RISING STAR ! The ultimate source to ace your NYPD Sergeant, Lieutenant, and Captain Exam Visit www.RisingStarPromotion.com to order our questions specifically designed for maximum retention of the Patrol Guide--plus full-length exams!

Yeah I dropped that one...
I'm holding on to the scaffold and diplomat question

Which dcas building did you go to? I have some I want to protest also and I don't remember the question numbers. I'll do the same and take a trip over there 

fighten0h wrote:

---

Anyone get the mayors executive order question wrong ? If I remember correctly the answer I saw was inspector general and comish of inspections

---

 i protested that one also...said comish of inspections and I checked+highlighted it 10x. which caused me to get it wrong ...i think it was a typo was supposed to say insp general and comish of investigations

Any word on prayingforapass70? Anyone work with him/her to confirm that he/she is okay.

So waiting for the list number to come out. The forum died. So what's going on? I hope there's a sgt class next month. This 2013 the never ending list.


How many people have passed in your cmd so far and what's the highest score. So far in my cmd got 7 people. Highest score is 88.

Elise1 wrote:

---

Who really cares no one does. When list comes out it will come out

---

 Agreed

Who really cares what ppl got in your pct. Ppl just cared if they passed not what others got. It's dead forum bc everyone is waiting for list to come out

I know for a fact someone I studied with got a 99 and works in Manhattan north

At the end of the day we need to try and think about how the Test Validation Board will see it. I'm assuming the first thing they will do when reading this question is opening up the Penal Law to read a through d and decipher what charge each action equals to. When they get to the option with the girlfriend realizing her car was "stolen", I believe they are going to have a hard time finding in Grand Larceny 4th Degree where it says that a boyfriend calling his ex to say she is never getting her car back equates to a Larceny. According to my recollection, the question never stated that he stole it himself. It said that she realized it was stolen and that it wasnt parked where she left, but no where did it say she or anyone observed him stealing the vehicle.

The moment the TVB refers to the CCRG, the question should be thrown out for being improperly referred to. Thats not what the question asked you to refer to.

-- Edited by HanginByAThread on Wednesday 26th of April 2017 08:34:01 AM

To me it sounded like unauthorized use of vehicle that's the way I protested it. Let's see what happens.

That is exactly what I have been telling everyone also. People are just so negative and not very open minded. Lets face it, there aren't too many questions at all on this exam that can be fought, if any. This is the only one that is debatable.

Remember, in order for the TVB to make a change, you have to make the argument that another answer is better or as good as what they have marked as the correct choice. Every time I hear the Assault 1 argument people seem to think i'm disagreeing that it isn't Assault 1, it definitely is, but like you stated, that would also mean it's Assault in the 2nd Degree. When you drop the online on the cousin who hit his cousin with the bat, your also gonna charge Assault 2.

As I stated on my long post before. The question and choices was poorly formatted. The exam overall was challenging enough to where they could have simply listed the charges themselves on A through D.

I am very confident that this question can be a double answer at minimum.

Just something else to add.

No one knows what DCAS wrote the correct answer as (as in what charge). Everyone keeps saying Grand Larceny 4th (GLA), but how do you know that if it wasn't shown at the protest review session ?

The CCRG is irrelevant for this question because even though it's nearly word for word identical as what they had "correct", that's not what they locked you in to. They locked you into 208-36 - Family Offenses.

According to 208-36, Aggravated Harassment in the 2nd Degree is a Family Offense.

Subsection 1 under Aggravated Harassment 2nd Degree States:

With intent to harass another person, the actor either:

(a) communicates, anonymously or otherwise, by telephone, by computer
  or any other electronic  means,  or  by  mail,  or  by  transmitting  or
  delivering  any  other form of communication, a threat to cause physical
  harm to, or unlawful harm to the property of, such person, or  a  member
  of  such person's same family or household as defined in subdivision one
  of section 530.11 of the criminal procedure law, and the actor knows  or
  reasonably should know that such communication will cause such person to
  reasonably fear harm to such person's physical safety or property, or to
  the physical safety or property of a member of such person's same family
  or household;


Subsection 4 under the SAME CHARGE:

4. With the intent to harass, annoy, threaten or alarm another person,
  he or she strikes, shoves, kicks or otherwise subjects another person to
  physical  contact thereby causing physical injury to such person or to a
  family or household member of such person as defined in  section  530.11
  of the criminal procedure law;

The boyfriend calling his girlfriend saying he has her car was also Aggravated Harassment 2.
 The cousin striking his cousin with the bat was Aggravated Harassment 2. Like the guy above me stated, when you commit an Offense, you just dont commit that single offense and THATS IT.
 There are usually other charges that go with it. 

When you turn to 208-36, and see "Assault 2" as one of the Family Offenses, and you turn to the Penal Law, doesn't it still say "with intent to cause SPI, causes SPI" ? Does the simple fact that it didn't have "with a deadly" instrument remove the fact that he
"intended to cause SPI, and caused SPI" ? No .. it does not. So YES, it is definitely Assault 1, but it is also Assault 2 (a Family Offense), it is also Aggravated Harassment 2 (a Family Offense) and it is also Reckless Endangerment (a Family Offense).

Reckless Endangerment 2nd Degree States:

 A person is guilty of reckless endangerment in the second degree when
he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a substantial risk of
serious physical injury to another person.

This was a poorly formatted Penal Law question that was mixed with the Patrol Guide in a way that made the question have too many grey areas. On these promotional tests, 99% of the time the answers are clean cut, straight up from the Patrol Guide word for word.
This isn't the case with this one.

This will be a double answer at minimum.

 

-- Edited by HanginByAThread on Monday 1st of May 2017 08:35:04 AM

-- Edited by HanginByAThread on Monday 1st of May 2017 08:36:59 AM

-- Edited by HanginByAThread on Monday 1st of May 2017 08:37:31 AM

I didn't protest it, I hope you protested it on those grounds

-- Edited by Yoloking on Thursday 4th of May 2017 04:10:26 AM

Does anyone have 94-100?

 

Gk06 wrote:

---

Sunrise wrote:

---

Nicholasjames65 wrote:

---

Can someone post the updated answer key again please. Thank you

---

 Updated??? Looks the same to me

---

 

---

 

Confirmed it's a different test and it's all over this thread.

Nothing is "confirmed" until test day......... I know some military guys got a July date and ppl are on these forums looking for answers.

Nyfine wrote:

---

Nothing is "confirmed" until test day......... I know some military guys got a July date and ppl are on these forums looking for answers.

---

 someone I know took the test and it was different. there's your confirmation

Does anyone remember the choices for the Diplomat question ?

The proposed correct answer was the one that says "No longer detain once verified by intel" or something very similar.

I remember choosing one that said something like "Detain the diplomat and take to the stationhouse until hes verified by intel", something along those lines ?

Im duscussing the question with someone and we cant remember the choices correctly. Perhaps someone with good memory can help us out ? Thanks.

-- Edited by HanginByAThread on Tuesday 27th of June 2017 12:54:04 PM

This board was on fire months back.

Completely dead now.

Lets try and wake this thing back up.

Throw-out predictions anyone ?

Im gonna call 2 throwouts, no double answers.

I say the question with the C.O. calling the Desk in the in-basket asking how many posts are covered will be thrown out

HanginByAThread wrote:

---

So far, can we say the most protested questions are ?

1. Family Offense question from 208-36, with GLA as a correct answer.
2. Diplomat question.
3. Building OEM question
4. 212 Active shooter (was supposed to be 221).
5. Question ending with "most" not specifying most correct.
6. And last one apparently there was a mistake with one of the TRI questions ?
Supposedly for one of the questions regarding the TRI there was no correct answer
Because more then one TRI needed to be done ? I have heard this from multiple people
Lately but they could also be wrong.

Any more to note ?

---

 and if I recall correctly, I believe #3 on your list Hanging locked us into a specific procedure in 217 Series.. talked about an injury occurring and a scaffolding involved which causes for a Direct notification to Dept. of Buildings (I don't believe it said "serious injury" because then a notification to Operations would also be a correct choice) 

Hated that question, only one I got wrong on the inbasket. I did every inbasket from every school and the one on our exam was much more difficult than all of them.

Reds wrote:

---

Hated that question, only one I got wrong on the inbasket. I did every inbasket from every school and the one on our exam was much more difficult than all of them.

---

I personally also hated this question, and answered it the best I could.. giving an educated guess by seeing how many extra unassigned cops I had at the time (that were not prohibited to be used by the C.O.'s memos, i.e.. command staff, etc.) and chose that number.  I don't remember whether I put 2 or 3 for my answer, but I marked my answer and kept it moving.  

Still have faith.

Bookworm, we got this, I know we do !