Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
By Jackie Valley (contact) 
Wednesday, July 21, 2010 | 12:44 p.m.
Sun archives
Erik Scott memorial
A coroner's inquest in the fatal Metro Police shooting of a man at a Summerlin Costco store has been scheduled for 9 a.m. Sept. 3, the Clark County Coroner's Office said today.
Erik Scott, 38, was killed July 10 after authorities say he pointed a gun at an officer, prompting three officers to shoot him.
Authorities said a Costco employee called 911 to report a man acting erratically in the store, damaging merchandise and carrying a pistol in his waistband. An officer approached the man, identified as Scott, then noticed the pistol and gave him verbal commands to lay on the ground, police said.
After Scott pointed the pistol at an officer, the officers fired at him, striking him multiple times, police said. He died at University Medical Center a short time later.
The officers who fired their weapons were placed on paid administrative leave during the investigation, which is standard procedure in officer-involved shootings.
A lawyer representing Scott's family has denied Metro's version of events, arguing that Scott, a West Point graduate with a concealed weapon permit, never pulled out a handgun and pointed it at police.
Police identified the three officers involved in the shooting as Officer William Mosher, 38, who has been with the department since June 2005; Officer Joshua Stark, 28, with the department since September 2008; and Officer Thomas Mendiola, 23, with the department since March 2009.
A courtroom for the Sept. 3 inquest hasn't been decided, according to the coroner's office. Only one officer has been found to have acted improperly since 1976.
so one would guess that we're not going to hear the 911 call that clears metro or see the tape that clears metro before both are lost on the way to the inquest?
They smeared the Bonanza Rd. police shooting victim with lies about "having a lengthy criminal record." Looks like they will need plenty of their "testilying" on this one too. They also have talk radio stooges that spin the media as well.
The Coroner's Inquest is a quasi-judicial process run by a Special Master, not a judge. The evidence is presented by the DA. The only questions that are allowed are those from the DA and the ones that the Special Master allows. The victim and their family are NOT ALLOWED TO ASK QUESTIONS OR EVEN PARTICIPATE in the process. I doubt if they are even allowed to view any evidence before the process begins. Any questions from the victim and their family have to be submitted to the Special Master. This system was not set up by Metro, but was set up by the County Commission based upon recommendations from the DA, Metro and the Police Officers Association.
Ref: http://www.lvrj.com/news/affidavit-error...
Sept. 3? Hey Sun, please do some quick research and find out the average time it takes for most such inquests to take place. This seems like a rather lengthy time in which to fabricate, bury, concoct, "lose," doctor, and otherwise eradicate evidence.
Okay people, it's time that all of us get together on this day, September the 3rd and go to this Inquest. We must protest on this day outside the courthouse. We must protest in this courtroom by wearing t-shirts in support of Erik Scott or shirts demanding justice. WE THE PEOPLE MUST TAKE ACTION NOW!!!! It is the responsibility of the people to keep our government in check and if all of you are to lazy to do so then we all deserve to get shot and killed for no reason. So let us take back this police department and lets start with this "inquest" on September 3rd!!!!! Take the day off work, for this day can and will be the tipping point that can change this city forever. I am going to put together a website soon to try to get this event organized and when i do i will post links to it here. I would appreciate if everyone told all their friends and family and stress the true importance of this event. We must stand up for our rights and the rights of our fellow man. God Bless
http://www.infowars.com/dc-declares-war-...
"Remember, too, that illegal aliens murder (on average) 12 American citizens EVERY DAY in the United States. That means illegals murder more Americans EVERY YEAR than in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan COMBINED, TO DATE. Plus, illegal aliens who drive drunk kill an additional 13 Americans EVERY DAY."
This is all factual info, go read the reports. We the people must take back our country and not allow all this criminal activity from the illegal aliens all the way to our POLICE DEPARTMENTS. WE THE PEOPLE ARE GETTING DUPED. Our country has been hijacked by foriegn bankers dead set on our destruction for their personal wealth. Do the research and open your eyes for they will be wide open and full of tears of rage and sadness. Tell all your friends and family members. Open up EVERYONES eyes to what is going on. I for one do not want to live in a police state where the police can murder innocent civilians like Erik Scott or Trevon Cole. Lets demand change now
i hope the costco management attends so they get to take part in the mess they helped make.
sounds like our police force back here in honolulu, corrupt!
Only one Metro Police Officer has been found to have acted improperly since 1976 in a Shooting...That comes to 12,410 DAYS Which is 34 YEARS and only one Metro Police Officer has been found to have acted improperly since 1976 in a Shooting...W-O-W
BOYCOTT COSTCO! DO NOT SHOP THERE!
Incognito - "So let us take back this police department and lets start with this "inquest" on September 3rd!!!!!"
Great suggestion, I will be there too in support of Eric Scott. The "LV news" left out the fact that he was shot in the BACK, nice cover up guys you should all be ashamed of yourselves especially the LVMPD and channel 5! This is important news and they don't even investigate it.
How do we know he was shot in the back MG?
I want to go to the inquest as well. To see the video they were having a "hard" time retrieving from an Electronic system.
Also the 911. I betcha there was some exaggerating going on there. You can't always believe witnesses that's why metro needs to have officers who can assess a situation for what it is as opposed to taking a 911 caller at their word.
I mean if Erik wasn't walking out with his shirt up gun in hand etc. Deadly force wasn't necessary. If he had the gun in his hand but wasn't pointing it at officers, deadly force wasn't necessary.
2 OIS since then and both suspects got shot but survived due to Metro not gunning down the suspect. 7 times shot, some while he was on the ground... really? that's totally justified I'm sure.
If Sheriff Gillespie has any political smarts, he will come out now, admit the 3 cops actions were out of policy, and admit liability, thereby cutting off the rubber stamp Coroner's Inquest at the pass.
If Gillespie does so, he will then legitimize the whole Coroner's Inquiry process both for recent officer involved shootings and for those in the future, with officer involved shootings which haven't even happened yet.
The Coroner's Inquest process has no credibility when it claims the police are right 100% of the time.
Again, to maintain credibility in a fixed series of games, you've got to lose one once in a while.
"Only one officer has been found to have acted improperly since 1976."
I bet that one officer didn't make a mistake either... Metro has a perfect record.
It seems that in Oakland, someone has finally gotten fed up with the police killings of civilians and has started to target the police using a sniper rifle.
My guess is that it will only take a few more murders by the police in Las Vegas for some nut to try the same thing here.
wow...thats just way too long! So many (deceitful(?)) things could happen in 45 days!
First of all, my deepest sympathies to the family of Erik Scott. As a long time resident of LV and also having friends and family members on the force currently, and some retired, I HOPE we have an honest and complete review. The family deserves it and the community and other officers deserve it.
Let me guess, 90% of these posts are from the "I want CCW" crowd.
You actually seem more likely to be shot by a cop in Vegas than by a criminal.
I asked an acquaintance whose husband is an officer with Metro. They hadn't heard what happened that day and while shopping met an officer who was on the scene at Costco that day. He told her husband that Erik Scott threatened to kill people and then pulled his gun. Take it or leave it.
Just because someone was in the crowd evacuating Costco and states that they didn't see Mr. Scott pull a gun doesn't mean that Mr. Scott didn't pull a gun. It means they didn't see him pull a gun.
When the ice cream vendor in Henderson was shot several people said they didn't see a knife in her hand. But the victim's own children testified that she grabbed a knife and ran toward the officers. Some people will make any kind of inaccurate statement just to be in the news and get attention or just because they like to talk and are not too concerned if they don't know what they're talking about.
I am no bleeding heart for the police. Police officers in other jurisdictions have threatened to kill me because I exercised my right to free speech peaceably. At the time this happened another police officer in the same department told me that they were trying to get rid of people like that. I know there are definitely police officers who don't deserve to wear a badge. I've personally seen them in action more than once.
On the other hand, the ridiculous way that many of the posters here are convicting the police without evidence is similar to a drive-by shooting or a lynch mob.
The LVRJ has an article about the Metro murder of Trevon Cole. Detective Bryan Yant lied under oath regarding Cole's criminal record. This is the same Detective Yant who shot a rifle bullet through the unarmed Cole's head, allegedly because of a "furtive movement".
Anyone who believes that Metro does not have a serious problem needs their head examined - or maybe Metro will shoot it for you.
I will be very shocked if anything other than justified shooting comes out of the inquest..Like in race track betting you have to go with the past performances..of course the favorites do run out of the money sometime..but in this town, having the inquest finding for the police is almost a sure thing..it's very sad..
@fulldeck, the problem is that the Metro officer's assertion that Scott threatened to kill people and pulled his gun is absurd. First, not a single eyewitness claims anything like that and there is absolutely nothing in Scott's background that would at all suggest that he would ever do so.
As for the coroner's inquest, anyone that has looked at the statistics since 1976 knows where it will come out, in large part because the process is stacked in favor of the police department. I'm not even sure if the coroner's inquest process is constitutional. There are some huge due process issues with it.
I think the Department of Justice needs to enter this case and the Cole case. Quite possibly, DOJ might need to look back at some of the cases that were "closed" via a coroner's inquest.
When it was suggested that an external agency head the investigation of officer shootings, I heard several comments from people saying there is no external agency large enough to investigate Metro shootings. It also appears that Gillespie is unable to manage such a large department.
In the private sector, companies that so dominate a market that they become abusive are subject to anti-trust laws. They get broken up to ensure there is fairness in the marketplace.
I'm not so sure that Metro PD shouldn't be broken up into two or three distinct, smaller departments. Most large city police departments operate in heavily populated states where there are some outside checks and balances. Here, Metro dwarfs the size of the Nevada State Patrol.
It's dangerous to have too much power centered in a government agency that has been given the power to take life, particularly when the process for justifying that power appears to be nothing more than a charade.
At any rate, if you think DOJ should enter these cases, please feel free to contact Asst. US AG Thomas Perez at Tom.Perez@usdoj.gov
Metro, needs federal oversight. They are getting away with to many things here in the valley. Next comes kangaroo court.
By SummerlinCC: "the problem is that the Metro officer's assertion that Scott threatened to kill people and pulled his gun is absurd. First, not a single eyewitness claims anything like that and there is absolutely nothing in Scott's background that would at all suggest that he would ever do so."
What's absurd is to assume that "eyewitnesses" were within earshot of three police officers who had their guns drawn in the process of an attempted arrest. I think it's less absurd to assume that most people would be looking the other way while trying to put distance between themselves and the drawn guns.
Who were these "eyewitnesses"? Where were they standing, when were they looking, what did they see and hear rather than what did they not see and hear? Neither you, nor anyone else here, knows the answers to those questions yet most of you are leaping to summary justice.
I know from personal experience that eyewitnesses are completely unreliable. I chased after someone who snatched a purse. I took a long, close look at him before he did it because he was peering at me aggressively and I peered back. He was about 5' 9", medium build, dark hair, moustache. He escaped and someone was arrested passing one of her checks. In court she sat next to me. The person charged was about 6' 1", muscular build, stiff, straight dirty blond hair. Neither of us had to testify but when I told her that wasn't the person who grabbed her purse she swore up and down that it was.
That there have been an insufficient number of police officers in Las Vegas charged with inappropriate use of force, in the personal opinion of some people here, anyway, is no rational reason to assume that any individual police officers are, therefore, guilty of inappropriate use of force.
In regard to Erik Scott's background- the fact that he was toting a loaded weapon when he went shopping, or whatever he was doing at Costco, seems to me a significant fact of his background. What kind of attitude does someone have when they do that and then refuse to remove their weapon from the premises when asked to?
I don't think it's a bad idea at all to have some sort of oversight panel other than just an inquest process in cases like this but what we're seeing in this discussion is a lynch mob in action.
Does anyone think Doug Gillespie needs to be replaced? I'm so sick of this Metro Gone Wild movie - is it EVER going to end? Friggin' babies new to the dept. can't wait to draw down and shoot. It makes me sick! Having worked for 3 different police depts. in SoCal, NEVER ever did those officers pull their weapons in such haste. In fact, the incredible amount of "murders" committed by Metro in the past few months is appalling! Metro has run amuck - REPLACE GILLESPIE and all his wild, wild west chronies. And please don't EVER call Metro to help me out, I don't need their kind of help!
@summerlin cc:
How to you reconcile the West Point graduate's death with..........
""Only one Metro Police Officer has been found to have acted improperly since 1976 in a Shooting...That comes to 12,410 DAYS Which is 34 YEARS and only one Metro Police Officer has been found to have acted improperly since 1976 in a Shooting...W-O-W""
Next time you need a cop, don't call 911 since you all know how to handle everything. It seems like everyone in Cosco was running out as fast as they could. Where were all the tough people then? Oh, that's right, they called 911 while all of you couldn't get out fast enough.
The title of the article is wrong. It should read "Coroner's Coverup Set in Fatal Police Shooting at Summerlin Costco". That would be a much more accurate title. Why even bother having one when we already know the results?
Oh grow up NanSand, we don't need to call Metro, I don't want a bloodbath on my conscience EVER! I'd rather bite my foot off then call Metro. I'm surprised they had the time to respond to Costco, considering all the texting and cell minutes they use daily! Oh that's right - those man with a gun calls are like giving candy to a baby, aren't they?
@fulldeck, Metro PD came out last week stating that witness statements confirmed their version of events. When questioned, Metro PD said they knew of no other conflicting accounts. That same day, this newspaper published the accounts of four eyewitnesses that disputed Metro's version. One of those interviewed indicated that they had provided their account to the police.
Now you're correct. I don't know if the reporters invented their sources to make a better story or failed to confirm whether their sources were at the Costco. But given that the eyewitness accounts published by the media also appear to match the girlfriend's account, I'll believe them over the three officers that would face manslaughter charges if they told the truth.
There is also a pattern of Metro PD putting out misinformation that also makes me question their motives. For example, Metro said they couldn't release the 911 tapes, but then proceeded to give select excerpts of it to justify the shooting.
Metro's Cpt. Neville also issued a statement saying that Scott was going "bezerk", yet then it came out that Metro never viewed the videotape and not a single eyewitness could confirm that statement. The only two eyewitnesses whose accounts have been published said that they saw Scott talking with the Costco employee, but he didn't appear to be going "bezerk" or destroying anything.
Keep in mind that the eyewitness accounts that differ from Metro's account aren't just from those at the time of the shooting. The eyewitness accounts from the non-stressful period inside the store also differ Metro's version.
So I'll be the first to say that I'm wrong if it turns out that the videotape shows Scott destroying the store or if it turns out the LVRJ reporters failed to adhere to basic journalistic ethics by falsifying, creating or failing to confirm their sources.
But for the time being, I'm going to believe the LVRJ witnesses and the girlfriend over the institution that just allowed an officer to sign a perjured affidavit resulting in a suspect's death and that would have 3 officers facing manslaughter charges should the LVRJ accounts be correct.
@KeolaGOP, I'll use a gambling analogy. I'd look at Metro's track record with the coroner's inquest process much in the same way I'd look at a roulette table that hits on red 100 times in a row. There's a chance that everything is OK with the table, but there is a high probability that something is wrong with it.
There are many shortcomings in the inquest process. Only one side of the story gets presented. You have a prosecutor that works with police on a daily basis on one side, but the deceased doesn't necessarily have an attorney to present their side.
I also wonder if many of the deceased just weren't educated enough or had the resources to challenge the existing process. And although my faith in the "system" has been greatly shaken, I still believe that the majority of police shootings since 1976 were probably justified. However, current events lead me to believe that Metro PD's batting average probably shouldn't be as high as it is.
I very seldom find myself in agreement with the ACLU. In fact, this is only the second time I've agreed with the ACLU in many decades. But I think they've hit the nail on the head on this one.
The US Department of Justice is the only external entity that has the authority to investigate some of these issues. They're as much a part of the process as the coroner's office. Going back to an earlier point, I doubt many of representatives of the deceased even knew they could try going to the the Justice Department.
In the end, I would rather not have to reconcile an Army officer's death with the actions of the Metro PD. I would rather have the US Department of Justice attempt to do it.
One quick correction, it was not this newspaper, but the LVRJ that provided the eyewitness accts
Sometimes I wish somebody would shoot my old lady before she makes it to the checkout.
SummerlinCC, I am in completee agreement with you. I have said over and over again, this situation is demoralizing to the Good police officers. Those boys were wrong, PERIOD! They lied to protect themselves. If Doug Gillispe sticks up for them, then HE contributes to demoralization of the entire separtment. He needs to go, Vote in November for Laurie Bisrch. I will be there on Sept 3rd, a Friday before 9am, to show support for the dead Erik Scott and the GOOD officers of this city! Not the gangbangers with a badge. To nonsand, by what you write, I KNOW YOU ARE NOT one of the good officers that I support.
I'm glad I don't live in Vegas!! And not because of the Police. How can any of you say the Police were wrong? Were any of you there? Did any of you see the shooting? Did any of you see what really happened inside Costco? I doubt it very seriously. Yet all you can do is sit and criticize the people that are there to protect you. Maybe the reason there are so many Police shootings in Vegas are the actual Citizens that that are breaking the law. If it is proved the Police were wrong in this, I would be the first in line to call for a Federal Investigation. Such negativity is whats wrong with us today. If you dont like the people in power, VOTE THEM OUT!!!
I always carry a loaded gun when I go grocery shopping in case someone with more than 20 items trys to cut into the xpress line.Cant people get it?GUNS GET MOST PEOPLE INTO MORE TROUBLE THAN THEY GET THEM OUT OF.Ask the dead guy.
@DCS, you don't need to have been there to know the following:
1. Metro PD gave an account of Erik Scott's behavior inside the store without having viewed the videotape and without confirming the facts they were disseminating.
2. Metro PD changed its' story of Scott's behavior in the store on multiple occasions.
3. Metro PD said it couldn't release the 911 tape and then subsequently fed select excerpts of the 911 tapes to the press in an effort to spin the story.
4. A Metro PD officer signed a false sworn statement to initiate a raid that resulted in the killing of Trevon Cole.
5. Metro PD said it knew of no other conflicting accounts of the shooting when there were several conflicting accounts that were reported by the media.
We know all of this information as of today.
None of this information changes regardless of the videotape.. Yes, there are MANY open questions that will hopefully be answered by the videotape. But we already know that Metro PD has some serious issues that need addressing.
Thanks, hateliars. It's important to keep reminding people of the accounts provided by eyewitnesses given that Metro has a paid, fully-staffed PR operation putting out one side of the story.
@Alex2, I checked out Officer Bisch's website. Man, her "Elect Right Over Might" slogan couldn't be more appropriate. I don't know much about her, but I would like to find out her thoughts on:
1. How she would reform Metro PD to ensure that the good cops are commended and the incompetent/dangerous one are weeded out.
2. How she would go about re-establishing trust with the community in the aftermath of the Cole and Scott killings.
3. What changes would she recommend to make to the current inquest process to make it more equitable.
Let me ask this, IF you are a police officer, you get a call about a customer with a gun, you approach this man and he reaches to lift a shirt, and you see a gun, what would you do? Wait to be shot, wait for this person to shoot someone else? He reached to lift his shirt and there was a gun!!! And once the person is down you still have to assume this person can do something, so you cuff them. I'm not a cop, but id sure want to make sure this person cant still go for a weapon.
Just because a person is a graduate of West Pointe doesnt mean they cant do something drastic. What about the Major that killed at Fort Hood? Sadly it happens. Just because you know someone doesnt mean someone cant go off on the deep end.
<By hateliars, July 22, 2010, 5:57 p.m.>
You don't find it the least bit suspicious that these "anonymous witnesses" will only speak to the news media? There certainly won't be any risk of perjury charges that way, right? It could very well be that these are friends of Erik Scott and gun carry advocates seeking out the news media to spin the story.
There's a reason why you have to take an oath in a courtroom and why there are punishments for perjury. It's because people often lie and the first person I would suspect of being a liar is a person who speaks anonymously.
<By hateliars, July 22, 2010, 7:27 p.m.>
"Scott told them he had a carry permit and agreed to leave the store quickly, per their request."
I would like to know where you found this description of what took place. The account I read said the store employee told Erik Scott he couldn't have weapons in the store and Erik Scott said, "Yes I can!"
@fulldeck, Thus far, LVRJ has interviewed a total of 7 eyewitnesses and not one has backed up Metro's version that Scott pointed a gun at officers. The girlfriend's account matches that of the 7, so that alone makes 8.
The "anonymous witnesses" appear to have spoken to more than just the news media--the Scott's attorney has indicated that much. And if I had witnessed the shooting, you can bet that I wouldn't identify myself to the media, lest I find myself in a media circus. Like I said, maybe the reporters are lying, but I tend to think we'll be hearing from those eyewitnesses.
As for perjury, in the past 24 hours we've received news that a Metro cop signed a false statement to obtain a search warrant that led to a suspect's death. There's another story about a Metro cop that randomly killed someone a few years back and will be in jail for life. If you're going to tell me that the 3 Metro cops are beyond perjuring themselves to avoid jail time, I'm not so sure that I share your confidence.
Time--and the videotape--will tell.
Some other random thoughts-
Officer Mosher left a job as a prison guard in Massachusetts to come to Las Vegas. According to one commenter, Mosher was working as security guard in the Westward Ho casino before he began working for Metro.
So here are two of my questions-
1. Did Mosher apply to be a cop back home? If so, why wasn't he accepted onto any of their police forces?
2. If Mosher was working at a casino, why did he leave a unionized job as a prison guard in Massachusetts to take a job as a security guard in Las Vegas?
Just curious...
"Scott told them he had a carry permit and agreed to leave the store quickly, per their request."
<By hateliars, July 22, 2010, 7:27 p.m.>
"Eric asked his girlfriend discussed him going to the car to put away the gun then come back and finish shopping and he decided he'd just buy what he came to buy and leave the store."
<By hateliars, July 22, 2010, 8:35 p.m.>
Are you one of the "anonymous witnesses"? The two varying statements above may cause some problems for you under oath. Or are you just repeating what you heard from "anonymous witnesses" that no one else has heard from?
As to not breaking any laws- that's irrelevant. If store personnel tell you that guns aren't allowed in the store you remove the guns from the store, you don't argue that your concealed carry permit gives you a license to do whatever you feel like doing. It's private property.
Also, when a police officer tells an armed person to raise his hands and he instead turns around and grabs at his shirt tail the "all he did was lift his shirt tail" argument doesn't work.
I'm looking forward to seeing some testimony under oath. On the other hand, a lot of people here have already made it clear that, for them, "anonymous witnesses" are much more believable than police officers testifying under oath.
Detective Yant lied under oath and then proceeded to shoot and kill the unarmed suspect at close range in the head. This is your Metro.
Lawyer's need to talk with some of these police officers that have fired. To try find an out what really goes on in metro. George Knapp and Dorthy Spears, seems afraid to look into all the shooting that have taken place with metro.
@fulldeck, both of the hateliars comments could easily be true if the store employee was just too afraid to ask Scott to leave the store.
I agree with you on one point. If the witnesses that spoke to the media don't step forward, then I don't think the officers will have any problem whatsoever and they should be cleared.
However, if the witnesses do step forward and testify that Scott didn't point a gun at officers, I think Metro will lose any remaining credibility that they have. Metro is on the record as saying their investigation couldn't find anyone that disputed their account that Scott pointed a gun at the officer.
If multiple witnesses come forward and contradict the Metro account, I think it brings into question the validity of the entire investigation as it would become apparent that the Metro investigation was either a.) conducted with the intention of justifying the shooting; or b.) so incompetently conducted that it missed some key eyewitnesses.
Time--and the videotapes--will tell.
There are 50 something comments on this article from about 15 different people. Some of you are DEMANDING change and urging for Metro to be investigated. 15 people out of 1.5 million citizens in Las Vegas. Maybe all 15 of you can make a change, but what is the change you are asking for? Have you even been to an inquest to be able to judge it? Who are you to even begin to know what the general public wants and then make comments demanding things on our behalf? The people who are posting on here are passionate about one side or the other. I just do not see what is wrong with waiting for the inquest to see what evidence will be presented from both sides, then making a logical decision. None of you were there and none of you were in the officers or Scotts shoes, and you are lucky for that. You all know Metro will not release the tapes and their witnesses will not talk until the inquest is over. Just because some nameless people spoke to the media while running away from what they thought was a "bomb scare", now they are valid accounts of what happened? I will wait until the inquest before I start making a fool out of myself like some of the above posters. Once I have the facts, then maybe I will be able to post some logical, vaild comments, not based soley on emotion, like what I am reading above. Everyone, especially a Doctor, should know what is said in the media can not be taken as a fact without verifying the sources.
SummerlinCC , are you being serious? If the Costco employee was too afraid to ask Erik Scott to leave then neither of those statements can be correct.
If the Costco employee did ask him to leave then one or the other statement is false:
"Scott told them he had a carry permit and agreed to leave the store quickly, per their request."
<By hateliars, July 22, 2010, 7:27 p.m.>
"Eric asked his girlfriend discussed him going to the car to put away the gun then come back and finish shopping and he decided he'd just buy what he came to buy and leave the store."
<By hateliars, July 22, 2010, 8:35 p.m.>
Either he "agreed to leave the store quickly, per their request" or he decided to ignore the request, linger at the store, and then check out. They can't both be correct. Two directly opposite accounts. So much for mysterious "eyewitnesses".
The account I read said that the Costco employee told him that he wasn't allowed to carry guns in the store. Erik Scott replied, "Yes I can. I have a permit." I have no way of knowing if that version is correct.
However, based on some very basic facts reported, we can conclude this: Erik Scott didn't leave the store until the general evacuation was in progress. This happened after the Costco employee walked over to report the situation to security, security then called the police department, and police officers had already arrived. The "agreed to leave the store quickly, per their request" version is therefore a lie. That's one, so far.
To hateliars,I believe your story,after reading all the initial reported stories I came to your conclusion,not a righteous shoot.
Costco employee sees Scott crouched on the ground and notices Scott's weapon. The Costco employee stops and tells Scott that there is a store policy against carrying a weapon in the store. Scott tells the Costco employee that he's got a CCW, that he's carried a gun at Costco in Texas and sarcastically adds the he'll leave the store. Costco employee walks away. Scott thinks the interaction is over and then discusses putting his gun in the car with his girlfriend. In the meantime, the miffed and/or scared Costco employee calls 911.
Obviously, the above description of events is pure speculation but it is possible that Scott could have both offered to leave and yet still have remained in the store if the Costco employee walked away from Scott instead of saying, "Yes, you should probably leave now." By the way, I'm not saying that's what happened.
But frankly, I didn't see any of those inside the store accounts published in any news story, so the question of whether Scott was asked to leave, offered to leave or was not asked to leave is an open question for that may never get resolved.
The only news stories from inside the store are Metro's statement that Scott was going bezerk and destroying merchandise and the 72 year old man and his wife that say otherwise.
If you look at most of my comments, they're based on Metro PDs's own statements and the eyewitnesses personally interviewed by the media. There are only two people that know what was said in the conversation between Erik Scott and the Costco employee. One is the Costco employee and the other is Scott's girlfriend--which is probably why I think the 72 year old and his wife provided the most unbiased account of they incident.
We'll see if the 72 year old and his wife go on the record or not.
LV SUN can u pls tell us how many unarmed people have been shot by Metro in the last 20 yrs?
SummmerlinCC, you forgot the part about how he told everyone he was a "GREEN BERET". This was in multiple news stories before anyone knew we was even in the Army. Was Scott a green beret? If metro did not engage him when they did, would he have been able to quickly kill all three officers due to being part of US Special Forces? Why would he need to identify himself as a "Green Beret"? I would be even more scared at that point if I saw a Green Beret with TWO guns in a Costco.
Why is nobody asking these types of questions?
My point being, your questions about what happened inside will be answered September 3rd at the Coroner's Inquest. Your statement about how that issue may "never get resolved" is unfounded considering the entire event will be relived in a month or so. Just because it was not published in a news article does not mean it did not happen. The media should not be your only source of information in life. You have to be able to form your own conclusions based upon facts from multiple sources. The inquest will be able to show you these multiple sources from both sides of the issue, including wintesses, the infamous tapes, forensic evidence, etc.
@WAKEUP, why do you need that information? Scott was not unarmed. He had TWO guns.
The problem I am seeing is people like you automatically believe everything they are reading in the media instead of doing your own research. Why don't you do a little research instead of asking the Sun your question? Conduct your own investigation. If the Sun told you Metro has shot 4,568 unarmed people since 1974, you would blindly believe them without verifying their sources. Shame on you. I bet you even think I did not make up that number.
LEHIGH: what if I told you I also made the posts by HATELIARS just to mess with people. Would you believe me too? He is an anonymous poster on a website. I can create multiple user names on here and you would not know the difference. I could be SummerlynCC and HateLias and Full_Deck. Point being, you cannot believe what is being posted on here. There were articles in the newspapers about how you cannot even believe eyewitnesses all the time. And yet, you are going to believe posts on the internet?
@lcare2009, I haven't seen any report indicating the Scott identified himself as Green Beret. Once again, I'm basing my analysis on Metro's own reports and on the eyewitness reports published by the LRVJ, not on anything that is posted online.
I don't need to have been at the store to know that Cpt. Neville first came out saying that Scott was going "bezerk" and destroying merchandise. Then it came out that Metro. Then the story was changed to say that Scott was acting "erratically". And then we found out that acting "erratically" may have meant nothing more than opening a carton of water to see if individual bottles would fit into a container. Of course, then it turned out that Metro never saw a copy of the videotape from inside the store. All of this information is available just by looking at Metro's own public statements--forget what people are saying on the Internet or what the press is saying
Metro PD also said it couldn't release the 911 tapes until the inquest. But then Metro releases selected portions of the 911 tapes in an attempt to justify the shooting.
Just look at the evidence. There are contradictions within Metro's own official statements and actions that aren't even being filtered by the media.
BOTTOM LINE:
It has been said by witnesses that Erik Scott was shot 6-7 times in the back. 5-6 times while he laid face down on the ground dying, and that he did not have a gun in his hand. THAT IS MURDER!
The economic ripple will most likely cost billions nationally. Hundreds of millions to Las Vegas.
Since when did PUBLIC SERVANT MEAN SERVE YOURSELF FIRST? Citizens pay your salaries. They are your bosses. You don't shrug off their requests for full disclosure. You don'tlie to them. You don't decide what they get to hear and what they don't get to hear.
THAT IS NOT YOUR RIGHT PUBLIC SERVANT! THAT IS NOT A RIGHT YOU HAVE!
DO YOUR JOBS OR STEP DOWN! THIS IS NOT A FACIST DICTATORSHIP!
DO YOUR JOBS OR STEP DOWN!
FULL DISCLOSURE FROM OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT!!!
This whole incident has got me doing some research on police responses to armed situations. Maybe its because I am so troubled by this case. Maybe its because I have lost sleep over it. I know that officers have a stressful job to do. And yes there are incidents where many good officers have lost their lives performing their duties. However, every case must be looked at individually to find out what went wrong and conversely, what went right. In a tragedy like this one, the devil is in the details: the assailant, the context, the immediate threat and any reports rendered up until the confrontation, etc. All
of that information is needed by police in order to assess the potential danger of a situation.
Now after just having said every case needs to be looked at individually, I also think there is room for comparison. After all, if we don't compare, how do we progress our knowledge of anything?
Here is an excellent example, in my eyes, of some good police work in a very dangerous situation:
Go to Youtube and type in: "Police shootout caught on audio tape"
Maybe I'm armchair quarterbacking, but I view this as an appropriate use of force. these brave officers were fired upon, returned fire, chased down the suspect after he had been hit, and even then provided the assailant every opportunity to live. They even appeared to see him "reaching" after the chase down, but ultimately assessed no further deadly force was needed.
Listen to how they handled this situation.
Their extraordinary level of restraint after the gunfight is indeed impressive. I put this link up because I don't want anyone to think for a moment that police officers do not deal with some very dangerous and lethal situations. But I do think that what had happened to Eric Scott was night and day compared to this, particularly with the level of force used. Yet, the assailant in the example referred to lived.
In Eric's case, if one were hearing, "Don't move", then "Get Down" or "Drop the Gun" simultaneously (you can move the words around in any order you want), that's a lot of information and not much room for error if you're going to start shooting next. And jeez, into his back? Into the man's back?
IT WOULDN'T SURPRISE ME IF ERIC DIDN'T EVEN KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON! or was surprised by it all. WE NEED THE VIDEO!
The amount of force used in Eric's case only leads me to believe that the officers wanted him dead. dead.
I can predict the response by some already: "a police officer doesn't have to wait to be shot at in order to incapacitate a potential threat to his own life."
My response is: GET OUT OF TOWN! GET OUT OF TOWN!
It was 3 on 1 with guns drawn. 3 on 1 with guns drawn.
what were Stark, Mendiola and Mosher expecting. That Erik was going to whip around and try to take them out while his girlfriend stood by and watched?
GET OUT OF TOWN! YOU KNOW THAT IS PLAIN, OUTRIGHT, UNADULTERATED, UNPASTEURIZED BULL SH%$!!!
Either poor training, fright, blood lust, paranoia, fear or down right stupidity was at work here on the part of these officers. The level of the use of force was not proportionate to the threat! If the threat was so high, where the hell was SWAT? Wait a crazed gunman in a Costco? NO SWAT? Get the hell out of town with that crazed gunman crud! People were filing out of the store like it was the end of a Sunday church service. Anyway, the Arizona officers in that example I referred to went into a situation where the suspect fled a traffic stop, tried to run down an officer, attempted to car-jack a citizen and then fired upon pursuing police. Even after all of this, they resolved the issue with only enough force to stop the immediate threat and apprehended the suspect. You continue to hear them yell "Don't Move!" "Don't Move!" That is the only reason, in my mind, that the assailant survived. And honestly, from the audio I don't even think the guy spoke English. But hey I'm not sure. In all, I would say that a combination of training, experience and maybe a little luck brought this potentially deadly situation to an end. There's not much we can do about the luck factor, but training and experience can save lives. AGAIN, IT IS INTERESTING THAT THE ASSAILANT IN THE ARIZONA EXAMPLE,
AFTER ALL HE HAD DONE, LIVED.
..AND A MAN WALKING OUT OF COSTCO HAVING HURT NO ONE WAS TERMINATED WITH HIS BACK TO THE POLICE! FORGIVE ME, BUT THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE. Yes they are two entirely different situations. But come on folks, 7 shots into the back of a man who went to fill a prescription and look at water bottles? And for the most part had already left or was leaving the store. Who the hell was in danger at this point, if anyone was ever in danger at all? CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING.
Questions remain: 1) what was the threat assessed if he was walking out of the Costco with no gun drawn and officers reported to be following him out the door? 2) the context: Costco on a Saturday afternoon where people were shopping and literally standing next to Erik as he was leaving. It appears that, there was no evidence of any commotion when the police showed up according to numerous witnesses; and, 3) what were the reports that lead up to the confrontation? there are no detailed reports of anything unusual the store other than by the Costco employee. If Eric was actually waving a gun around, Costco would not have needed to attempt to evacuate the store? People would have been running over each other to get out, followed by a flood of 911 calls, not just one mysterious call from a customer (per police report) which the evidence for has yet to be provided. I would be interested in seeing if transactions were continuing to be conducted when the so called "man waving a gun around and acting erratic" was supposed to have occurred. That would help to support or refute the "crazed gunman" scenario, which has also yet to be substantiated by any good evidence (multiple 911 calls, eyewitnesses, etc). Were people not walking out of the store with Eric? Wasn't he within a crowd of people? Didn't he need to be pointed out by an employee? Who walks out of a store next to a crazed gunman? That just doesn't makes sense with what the police have reported. None of this makes sense: the situation, the report by the Costco employee, the context, the behavior of customers and the use of deadly force.
If it was all cut and dry, let's hear the 911 call from the Costco employee in its entirety. Let's hear all of the 911 calls if in fact there was even more than one. Let's see the surveillance video. Surely the security company to where the surveillance video is streamed has back up drives. Are there no Costco employees willing to provide a report of what they saw up until the shooting? None? Is Costco telling them to shut up! What are they hiding? I've seen more evidence provided by police after a barn burning than I have here. Basically, what the heck is going on? Wait for the Coroner's Inquest? But Metro has already released bits of the 911 call. Release the whole damn thing then! The public needs to know what actually happened. And up until this point, there's been a lot of hocus pocus going on. So either expedite the process PUBLIC SERVANTS, or don't mislead us with bull crap propaganda hoping that this will go away. WE ARE NOT THAT STUPID!
IT BEARS REPREATING: DO YOUR JOBS PUBLIC SERVANTS OR STEP DOWN! THIS IS NOT A FACIST DICTATORSHIP! DO YOUR JOBS OR STEP DOWN! FULL DISCLOSURE FROM OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS IS A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT!!! WHAT A VIOLENT DAMN DEATH THIS MAN WENT THROUGH. WHAT A VIOLENT DAMN DEATH!
1citizen1, when it becomes apparrent that someone is armed and is about to kill or seriously harm someone it doesn't matter whether he is shot in the chest or in the back. He is just shot as quickly as possible to eliminate the threat to public safety. Be rational.
1citizen1: Did you really do any sort of research or did you make that part up? If you had, you would know front line officers are the first responders to these types of dangerous situations. Of course they would love to have SWAT on every one of their calls. The SWAT team has special gear and more protection. However, the patrol officers are the ones that must be able to protect the citizens immediately. If the situation is stabilized and the threat detained, the SWAT would respond. SWAT is 30-60 minutes way while a patrol officer is usually 1-2mintues away. Make sense?
All your questions will be answered at the inquest. Why would be losing sleep over this? Would you be losing sleep if they already released the video of Scott pointing a gun at the officer? Or the tapes of him yelling, "I am a green beret!". Or the tapes showing him throwing things around Costco? Just because he went to west point does not mean he did not have problems. Did he commit suicide by cop? Who knows. Is this shooting going to be ruled justifiable? Who knows. The inquest is soon enough. Then the facts will be presented and you can make a logical decision. Just because Metro is not releasing their investigation does not mean they are covering something up or were wrong. It is the way things are done. Just like when Metro had to shoot that 15 year old in the head. He had a knife to his mothers throat and was about to kill her. She was screaming for help. They killed him first and then she told the Media "they did not have to kill him!!!!" Well, people just like you were making comments just as you are. DOWN WITH METRO THIS, DOWN WITH METRO THAT. The whole time Metro had a video of the incident proving everything they had said. It was not until the inquest did this video come out or the public know about it. Audio and Video. The mom had to eat her words. Point being, wait until the inquest before getting all dramatic.
Okay Summerlin, let me try this approach. The bottom line is if Scott had not walked into Costco with a gun, let alone two, he would still be alive today. He was not engaged by Metro because of a 911 call. He was shot because he had a gun. We can both agree on that right? If he was totally unarmed I would be just as upset as you are.
I hope Scott's father does get a new law into effect. An ANTI-GUN law. A ban on guns within city limits.
Also, how do you guys know he was shot in the back? Makes sense considering the orginal statements by Metro indicated Scott turned around, as in twisting his tourso, towards the officer with a gun in his hand. Of course he would have been shot in his back area. Makes perfect sense.
The inquest is soon and all these facts will come to life. If Metro was wrong, they will admit to it. You will see.
@lcare2009, you're correct that Scott would not have been killed if he hadn't been carrying a gun. And most rape victims would not have been raped if they didn't go out at night (most rapes happen in the evening). See the problem? In both cases, the victim is being blamed for the result of doing something they're legally entitled to do.
Carrying a gun didn't cause Scott's death. The officers' excessive force caused Scott's death.
I've spent some time around guns in a prior job, but I'm not a gun afficiando and I don't hold a CCW. On a personal level, I could care less if Vegas wanted to ban concealed weapon, although I do believe that it wouldn't affect the black market in guns.
If the citizens of Las Vegas choose to change the gun laws, that's up to them.
As for the turning part, I'll be very interested to see the videotape.
<By SummerlinCC>
"the victim is being blamed for the result of doing something they're legally entitled to do"
People aren't legally entitled to bully other citizens, ignore the legal rules and requests of a privately owned business, refuse to follow police instructions, or attempt to kill police officers. If it turns out that some of these are behaviors that Erik Scott engaged in it's because he was carrying weapons and considered himself superior to others for that reason.
Why did a medical devices salesman have a concealed carry permit?
How many concealed carry permits have been issued by Clark County and why?
These are questions that Clark County residents should be asking.
Hateliars,I'll stick by my original statement which I got from a veteran "old-school" officer,not from some anti-gun source. None of this would have happened if he had left his firearm locked up at home while running errands.I know the law allows him to carry etc.,but dont take my word for anything,but if you know a cop who's been around and you respect,ask him.
@fulldeck, you're right, but given that there is no evidence that Scott bullied citizens, ignored police instructions, etc. In fact, it seems like Scott was attempting to follow police instructions. Try this exercise. Put a gun in your waistband. Now have three guys hold loaded guns around you. The first guy tells you to "Drop It". The second guy tells you to "Stop". The third guy tell you to "Get Down". You get shot if you don't follow all three commands at the same time. See the problem?
@Bundy5, you're correct, it wouldn't have happened if Scott had left his gun at home. But going back to my previous post, Scott was following the law. The responsibility rests with the police to properly assess the threat and to follow procedures for disarming a civilian. Scott's carrying a gun into Costco was not the proximate causation of his death. It was the Metro PD officers' failure to apply their training to a real world situation.
So Metro has to fork over $120K to Darling for the Manor accident (LVRJ). My guess is Trevor Cole's family gets $500K and Scott's family over a million. This is your Metro at work.
Henderson PD just paid 750000 to the family of the "ice cream lady" in a civil settlement. That shooting was found justified in Coroner's Inquest. I doubt if the Scott family can be bought off. This will end up in court and think about punative damages. One million may be conservative. All of that money is taxpayer money.
Perhaps a witness could help provide insight as to what the victim did which compelled law enforcement personnel to unholster their weapons to begin with?
BTW: Will the media be broadcasting this tragic event on local television?
: {
I'm thinking it would be nice if people did some reading before accusing people of having a lynch mob mentality!!! To chime in over 2 weeks after the event took place without doing a little background research is ridiculous. For those of you who think these officers did the right thing..... Read before you write. There was a large group of people behind and in front of Erick when he was shot, some of them close enough to Erick to touch him as was the police.. They even admitted to tapping him on the shoulder just to get his attention. Enough credible eyewitnesses have written their views of the events as they had seen them. Ironically, they all have a very similar story which is the opposite of the Police. So, before you start defending the police and stating we have a lynch mob mentality, Do some more reading and research!!!! ty