It's not too late! Order your 2023 Lieutenant Exam "Just the Questions" for only $349 Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to order over 1400 questions specifically designed for maximum retention of the Patrol Guide--plus full-length exams!

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: May 31 BMOC


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:
May 31 BMOC


Did the finest come down for a May 31 BMOC? 40 Sgt are supposed to be going in



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 198
Date:

No finest for bmoc as of 1345 5/27/16

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 241
Date:

pretty sure a judge put a stop to that at least until june 24th



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Sarge wrote:

pretty sure a judge put a stop to that at least until june 24th


 June 1st



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Sarge wrote:

pretty sure a judge put a stop to that at least until june 24th


 s



-- Edited by Devil Dog on Saturday 28th of May 2016 12:05:06 AM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 241
Date:

this says june 24th http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-lieutenant-promotions-hold-test-results-challenge-article-1.2639949

 



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 293
Date:

Sarge wrote:

this says june 24th http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nypd-lieutenant-promotions-hold-test-results-challenge-article-1.2639949

 


That's also a Daily News article.  



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:

The temp restraining order is in affect until June 1. That day there will be a hearing and the judge will decide the preliminary injunction. If the judge grants the injunction, the job will not be promoting anytime soon. Hopefully the judge will decide quickly and get this list moving. Hopefully with more people added to the list.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 200
Date:

GDASSCLUB wrote:

The temp restraining order is in affect until June 1. That day there will be a hearing and the judge will decide the preliminary injunction. If the judge grants the injunction, the job will not be promoting anytime soon. Hopefully the judge will decide quickly and get this list moving. Hopefully with more people added to the list.


 Where are you getting that info from? 

(I'm not saying youre wrong....if it's from public documents or Wherever I actually want to know so I can look for myself in the future)



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:

I got the 129 page complaint mailed to me. My info is spot on. Blatt and company are looking for 6 questions to get tossed. #17 18 27 59 61 106. They are looking for the judge to create a "special list" with these questions tossed. In result to the that, the original list must be deemed invalid and the judge will create a special list as stated in the complaint. The complaint also attacks the make-ups, in s and substance shouldn't be promoted. The complaint recognize the elite 164 stating we shall all be promoted.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 241
Date:

 

 

Hmmm seems like they are finally doing the right thing, I could get on board with this....

 



-- Edited by Sarge on Sunday 29th of May 2016 02:45:06 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 112
Date:

I got the same package of the complaint mailed to my command as well ... I think some of those Sgt's who filled for this lawsuit should worry about being a supervisor first before worrying about making it to the list ..has anyone read Personnel Order #149 .. Pg#6 on the "disposition of disciplinary proceedings" section ..if some of these superstars can't even supervised two (2) cops .. imagine supervising the whole platoon? Wow ..what a shame !

__________________

" iT is What It is "



Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

papote170 wrote:

I got the same package of the complaint mailed to my command as well ... I think some of those Sgt's who filled for this lawsuit should worry about being a supervisor first before worrying about making it to the list ..has anyone read Personnel Order #149 .. Pg#6 on the "disposition of disciplinary proceedings" section ..if some of these superstars can't even supervised two (2) cops .. imagine supervising the whole platoon? Wow ..what a shame !


 Wow!



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 226
Date:

papote170 wrote:

I got the same package of the complaint mailed to my command as well ... I think some of those Sgt's who filled for this lawsuit should worry about being a supervisor first before worrying about making it to the list ..has anyone read Personnel Order #149 .. Pg#6 on the "disposition of disciplinary proceedings" section ..if some of these superstars can't even supervised two (2) cops .. imagine supervising the whole platoon? Wow ..what a shame !


 Personal order 149 has not been published yet but it does exist in order number 148.......perhaps you made a mistake and quoted incorrect order just like she probably did .... No need to sling mud at a public forum on fellow brothers and sisters in blue. You'll all be promoted just be patient and let's stop with all the unnecessary crap here. 



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 112
Date:

My mistake ..it is # 148 ..thanks for the correction!

__________________

" iT is What It is "



Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 18
Date:

Why wasn't #79 included with the other operations order questions?



__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 81
Date:

Actually, the way it's stated, they are literally looking to toss the questions. I don't think it's their fault it has something to do with case law. Those six questions would potentially be stricken from record and the test would be regraded out of a 94. I bet a lot of the ppl the donates to blatt and co. don't stand a chance of getting on the list. The whole "65 and over will get on list, so donate money to the cause "is now a complete fabrication.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 226
Date:

Nikkydenimblue wrote:

Actually, the way it's stated, they are literally looking to toss the questions. I don't think it's their fault it has something to do with case law. Those six questions would potentially be stricken from record and the test would be regraded out of a 94. I bet a lot of the ppl the donates to blatt and co. don't stand a chance of getting on the list. The whole "65 and over will get on list, so donate money to the cause "is now a complete fabrication.


 so does it mean that if you scored a 70 and got all those 6 correct, with new regrading your score will be a 68? So if you were on the list before , regrading could get you off?



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 293
Date:

mjehangir96 wrote:
Nikkydenimblue wrote:

Actually, the way it's stated, they are literally looking to toss the questions. I don't think it's their fault it has something to do with case law. Those six questions would potentially be stricken from record and the test would be regraded out of a 94. I bet a lot of the ppl the donates to blatt and co. don't stand a chance of getting on the list. The whole "65 and over will get on list, so donate money to the cause "is now a complete fabrication.


 so does it mean that if you scored a 70 and got all those 6 correct, with new regrading your score will be a 68? So if you were on the list before , regrading could get you off?


Correct. This is mentioned in Blatt's complaint.



__________________


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 2
Date:

I think the correct answers for above six questions will be ABCD . Hence gaining points for everybody , including passers points if they had those incorrect.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Ltexam2017 wrote:

I think the correct answers for above six questions will be ABCD . Hence gaining points for everybody , including passers points if they had those incorrect.


 Lol, wrong. This is court not tvb. Read the complaint and case law.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 241
Date:

someone is trying to scare all the passers.... dont worry.   It doesnt make sense for them to have a lawsuit where the questions just get striken from the test and they gain no points so they dont pass anyways.... Like lt exam was saying the throw out questions will read ABCD. 



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Sarge wrote:

someone is trying to scare all the passers.... dont worry.   It doesnt make sense for them to have a lawsuit where the questions just get striken from the test and they gain no points so they dont pass anyways.... Like lt exam was saying the throw out questions will read ABCD. 


 Wrong again. the passers received two copies of their complaint in the mail.  You on the other hand are speaking from a place of ignorance. Tvb is over. If a question is tossed, no one will receive credit for it. Exam will be regraded from the remaning Questions. Their complaint acknowledged it numerous times, and went on to state that some original passers could be removed from the list. What it didn't mention is some people paying for this suit have no chance at passing. 65 and below are done.



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:

I read the complaint. I concur with above statement. It also reiterated a %70 passing score. So if you do the math getting 30 questions wrong will make you a failure. The magic # is now 29 questions wrong to receive above %70.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:

Correction manic # is 28 wrong to receive 70 or above

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 226
Date:

28 wrong would mean a score of 66 out of 94...... Interesting .... Given that by removing above questions won't bring you below 66 mark.....

__________________


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 2
Date:

2 complaints devil dog? Does that include one filed by the elite 97?

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 72
Date:

Let the "leapfrogging" begin! Where's ondeairr? Lol



-- Edited by Paul Benedict on Monday 30th of May 2016 04:44:57 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Paul Benedict wrote:

Let the "leapfrogging" begin! Where's ondeairr? Lol



-- Edited by Paul Benedict on Monday 30th of May 2016 04:44:57 PM


 Lol



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Ltexam2017 wrote:

2 complaints devil dog? Does that include one filed by the elite 97?


 Nah, judge made the 9 send out complaints via certified mail, since their tactics could adversely affect passers. Would also affect people with 65s who gave them money. 



-- Edited by Devil Dog on Monday 30th of May 2016 06:09:25 PM

__________________


Veteran Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 81
Date:

It is a public document, in the hands of 204 people. You can read it for yourself. It is true that people who are currently on this list can be knocked off. It is also true that most people that donated money and I bet even some of the named complainants wouldn't make the list either. Like someone stated before, the court is not TVB. Everyone defending the 9 or 7 or whatever they are... They weren't doing this for you. Blatt is doing it for himself. As long as he passes I don't think anything else matters. He gave people false hope, he took their money, now the truth comes out. Six questions stricken from the record, test would be regarded out of a 94. While I am very skeptical this complaint will be triumphant, I think everyone should be aware of what is actually being asked.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Nikkydenimblue wrote:

It is a public document, in the hands of 204 people. You can read it for yourself. It is true that people who are currently on this list can be knocked off. It is also true that most people that donated money and I bet even some of the named complainants wouldn't make the list either. Like someone stated before, the court is not TVB. Everyone defending the 9 or 7 or whatever they are... They weren't doing this for you. Blatt is doing it for himself. As long as he passes I don't think anything else matters. He gave people false hope, he took their money, now the truth comes out. Six questions stricken from the record, test would be regarded out of a 94. While I am very skeptical this complaint will be triumphant, I think everyone should be aware of what is actually being asked.


 Agreed. This last document proved it. Even the financial supporters of this debacle have been sacrificed. 



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 255
Date:

So is today the day we get more info on this lawsuit ?

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:

Today @ 1200 hours. The judge will decide on the preliminary injunction. That means if the judge grants the preliminary injunction, the city can't promote until the lawsuit is over. If the judge doesn't grant the injunction, the city can start promoting. That doesn't mean the case is over and the judge can still rule in the favor of blatt and company. But If the judge denies the injunction it is a good sign the judge is siding with the city.

__________________


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 2
Date:

Any news ? Should I start reading again? Or there is a chance? I'm sure some if you went to the hearing please update us all.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 255
Date:

The suspense is killing me

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Basically nothing happened today. Judge did not rule from the bench. There will be a decision by the 24th after she reviews everything

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 255
Date:

So the daily news was correct when they stated she will make her ruling on the 24th

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 241
Date:

I think now we can realize not to listen to these clowns who think they know everything.... The date of the 24th was the correct date and the 6 questions will read abcd if they are indeed thrown out. 



__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

Sarge wrote:

I think now we can realize not to listen to these clowns who think they know everything.... The date of the 24th was the correct date and the 6 questions will read abcd if they are indeed thrown out. 


 Not really. Judge can rule Tomm if she wants. City made strong arguments vs 5 outta 6 questions imo. one of em is a wild card. Once again "Sarge" you are speaking from a place of ignorance. You don't bother to read public docs or go to public hearings. While thinking your opinion has weight. Ignorance is bliss they say 



-- Edited by Devil Dog on Wednesday 1st of June 2016 09:21:05 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 200
Date:

Devil Dog wrote:

 


 Not really. Judge can rule Tomm if she wants. City made strong arguments vs 5 outta 6 questions imo. one of em is a wild card. Once again "Sarge" you are speaking from a place of ignorance. You don't bother to read public docs or go to public hearings. While thinking your opinion has weight. Ignorance is bliss they say 



-- Edited by Devil Dog on Wednesday 1st of June 2016 09:21:05 PM


 So today they actually argued over specific questions?

 

Where could we find the public documents? Thanks 



__________________


Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 11
Date:

What question was the wild card?

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 255
Date:

I wonder if they will use Bratton's own words against the city, where he stated some questions should of been thrown out on NY1. It seems like it would be a one way argument the city pleads their case for the questions being acceptable. Then they counter with "its not on the list of things to study." Now saying that if i get the point i need i will get them all a pen set, but unfortunately i dont think that will happen since i got 106 correct.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Date:

www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/nypd-promotions-hold-judge-refuses-lift-ban-article-1.2657658

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 255
Date:

wow these guys might actually pull it off, according to this article The judge stated "that the question she needs to resolve is whether the advance notice was specific enough." where the city lawyer states "they were notified under Task Areas that would be covered on the exam." Again I'm just a Sergeant but that does not sound specific to me. Lets wait and see what the judge thinks.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 241
Date:

Tme97 wrote:

What question was the wild card?


 Has to be question 106.... There is just no justified response for not throwing this question out



__________________


Newbie

Status: Offline
Posts: 4
Date:

So after reading the judge's direct quote, my question is what happens of she determines the advanced noticed wasn't specific enough? I assume that only one of the three following will happen:
1) The judge looks at the 6 specific questions brought up and make a determination to just throw those out?
2) The entire exam becomes invalidated, because now the floodgates open up for more questions nitpicked as to whether there was sufficient notice.
3) The exam gets kicked back to DCAS for re-evaluation.

What a cluster****. And the whole department waits

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 255
Date:

SBA sent out an email, stating if the judge decides to throw out the questions the list would be regraded. They also stated that the judge can decide if ANY sgt get promoted off this list. Personally they should just hire from the original test date takers. That way the scammers wont get made. No need to punish those that pass truthfully.

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 312
Date:

common sense wrote:

SBA sent out an email, stating if the judge decides to throw out the questions the list would be regraded. They also stated that the judge can decide if ANY sgt get promoted off this list. Personally they should just hire from the original test date takers. That way the scammers wont get made. No need to punish those that pass truthfully.


 SBA email was full of errors, they obviously gave half an effort on it.  No one there said or heard anything about the judge tossing the list. She basically said she wants nothing to do with cheating allegations and that is being handled by IAB.  Also there has never been an injunction granted, the tro was Extended til she makes her decision. There's huge difference between tro and Pi. I have a feeling this will drag on for many months. if she thorws out questions city will prob appeal if not the failures will appeal. 



-- Edited by Devil Dog on Thursday 2nd of June 2016 01:04:29 PM



-- Edited by Devil Dog on Thursday 2nd of June 2016 01:07:54 PM

__________________


Senior Member

Status: Offline
Posts: 200
Date:

common sense wrote:

SBA sent out an email, stating if the judge decides to throw out the questions the list would be regraded. They also stated that the judge can decide if ANY sgt get promoted off this list. Personally they should just hire from the original test date takers. That way the scammers wont get made. No need to punish those that pass truthfully.


 I think the whole scammer thing has been laid to rest. They lost that lawsuit, this is a new one challenging the questions. 

I guess the judge can start throwing out questions, or else this thing would have been over yesterday.



__________________
1 2  >  Last»  | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us