Credit to "PatrolGuideIsMyBible"   who made very good points to questions many seem to have gotten wrong

45- 215 question involving a child removal. They wanted the "least correct" statement. Proposed answer key says A, I say B. A was PO notifies IRT, which has two exceptions which are vague in the body of the question. B has the PO notifying the central registry which is the least correct since the DO is supposed to do it. B is better than A, IMO, but A is the answer? In both statements they have the PO notifying these units/agencies where it should be the DO, choice A has exceptions where a PO could do it though, so no way choice A is better than B. How is one "least correct" to another when both are incorrect for the exact same reason, the DO makes the notifications?

63- everyone and I mean everyone should write this one up. PINS question. They tell you in the body of the story that all 4 choices are PINS cases, so there is no interpretation whatsoever in any of the choices not being under a PINS scenario. All four choices have 16 year old children and they want to know which would NOT get an Arrest Report Supplement. All 4 would get one since there is a statement in the procedure that says all 16 and 17 year old PINS get an ARS which is located in the middle of a list of things involving kids under 16 that is not related. The exam writers read the procedure wrong and wrote a factually wrong question with 4 choices that don't fit.

64- Missing person question. They said the correct answer was A which had a Sgt So and So telling his PO's that a roommate cannot file a missing report. In the missing procedure it has a list of 4 that can file the report, member of the family, guardian, school administrator, etc. I am submitting that "member of the family" is not defined in missings, but in family offenses it is spelled out in a bit more detail. According to the newly revised family court act, an "intimate relationship" would include just about anyone living together in a family like relationship, or share expenses, or spend time together, and do not have to have any sexual relationship? Would a roommate not fir into a "member of the family" then? Also the answer I picked "C" was that the DO will check precinct records and notifiy PDU. The DO would do those things and based on the fact pattern they do not designate the DO Pct of occurrence and DO Pct of residence as two different actors, so that one DO could do both in that fact pattern, so it is a correct statement. I want a double answer A or C, since both go for vagueness and neither are factually wrong, but can be interpreted.

89- E day question for sick kid. Right answer was give the eday, but there is a finest message saying its prohibited for the next 6 tours, no excusals. I chose and appealed to inquiring if the officer could call another family member to care for the child. In that choice you neither approve or deny the eday, you are looking to solve the problem. I also submitted a copy of 203-3 compliance with orders with my protest in the granting the eday is wrong based on procedure. I picked B, proposed answer key is C. I want a double answer.

"PatrolGuideIsMyBible"  

yes those too, and we should find the best response to those questions and use them as well!

what # is department vechicle accident?

PFB wrote:

---

what # is department vechicle accident?

---

 47

89- E day question for sick kid. Right answer was give the eday, but there is a finest message saying its prohibited for the next 6 tours, no excusals. I chose and appealed to inquiring if the officer could call another family member to care for the child. In that choice you neither approve or deny the eday, you are looking to solve the problem. I also submitted a copy of 203-3 compliance with orders with my protest in the granting the eday is wrong based on procedure. I picked B, proposed answer key is C. I want a double answer.


I also picked B. my argument is going to be that before i can make a sound judgement, all facts must be considered

Supervision of Police Personnel, Iannone, Sixth EditionDecision Making, page 50 and Drawing Conclusions, page 51;
The decision-making process involves several steps.
First, there must be an awareness that a real problem exists.
Second, facts must be obtained.
Third, facts obtained (data) must be evaluated

If the guy has family to bring the kid to the hospital then there would be no problem now, would there? (Step#1)
How would you know unless you ask? (Step#2)


for the record, spasms of competence, get a life, you trolling a_ _ hole and stop MMQ when you either
(a) just got lucky with a few answers
(b) took the test 2 weeks later and think you're smarter than the rest of us
(c) failed so miserably that you probably won't even bother to protest
(d) all of the above

Spasms_Of_Competence wrote:

---

---

89- E day question for sick kid. Right answer was give the eday, but there is a finest message saying its prohibited for the next 6 tours, no excusals. I chose and appealed to inquiring if the officer could call another family member to care for the child. In that choice you neither approve or deny the eday, you are looking to solve the problem. I also submitted a copy of 203-3 compliance with orders with my protest in the granting the eday is wrong based on procedure. I picked B, proposed answer key is C. I want a double answer.

---

 

 

Now here is a question that was designed to measure your fortitude as a police supervisor.  Faced with the premise of a sick baby requiring immediate hospitalization, it should have been obvious that the blanket Department directive should have been disregarded by a competent supervisor concerned with protecting life and avoiding a potentially litigious situation.  Yet faced with such a scenario, some concluded a viable response would be to demand emergent care be delayed as dad diddled calling his relatives and friends for assistance. 

Holy Sh__.

With the judgement some of you employ, I am quite certain that if placed in Harry Truman's unenviable shoes of having to consider the deployment of Fat Man and Little Boy over Hiroshima and Nagasaki, many posters on this board would have stumbled their way into nuking New York City and subsequently attempted to justify it.

"But...  But...  since we're trying to kill Japanese, it was wholly legitimate to start by destroying Chinatown.  They're close to Japanese, right?"

"No Sergeant, they are not.  That was not the right choice."

 

-- Edited by Spasms_Of_Competence on Thursday 1st of December 2011 03:22:02 AM

---

...

90xGoodnight wrote:

---

Credit to "PatrolGuideIsMyBible"   who made very good points to questions many seem to have gotten wrong

89- E day question for sick kid. Right answer was give the eday, but there is a finest message saying its prohibited for the next 6 tours, no excusals. I chose and appealed to inquiring if the officer could call another family member to care for the child. In that choice you neither approve or deny the eday, you are looking to solve the problem. I also submitted a copy of 203-3 compliance with orders with my protest in the granting the eday is wrong based on procedure. I picked B, proposed answer key is C. I want a double answer.

"PatrolGuideIsMyBible"  

---

 i could see denying him the day, i could see asking whether another family member could take the baby. i could see (in real life) giving him the day, but i would love to see how the examiner's defend a blatant violation and contradiction of the PG