Jump to content

[Accepted] Jarod Dvorsky Captainship-CCIA Action Appeal

Recommended Posts

Appealing Personnel: Jarod Dvorsky

Specific Incident: BODY:

"Jarod Dvorksy, as you failed to respond to all contact attempts made by the Central Command Internal Affairs Bureau, we apologize that this cannot be done in person.

Concluding our investigation into a recently filed Incident Report, we have chosen to move forward with your immediate demotion and and baring from the positions of Captain and Head of Security aboard the NSS Exodus, or any other NanoTrasen Installation. The reasons for this decision will be detailed below:

We would like to remind you that under Code Green, operating procedure requires the use of a warrant to conduct the arrest of any crew not currently not posing an immediate and visible breach of regulation. We do not believe the reported Neglect of Duty of a janitor to fall under this category, furthermore a multitude of witnesses have made statements indicating this report to be inaccurate.

While the Captains of our installations are granted executive authority over all departments and may bend SOP when acting under extraneous circumstances, all such actions will be subject to review. Our captains are also highly discouraged from taking direct command over individual departments and are asked to instead delegate to capable personnel such as the Heads of Staff assigned to oversee these departments.

Through our investigation, we have have found reason to question your judgement, understanding of the SOP and have come to the conclusion that your exercise of the Executive Authority to authorize an illegal arrest was unacceptable.

Should you wish to return to work under the position of either Captain or Head of Security, the action taken against you may be subject to appeal in no less than one month's time."

Action taken as a result: Removal of rights in any capacity to exhert Captainship or Head of Security positions in the station.

Action contested: The aforementioned.

Reasoning for contest:

The entire situation was, at the core of it all, a complete and utter masturbation of utterly personal reasoning from the Security team to want so verily badly to get into the kitchen and exhert humilliation and breaking of protocol upon the Chef and his impromptu assistant who clung to their rights to avoid the wrath of the security team. I wasn't aware of the problem- it was only voiced to be shallowly by an utterly invested officer that, for some damnable reason, the Chef and the Assistant thereof inside the kitchen were a danger to the station, as the officers all piled around the kitchen, flashbangs and batons in hand. A cavalcade of angry security officers ensued when I made the wrongful assumption that these four officers and two cadets were onto something as I opened but a single airlock for them to head inside and make the arrest.

What personally saddens me most of this situation is that, while neither the perpetrator or the cause, my absence at defending myself in the case made it easy for I to be pinpointed as the one at fault despite being the only one who majorly scolded the security team and reigned them in afterwards. Handling the release of the wrongfully assaulted and processing all required fines; listening to the complaints of the crew through PDA and ensuring the crew's voice was channeled in the security team as they hammered through due process like it was a joke. It was injustice.

I recognize my mistakes in this endeavor- I put too much trust in the professionalism expected from my security team, I lacked the initiative to answer these CCIA claims while the fire was hot still, and I could bring from the cinders a proper flame to bring light to the truth in the matter. I didn't, however, and through argumentative and fabrication I was made to be the target of the CCIA department in finding a true perpetrator to this matter. Rest assured, however, that it was I who solely sought to culminate the brief insanity that was that episode we were shown on the kitchen by the security team.

Regardless of it all, this will not happen to me again. More rigid expectations and less good-hearted assumptions of my security team will not be a reason to tarnish my career over a second time.

J. Dvorsky



Additional notes: I know this has been a long time coming, and its only recently that I've had the stability on my internet to even find the desire to go about doing things such as these. Anyway, here it is. :)

Link to comment

TO: Jarod Dvorsky, NSS Aurora

FROM: Lyla Rathen, CCIA Duty Officer, NTCC Odin

SUBJECT: RE: Incident Report



Mister Dvorksy, during our investigations into the case which prompted the demotion listed here, we interviewed a number of individuals involved in the situation. Of those interviewed, multiple witnesses had implicated you in the following:

-Ordering the immediate arrest of the Janitor, Robin, for the failure to properly clean the station following a series of bear attacks. The station was operating under code green and no warrant was created. Robin was reported as being damaged in the bear attacks, temporarily inhibiting its ability to conduct its custodial duties. Robin was located with the kitchen, reported on multiple accounts to have been attempting to clean it at the time of the arrest.

-Aiding the security team in illegally raiding the kitchen without a warrant for the arrests being made, even though after being informed of the necessity of such a warrant by those present in the kitchen and some security personnel.

While it was unfortunate that we were unable to obtain your official statement prior the issuing of our action, attempts at contact were made for a period of two weeks before the case was closed.

We are open to the acceptance of this appeal, however, we wish to be certain that such an incident will not repeat. It is our expectation that any member of command overseeing the operations of the Security Department be well versed in their protocols. As such, we would expect that prior to your reinstatement, you will have taken the time to fully review the current security procedure in order to avoid aiding, or worse yet, encouraging the illegal arrests of the crew. Regardless of the whims of the personnel within the security department, you are expected to keep them in proper behavior or see to it that they are removed from their position of authority.

So long as you have acknowledged an understanding of the expectations placed upon the Security Department and the role of the Head of Security and/or Captain as oversight, we will accept this appeal.


DTG: 07-09:40-TAU CETI STANDARD-11-2459

SIGN: CCIAA Lyla Rathen

Link to comment
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...