Two Los Angeles police officers were fired because they played Pokémon Go while on duty instead of assisting in the pursuit of robbers.
These things also happen nowadays. LAPD officers were called by wireless for support in a robbery episode, but instead of chasing the robbers they preferred to catch Pokémon. The event and their dismissal took place in 2017, the police officers appealed against the decision and only now has the final decision of the judges for a permanent suspension from their duties been issued.
The video camera of the patrol car witnessed all this, as it showed that the two police officers, Louis Lozano and Eric Mitchell, ignored a request for support from their colleagues, to play the game.
The pair of police officers parked near a region that there was a robbery in progress and while the radio called them for backup, they ignored the call and left the area.
When asked later why they did not respond to the call, the two officers said they were in a noisy area and could not hear the radio. Lozano and Mitchell's supervisor was skeptical of their explanation and checked the system camera that recorded everything inside the car (commonly known as dashcam), and discovered that the two had heard the call and chose to go elsewhere, as they did not want to help. The supervisor reported the incident, and so an official investigation was opened.
According to court records, an extensive review of the car's video system revealed that shortly after they left the scene of the robbery, the two police officers were heard talking about Pokémon Go, including a Snorlax that had appeared and the best way to stop it. and his arrest !!!.
For about the next 20 minutes, the video system in the car recorded police talking about Pokémon as they drove to different locations where the virtual creatures were apparently appearing on their cell phones.
When asked by their superiors, the police denied that they were playing Pokémon Go and said that they were just having a conversation. They tried to appeal by arguing that the recordings inside the vehicle were not intended to be used to monitor the "personal conversations" of the police, but the judge considered their action unfounded and dismissed the appeal.
