Pending Review Wrong and Biased Decision | Jack Cranley

[Gyaani Bhai]

Your ID

3440

Admin's Name

Jack Cranley

Date of violation

Oct 30, 2026

Time of violation

6:24

Proofs

https://librarp.com/forums/threads/2498/

Jack was completely influenced by the third party commentators of the respective forum.

1. Jack said VDM was not intentional is Wrong. Can Jack explain why he turned his vehicle right and landed his vehicle on me??
2. Jack said that apologized which is wrong. Can jack explain how he heard his apology?? because in my pov id 7395 mic was not working properly?

Jack completely ignored that the id 7395 turned his vehicle right and stopped vehicle on me which is 2 times hit injury to give his biased decision.
He also imagined that the guy who landed vehicle on me gave apology without hearing. Is this a Joke?

 

[Jack Cranley]

Hey, I reviewed your POV, and although he hit you with his vehicle, he approached you afterward and admitted it was a mistake. Since you were standing in an open area near an NPC, there was no clear evidence of intentional ramming. VDM involves intentionally hitting or killing someone with a vehicle, and as I found no evidence of intent, I decided not to punish him.

 

[Heartie Muerte]

Hey, I reviewed your POV, and although he hit you with his vehicle, he approached you afterward and admitted it was a mistake. Since you were standing in an open area near an NPC, there was no clear evidence of intentional ramming. VDM involves intentionally hitting or killing someone with a vehicle, and as I found no evidence of intent, I decided not to punish him.

I agree with jack as it wasn't intentional, I also reviewed the POV.

 

[Gyaani Bhai]

Nice Jack, How did u explain the landing the vehicle on a person?