Police did not respond to an emergency call for playing Pokémon Go – People – Culture

Louis Lozano y Eric Mitchell, who were on patrol in the city of Los Angeles, were on duty under the supervision of Sergeant José Gómez. It was Saturday, April 15, 2017 and, according to the sentence, “there were more calls than patrols available to answer them and an earlier homicide occurred.”

The captain surnamed Davenport saw a police car meters away from the scene, but assumed that it was traffic or that the occupants did not have the same frequency tuned, otherwise they would have responded to the incident.

Davenport reported a code 6, pinpointing the location of the robbery and saw the police car leave. That unit was that of Lozano y Mitchell.

(Also read: Neighbors sent the Police to youtuber Dominic Wolf for ‘suspicious’).

Sergeant Gómez realized that both policemen were in the area and summoned them to question them for not having acted.

What are the tasks of a patrolman? was the question that started the conversation. Of course, the relationship with the community was among the answers.

Gomez proceeded to ask if they had heard a “backup for a robbery at the Crenshaw Mall” call. Mitchell replied that he had not and Lozano that Captain Davenport had not requested reinforcements.

(You may be interested: ‘Well, sell it’: Claudia López and the memes of the new peak and plate in Bogotá).

The excuse after the reprimand was that there was “a lot of noise in the park” where they were and that is why they had not listened to the radio.

However, the recordings revealed that they were playing Pokemon Go during his turn, the augmented reality game that became so popular at the time. In fact, the sentence cites that during the 20 minutes following the robbery, the officers went to different locations to capture the creatures of the game.

The video game was developed by Niantic for iOS and Android devices.

Photo:

Pokemon Go – pokemongolive.com

Both of them they were removed from their positions and, although they appealed the decision, the California State Court of Appeals reaffirmed its position regarding the officers.

More news

Leave a Comment