me, I am unsure if two of these were your mates or just random people people who thought they would run in but it resulted in more officers being put at the back door to prevent people coming in. The other two who ran in were both unmarked firearms officers who immediately went upstairs and took control of the rest of the building including the server room meaning you were isolated to the downstairs lobby which we had officers watching from the front door, stairway and upstairs. 

I don't know who took negotiator at the front and we struggled with communications with them, information relayed to me by the negotiator was that the officer taken hostage was requesting that I exit the building, I was then told this again by the officer when he was brought over to me. As I said to you then, we had a greater view of the officer from inside of the building with a platform to take immediate action if he came to harm, harm which you had both threatened and allegedly done by assaulting the officer when I initially pushed up to the stairway. Additionally there were a further two officers who were upstairs who needed to be kept safe and who were also ready to eliminate any threats to the hostage. 

We then also made it very clear to everyone; the negotiator, the hostage and the armed officer

You may well have given information to the negotiator and hostage that you didn't want more people to enter the building but that was not relayed to me, the only thing in regards to this that you did say to me was when I had already been joined by PS Ffrench on the stairway and you threatened to put a knife in the hostages' neck if we came further down the stairs, you were reminded for at least the second time that we would take action if you continued threatening the officer. 

After you initially refused the option to leave the hostage and move into a police pursuit we began preparing a tactical solution, fortunately you reconsidered and then agreed to our negotiations, the resolution which we were hoping to take. However you then proceeded to start robbing the officer right in front of us, with three marked firearms officers and a number of officers at the front doors. We kept delaying and delaying any tactical resolution to allow you to move to a pursuit and while you did stop robbing him you then placed him in zip ties and threatened him for a final time as shown in your medal clip and a flashbang was deployed resulting in the officer being recovered unharmed.

This in my opinion was a clear breach of NVL

NVL doesn't apply to hostage negotiations, it requires you to value your own life however we still respected the hostages life and held back allowing for negations to continue, it doesn't mean we will give you all of your demands during a negotiation particularly when it means giving up tactical positions which better ensure the survivability of the hostage.

In regards to everything you have said about your roleplay being interrupted or messed up I ask you what you think roleplay is? We are not here to give into all of your demands and to present no risk to you while committing crime, if you went into this thinking we have a hostage nothing will happen to us then that's just ridiculous. You decided to take an officer hostage and immediately take him to a robbery while being followed, you had no one prepared inside to secure the building. You lost control of the building to police, you spent a large time negotiating trying to get me to move so you could 'do what you had to do' failing to recognise that not every situation will end with you getting the software and leaving. You were given multiple chances to leave, were warned multiple times to not threaten the officer and then decided to rob him. You screwed up in your in roleplay planning, you screwed up in your in roleplay negotiations, you screwed up in your in roleplay execution and you got screwed in roleplay by the police.

Don't think for a second that your roleplay was ended just because we breached as a last resort, you were provided many, too many chances and the roleplay continued during the breach, with the paramedics, in custody and now in prison.

I ask you as well, you accuse us of a win mentality like so many people yet here you are on the forums after you've lost a situation after thinking in such a linear direction of 'I must get the software' having been provided so many chances to get away.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Footage from when the panic went off until the breach ended, the guy who did no pulse went on to provide some nice medical RP. Apologies for my comment in OOC it was pointed out that I did not need to engage and was unhelpful to say 'stop crying OOC and put up a report.' Whoever 486 and 336 were those comment seconds after a situation concludes in a way that you didn't like are neither needed or appreciated.

 

[Snoops]

Hello Steve,

I'm the officer next to Ellijah in his footage, also the officer who helped provide medical to you on the scene and also took you to the station and we had a bit of a laugh and gaff I'd like to think.  Firstly I apologize that you've felt that it's necessary to come to the forums to deal with what you must feel to be a rulebreak, however I must standby the others in the topic in regards to our actions and how the situation went down.  I won't analyse every little part of the situation but I will go through my own thoughts as you can hear from the footage I am the one giving the negotiator the Police's terms for your own escape, rather than surrender.

As you can see from the must longer POV of Ellijah by the point that I am at Life Invader yourself and your group are entirely and completely surrounded by police and Firearms officers, to the point where I can safely say that we could have forced you to surrender and moved in for your arrest.  However I believe both sides can agree that an unconditional surrender is very much a boring thing for everyone, where we pop you into a cell, write a report, and ship you off.  By offering you the ability to escape, and flee, get into your cars and drive off that gives us all the chance to engage in a police chase where you may very well escape.  I felt that everyone at the scene felt this was an acceptable outcome.

Unfortunately during this yourself and another person then, while surrounded by the police, after being told by ourselves numerous times to stop with the threats and harm to the hostage held the officer at knife, edge, and or weapon-point to begin robbing him of his things.  One of which was a taser, and I believe to be a Glock 17, by taking these items you increase your threat to ourselves as you now further have additional weaponry.  This is why you then faced the consequences we warned you about, we gave an inch but you tried to take a mile in the metaphorical sense.

However I must run onto the stated rules:  NVL is to do with your own person, in terms of us valuing the life of the hostage there are Ingame consequences for us failing to value the life and limb of a hostage, this could very well be up to the maximum of us losing or positions within the police where some of us have taken literal real time years and or months to achieve.

Common sense: I felt that we used our common sense to it's fullest here, we had you surrounded, we offered you a way of continuing roleplay rather than shutting it down, which I felt was a very fair.  However I must say that I feel that perhaps yourself and your friend/s who then began to rob the officer in front of us all didn't show too much of this, as you had at this point been warned multiple times that your positions only get worse by threatening the hostage, and then you threatened them further, and while flashbanged and with a weapon in your hand began to run towards the same armed police who then shot you for this reason.

Hopefully this helps you understand some of the thought processes, of which I'm always happy to hear constructive critique about.

 

[Bonzi]

Your report is currently being reviewed, Please be patient while the evidence is reviewed

Please keep checking this report regularly just in case the reviewing staff member has any questions

Thank you for your report and you doing your part to keep our community clean!

 

[Will Rozier]

@Snoops

Sorry for any confusion mate but the video is from my POV therefor I’m the one in the bucket hat. Just to make it clear I’m not apart of this report. @SteveStacyis the one in the ‘cowboy’ hat and he just needed the footage  

 

[Snoops]

@Snoops

Sorry for any confusion mate but the video is from my POV therefor I’m the one in the bucket hat. Just to make it clear I’m not apart of this report. @SteveStacyis the one in the ‘cowboy’ hat and he just needed the footage  

Thanks for clearing that up, hopefully my post still makes sense

 

[SteveStacy]

Hello everyone, there was quite a lot for me to unravel and respond to, but I hope my put comes across. 

I was 655 the firearms officer that you're reporting in this situation. Just to breakdown one of your misconceptions, having a hostage doesn't mean you win a situation. You kidnapped a police officer and immediately went to lifeinvader while actively being pursued by multiple units. You arrived at the same time as multiple other officers including myself. I am unsure if the side door is automatically locked or if you had ziptied it but seeing that there was no one at the door watching it I made entry through it in order to create a tighter zone of control. Upon being informed the officer was being injured by someone I pushed up further to the stairway to gain eyes on the officer. 

I want to start with, I'm reporting all of the officers who entered the building, not just yourself it's just you were the first armed officer who entered so I used your session ID. This was not a misconception on my part, I understand that having a hostage doesn't grant me the ability of being a god and allowing me to "win" but what I'm sure of is that by my group and I having an officer hostage, you, should be attempting to deescalate the situation and meet demands to ensure the safety of the hostage, not blindly ignoring multiple requests for you to leave the building which would just angry the captees more. Also, the officer was not being harmed whatsoever, I guess that was just poor communication on another officer's end.

The other two who ran in were both unmarked firearms officers who immediately went upstairs and took control of the rest of the building including the server room meaning you were isolated to the downstairs lobby which we had officers watching from the front door, stairway and upstairs. 

Again, this seems to me that you and your fellow officers didn't show any value for the hostage's life as we specifically asked for no more officers to enter the building or the hostage would be harmed, yet multiple still came in anyways. 

I don't know who took negotiator at the front and we struggled with communications with them, information relayed to me by the negotiator was that the officer taken hostage was requesting that I exit the building, I was then told this again by the officer when he was brought over to me. As I said to you then, we had a greater view of the officer from inside of the building with a platform to take immediate action if he came to harm, harm which you had both threatened and allegedly done by assaulting the officer when I initially pushed up to the stairway

So, despite being asked three different times to leave the building by the negotiator, which you should very much listen to, that's literally his job, the hostage and us hostage takers, you declined even though this would very much cause harm to the hostage? Again, no harm had been done to him at this stage. 

You may well have given information to the negotiator and hostage that you didn't want more people to enter the building but that was not relayed to me,

I mean, what do I even say to this? Why were you not informed? This is most likely were all the confusion has then stemmed from. 

We kept delaying and delaying any tactical resolution to allow you to move to a pursuit and while you did stop robbing him you then placed him in zip ties and threatened him for a final time as shown in your medal clip and a flashbang was deployed resulting in the officer being recovered unharmed.

Threatened? We were quite clearly cutting his zip ties to let him free, before we could even do this you lobbed a flashbang at us, including the hostage which to me seems awfully silly and a just an overall lack of common sense. 

NVL doesn't apply to hostage negotiations, it requires you to value your own life however we still respected the hostages life and held back allowing for negations to continue, it doesn't mean we will give you all of your demands during a negotiation particularly when it means giving up tactical positions which better ensure the survivability of the hostage.

I don't believe you respected the hostage's life at all, you advanced when asked not to otherwise harm would be done, you didn't leave the building when we said harm would be done if you didn't and finally more officers entered when we said for you not to otherwise, yet again, harm would be done to the hostage. 

I ask you as well, you accuse us of a win mentality like so many people yet here you are on the forums after you've lost a situation after thinking in such a linear direction of 'I must get the software' having been provided so many chances to get away.

YES! You clearly had a "win" mentality because of your stubbornness to listen to demands made by people who have knifes to the throats of an officer, you showed very little care for the hostage's life and went against every single protocol in place when someone has a hostage. YOU flash banged us when we were in the middle of freeing the hostage just because we were going to leave yet you did not want that, no you wanted to "WIN" and get multiple arrests and shoot your gun a bunch. YOU flash banged the hostage, I mean come on, how stupid is that?! 

 Please don't think for a second that is all we wanted to do, "I must get the software" we wanted to ROLEPLAY, not have people like you who are too stubborn and unwilling to listen or value the life of a hostage, even when the hostage himself asked for you to leave for his safety! 

By offering you the ability to escape, and flee, get into your cars and drive off that gives us all the chance to engage in a police chase where you may very well escape.  I felt that everyone at the scene felt this was an acceptable outcome.

Hello snoops, yes, we wanted to accept this, we had accepted the negotiators term and were freeing the hostage and getting ready to leave when the officer above threw a flashbang at the hostage himself and us, which to me, like I've stated above, is a severe lack of common sense and demonstrates the "win" mentality.  

Unfortunately during this yourself and another person then, while surrounded by the police, after being told by ourselves numerous times to stop with the threats and harm to the hostage held the officer at knife, edge, and or weapon-point to begin robbing him of his things.

The two people who started robbing the officer stopped when the negotiator asked them to, I don't see anything wrong with that. 

I felt that we used our common sense to it's fullest here, we had you surrounded,

We were surrounded because of the lack of care for the hostage's life, if common sense was used there should have been no officers inside the building. How do we even attempt to roleplay when speaking to the negotiator literally didn't get sent over to the officers inside and when speaking to the officer inside, it was almost like speaking to a brick wall. 

 

[Zulufighter]

Again, this seems to me that you and your fellow officers didn't show any value for the hostage's life as we specifically asked for no more officers to enter the building or the hostage would be harmed, yet multiple still came in anyways. 

Officers had already entered the building behind me before you came over to speak to me.

So, despite being asked three different times to leave the building by the negotiator, which you should very much listen to, that's literally his job, the hostage and us hostage takers, you declined even though this would very much cause harm to the hostage? Again, no harm had been done to him at this stage. 

The only instruction to leave the building from a police officer not under duress was from PS Ffrench who when I asked him to repeat the order realised my position inside the building and that we could better protect the hostage and secure a positive resolution if we remained where we were.

I don't believe you respected the hostage's life at all, you advanced when asked not to otherwise harm would be done, you didn't leave the building when we said harm would be done if you didn't and finally more officers entered when we said for you not to otherwise, yet again, harm would be done to the hostage. 

We didn't advance at all down the steps until after the threat had been temporarily eliminated with a flashbang and until we could provide appropriate lethal and non-lethal cover.

YES! You clearly had a "win" mentality because of your stubbornness to listen to demands made by people who have knifes to the throats of an officer, you showed very little care for the hostage's life and went against every single protocol in place when someone has a hostage. YOU flash banged us when we were in the middle of freeing the hostage just because we were going to leave yet you did not want that, no you wanted to "WIN" and get multiple arrests and shoot your gun a bunch. YOU flash banged the hostage, I mean come on, how stupid is that?! 

My self and other firearms officers on seen were very happy for a peaceful resolution to happen. However you continued to push it and in your own footage and mine you threaten the officer a final time with the individual with a bottle pointing it at him and threatening to chop his balls off, this is where you exceeded you chances and why you were flash banged, fortunately the officer survived being flash banged as they're designed to be used during hostage situations.

 

[SteveStacy]

could better protect the hostage and secure a positive resolution

in other terms, not listen to the captees requests, not value the hostage's life and come out with a "win"? Seems a bit daft to put the hostage in more danger with using bullets and flashbangs, seems like a lack of sense to me. 

threaten the officer a final time with the individual with a bottle pointing it at him and threatening to chop his balls off,

 threaten? again, you say that HE WAS NOT THREATENED, if anything we were too lenient with you, you were told multiple times to leave, not enter etc otherwise harm would be dealt but you didn't. We held these weapons to him to ensure you didn't push or just shoot us because let's face it, that's what you hopped for, but instead you flash us, and the hostage could have easily ended his life with a wild slash of these "weapons" that were held to him. Yet, this did not cross your mind as like i said before, you were clouded with that "WIN" mentality. 

My self and other firearms officers on seen were very happy for a peaceful resolution to happen.

No, this is simply just untrue, if you wanted a peaceful resolution, you would have listened to the requests of many which was to leave the building and no one else enter.

 

[Bonzi]

Good morning all - thank you for taking the time to make this report @SteveStacy.

I'll lay out what the provided evidence (video clips) show in the hopes that my thought process behind this whole scenario is clear.

Looking at the initially provided clip (@SteveStacy) :

1. You and your friends have a single police officer hostage at knifepoint.
   
2. Demands are made (I'm assuming by police) for you to let the hostage go.
   
3. Everyone in the room is caught off-guard and suddenly flash-banged - knocking everyone to the floor and neutralising the threat to the hostage's life.
   
4. @ItsJustTom03's character is then shot by armed officers after moving towards the officers with a knife in hand.
   
5. Police then appear to have full control of the scene.
   

Looking at the longer clip provided by @Zulufighter(thank you for that!) :

1. 00:25 - Police respond to a panic from a policer officer - upon responding they determine that an officer has been kidnapped.
   
2. 00:50 - Officers give chase and head to Lifeinvader, where the kidnapped officer has been taken.
   
3. 01:30 - An armed officer arrives on scene, takes advantage of the unguarded rear entrance, grinds it open and takes control of said area of the building.
   
4. 02:10 - Information is relayed to officers on the radio that "harm is being done to the officer"
   • 
     
     Whether this is true or not is irrelevant - as either way this information would justify 'more aggressive' tactics from the responding police officers.
     
5. 02:20 - The armed officer progresses into the building in response to this information, and comes face to face with the hostage and hostage takers.
   
6. 02:30 - There is some conversation between the armed officer and hostage takers, but the fog of war (interlapping radio chatter and conversation) makes it hard for any real conversation/progress to be made.
   
7. 05:35 - The hostage clearly states to the armed officer that if he does not leave the building, his throat will be slit.
   • 
     
     The officer does not comply - stating that it would be safer for him to remain in the building.
     
8. 06:35 - The officers begin to formulate a plan of attack noting the weaknesses of the hostage takers and the rising tensions.
   
9. 08:40 - Demands of the hostage takers are relayed to officers on the radio.
   
10. 09:30 - The hostage takers attempt to move to the rear stairs, but are blockaded and forced to retreat by several armed officers.
    
11. 10:10 - A hostage taker makes further threats to the hostage - again adding to the justification of aggressive tactics of the officers. 
    
12. 11:20 - It is made clear to all officers on the radio that police have overwhelming control of the situation. 
    
13. 13:30 - Officers witness the hostage takers robbing the hostage, and decide to issue an ultimatum.
    
14. 15:30 - The armed officer flings a flashbang, and the events of the initially provided clip play out.
    

This entire life-invader situation appears to be very hastily and sloppily organized RP-wise, from what I can see the hostage takers take a single police officer hostage, then immediately head to life-invader in order to take advantage of said fact and acquire whatever it is life-invader has to offer item-wise.

Police arrive on scene at the same time as the hostage takers - and rightfully so use this to their advantage to gain the upper hand in regards to building control. This eventually leads to the police succeeding in rescuing the hostage and detaining the criminals 

Linking this to the two alleged rule breaks of NVL and Common Sense:

1 - NVL (G2.4)

As stated by others in this report, NVL refers to the valuing of ones own life - and one purpose of this rule is to deal with the fact that we are all playing as characters on a video game. It does not refer to valuing the life of others.

Even in the sense of valuing the life of the hostage - any concerns as to how the officers acted in regards to hostage safety is an in-roleplay issue. 

G2.4 was not broken in this scenario.

2 - Common Sense (C1.7)

and a severe lack of common sense when dealing with hostage situations.

Even if this was the case @SteveStacy- this would be an in-roleplay issue for you to deal with.

C1.7 was not broken in this scenario.

As @Zulufighterstated @SteveStacy, just because you have a hostage - does not mean you have automatically won the situation. Despite your possession of a hostage in this situation, the police still maintained a strong controlling hand within the building and the situation itself. This, paired with the increasing aggression towards the hostage (robbing him etc.) is what resulted in the police taking action (after around 15 minutes since you entered the building!). Not because the officers involved lacked common sense or failed to value their own or others lives.

Just because a situation has not went your way @SteveStacy, please refrain from saying other players are "fuelled by their own ego" and "hungry to shoot their weapon/win rather than have good roleplay". Frankly - it's disrespectful.

Report Declined.

 

[Bonzi]

Thank you for your report, Unfortunately, it has been declined

The staff member will advise shortly why on this occasion they have declined to take action against the reported player.

Please do not let this put you off making further reports in the future, We rely on our player base to help keep our community clean.