[MAIN] r3dtaile - Bias towards Security in admin rulings.

[SomanBat]

BYOND Name of complaint against: R3dtaile

Your BYOND name:Somanbat

Date of issue and round ID: 11/11/2019 Round 20050

Reason for complaint:

Rolled roundstart cultist as assistant. Cult was beginning to get going, and I was wandering around the station as an assistant. Cult had not gone active, nor were there any indications that there were active antags aside from blue shift declaration.

During my wandering, I ran up towards sec in a public hallway. Ran up, looked in the window (from the public hallway), then went about my merry way into the maint area between lawyer and abandoned office.

In this time, a security officer with the name of Lynn (something, client crash erased logs) began following me. Again, there was no active antags during this time. As she follows me, I turn and ask her what she wants, and she states, paraphrased "It's a blue shift I'm randomly searching you". Per previous rulings, I was under the impression that probable cause was required to conduct a search. I attempt to inform them of this in an ICish manner and refuse, and they are more insistent that "blue shift, random search". I finally state via LOOC that "You need probable cause for a search", and the stun batons come out.

I fired off an ahelp, and after the action occurred with cult trying to save me, r3dtaile closes the ticket with "they had probable cause". As I'd done nothing remotely antagonistic aside from wandering like an assistant, I re-opened the ticket and asked what specific cause was given for a search. r3dtaile gave the following as her reasoning: "She was watching around sec and when I stepped out she ran, I just stood there, came back to me, ran again when I got closer, I decided to follow and everytime I saw her she ran so I decided that since its code blue(?|F) I'd just random search her, she refused, threatened me if I didn't stop asking so I just took the threat as a sign that maybe it was safer to me to proceed with the search before getting shanked or something. " That's reasonable to me. " At no time was I loitering around security. I ran up, saw someone inside, stopped for a moment to rightclick and get a name, and left.

At no time did the security officer involved give any indication that there was more to it than "Blue shift, random search". Further, I feel that r3dtaile's bias towards security tainted their ruling towards "probable cause". The person involved even states in their ahelp response "I decided that since its code blue(?|F) I'd just random search her". Being in a public area as an assistant is not probable cause to search. It's also very faulty logic to say "I stated they're being randomly searched, they (rightfully) said no, now I have probable cause I can search."

[DiscordWizard]

Officer in question here, not really sure what else to say since my reasoning is explained in the post, but as I said the way you kept coming to me and leaving as soon as you saw me before going to maint got me suspicious, I followed you and since it was a blue shift I asked for search to be safe, when you kept refusing and even said I should really not search you or else I just squeezed the taser to be safe. As far as security goes I think it was proper escalation, got jumped by cultists after it almost immediately either way.

[Redtail]

Suspicion can come from many things such as how the suspect behaves and what. You claim it was just wandering, they saw it as otherwise. They had reason, they searched. There was nothing to be biased about here. "probable cause" can be many things, there's not a concrete definition with examples. Your behavior gave them probable cause. That's that.

[MrJWhit]

It's not unreasonable that someone who constantly plays security, would have a bias towards security when things are fuzzy.

[SomanBat]

It's not unreasonable that someone who constantly plays security, would have a bias towards security when things are fuzzy.

All the more reason why those in authority should be aware of their biases, and actively attempt to be objective when it comes to issues regarding such.

As much as hemming and hawwing about "circumstances" gets thrown around, these sorts of rulings set a precedent. As I see it, when playing security, I am now allowed to search an individual if the following conditions are met: It is a blue shift, an individual looks into a "secure" area from a public hallway, then moves away. Antags being confirmed, actions the individual has taken, or the like aren't needed. The round goes blue, a person stops within render distance of a secure area, and walks away, there is now probable cause to search.

Using the same logic that was given to me during ahelps, I can walk up to someone, say "I'm going to search you". If they refuse, I can now say "probable cause", stunbaton, and search away.

[SomanBat]

Per discussion with headmins and such last night on Discord, I feel that the concerns I have raised have been dealt with in a fair and equitable manner for all involved.

Thanks for the time and attention.