[john77]

So I just got home from the test and I have a couple of questions.

1). Did anyone notice some problems with the way a couple of the questions were writte?

2). Why did they have two questions that were repeated within a couple pages of each other? Was this just a mistake or is there a real reason for it.

One of the problems I had with the wording of a specific question was with the question about confessions and suspects rights. Did anyone else find anything wrong or confusing about this question?

 

[ROBOCOP1982]

Yeh the two questions were the same....who the heck knows why they did that. The confession one...I put the one where they told the suspect they had his brother and then he confessed.

 

[john77]

for the confession one I put the suspect who did not say anything. But I thought it could have been either of them. The qustion asked who did not have their rights violated and/or his or hers confession was admissable.

The guy who did not say anything did not have his rights violated becuase his scheduled arraingment was cancelled due to inclement weather, so he was arraigned at the next scheduled one. He did not confess to anything, but the question said and/or the confession was admissable.

The guy who's brother was arrested everything seemed to be kosher, I just wasn't sure whether they considered the detective saying "if you confess you can help yourself" (or something to that effect) coersion. I don't consider it coersion, but thought they might.

 

[Z32]

The two questions were the same but the anwers were differant letters. I think one was D and second one B or something like that. I think it was written for people to recognize it and just put down the first answer again. Very Sneaky

 

[JeepinWeezle]

for the confession one I put the suspect who did not say anything. But I thought it could have been either of them. The qustion asked who did not have their rights violated and/or his or hers confession was admissable.

The guy who did not say anything did not have his rights violated becuase his scheduled arraingment was cancelled due to inclement weather, so he was arraigned at the next scheduled one. He did not confess to anything, but the question said and/or the confession was admissable.

The guy who's brother was arrested everything seemed to be kosher, I just wasn't sure whether they considered the detective saying "if you confess you can help yourself" (or something to that effect) coersion. I don't consider it coersion, but thought they might.

Same thing...i thought of coersion...but went with the brother answer anyways because in this situation i think we knew too much for our own good....they are expecting people who no nothing about law enforcement i guess

 

[Capt. Kirk]

I also went with the brother answer on that one. I thought of the coersion thing too but then re-read the question and felt it wasn't coersion. I think your right JW sometimes we know to much for our own good.

 

[Xyr_gt]

The question which was printed twice was a mistake by the Csc, A female in my class stood up and asked the examiner about it... The Examiner was talking with some people in the hall way, whom i over heard saying "shoot thats a mistake, tell them to just anwser like they did on the previous one"

The examiner then came in and told us to just keep going and anwser it like we thought was correct.

Could be a sneaky Tactic however it could have been a mistake like the officials were saying.

 

[john77]

The "and/or" part is what gets me. The guy who said nothing did not have his rights violated, so in theory that is a correct answer. If they had said who did not have their rights violated AND gave a confession that is admissable then I would have had to go with the brothers.

 

[soxrock75]

I went with the guy who wasn't arraigned for 24 hours. I went back and forth on that one and just tried to answer it based on the questions wording......."rights not violated" etc. I dunno, I guess we'll find out in 4-5 months.

Random Observations made on Test Day:

1) I took the exam at the Washington Irving Middle School in Roslindale and the way things were handled, it was as if they had never been a test site before. I arrived at 9:10 or so and was in the first 75 people. Yet, they did not even start getting people into classroom lines until 10:15. So much for arriving early. I have taken the test at other sites (Somerville, Malden) and they start getting people INTO the classrooms at 9:30 so that the exam may begin at 10. The proctor in my classroom only had 1 location code sheet for the entire room of 25. (I know that the notice said to bring one with us, but honsestly, who does that?)

2) This exam was a little different than previous years, I found it a little more diffcult this time around. There were more reading and legal questions. Which is good, because you don't want any meat-heads getting lucky and scoring better than you. This test required a little more thinking.

3) Did anybody put the MBTA down as their residency location? I filled out my locations fast and was being curious....OK Nosy, as to what other people were listing and the guy next to me had the T as the location where he would be claiming residency? It was definitely the MBTA because the code was an unmisatkable "888". I am sure that many of us put the T down as an option but for residency??? I remember on some of the other tests that you were automatically thrown into the T mix without even choosing it. I guess now you have to choose it to be considered. I just would've thought that you list it after your home city/town. Maybe this guy just really loves the Transit System?

4) How can you not show up on time to a test that doesn't require you to be there until 10am on a Saturday morning?

Anyone else have any observations or funny stories......?

 

[Southside]

I was amazed at all the civilians with blue line stickers and plates....some even both. I found this a little more involved than prior tests.....which is a good thing. I took my time and gave it my all so we'll see.

On the memore part it asked how many were sitting standing in or along the park......how many were there?

 

[john77]

There were
3 LEO,
2 guys hanging out (one with a number 31 on his shirt),
1 guy walking towards the 2 guys hanging out (I think),
1 women with 1 kid...

so that makes 8
I think that might be it.

Can anyone think of anyone else, or did I make up any of the ones I stated?

 

[Southside]

I put A) which I believe was 1-3. Because the question was who was in or along the park. One cop in the park and the two gus talking. The other cop was out in the street and the dude walking was crossing a street to get to the park and the woman was over by the marketplace. I don't think the question wanted everyone in the scenario....I could be wrong. Some of those questions made me talk to myself. :lol: .

 

[Guest]

yeah i was talking to myself and the head woman was staring at me for about 20 minutes kinda freaked me out.

 

[Officer Dunngeon]

It was in or on the sidewalk along the park. There was also the guy walking his dog.

 

[john77]

So the 2 LEO's chatting by the squad cars don't count...damn, my score keeps going down.

 

[Guest]

Heh if I dont get a 98 I dont have a chance, so if its lower than a 98 I think im going to FL and saying goodbye to good ol mass

 

[ROBOCOP1982]

I was shocked at the number of full-time officers taking the test at Plymouth... :shock: All seemed to be from southeastern mass

 

[john77]

Why would a full-timer take the test? Is it just so they can lateral to a Civil Servoce dept. I am assuming that the FT's you are talking about are currently at non Civil Service depts.

 

[ROBOCOP1982]

Why would a full-timer take the test? Is it just so they can lateral to a Civil Servoce dept. I am assuming that the FT's you are talking about are currently at non Civil Service depts.

Yes...

 

[lt.drebbin]

Full-time Officers who are currently working for civil service departments also take the test so they have a chance of getting on a department that does not take laterals .. such as Brockton or Quincy