Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Friday, Oct. 29, 2010 | 12:57 p.m.
Related Document (.pdf)
Sun archives
- Erik Scott family buys 4 billboard ads seeking Costco video (10-28-10)
- Police officers found justified in Erik Scott shooting; family plans lawsuit (9-28-10)
- Detective: Erik Scott had pain medicines from several doctors (9-27-10)
- Witnesses give conflicting accounts of Costco police shooting (9-25-10)
- Shoppers recount police shooting outside Costco (9-24-2010)
- Officer in Costco shooting says man raised gun, didn't know it was in holster (9-23-2010)
- Inquest testimony focuses on Erik Scott’s use of prescription drugs (9-22-10)
The Las Vegas police department was sued in federal court Thursday by the family of Erik Scott, which claims his civil rights were violated when officers shot and killed him at a Costco on July 10.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for Nevada, names as defendants the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, Sheriff Doug Gillespie, officers William Mosher, Joshua Stark and Thomas Mendiola as well as Costco Wholesale Corp. and Costco security officer Shai Lierly.
While the officers were found by a coroner's inquest jury to be justified in shooting Scott, Thursday's lawsuit charges Scott "did not engage in any conduct which would indicate he posed a threat to the safety of the officers or any other person."
Even though Scott was armed and witnesses said he was acting erratically, the suit alleges Lierly "falsely reported that Erik did pose a threat to the safety of other persons" and ordered a store-wide evacuation.
The suit alleges there have been "numerous prior incidents in which Metro officers engaged in unreasonable seizures and the use of excessive, including lethal, force," but that Gillespie has acted with "deliberate indifference" in failing to adequately train, supervise and discipline officers concerning unreasonable seizures and the use of excessive force.
Metro's policy is to not comment on litigation. Thursday's suit was filed by attorney Ross Goodman of Goodman Law Group in Las Vegas.
As if Erik Scott's poor choices have not already cost tax payers enough. Now we will have to pay to defend a frivolous lawsuit.
When will the Scott's realize that their son was a drug addict that made some bad choices, leading to his own demise?
To bad the Scott family cannot let Erik go. I did not know the young man but if he was the man they want us to believe he was, I ask "Would he be proud of the way the family is acting." I think not. As I said before, look closely at his girlfriend. There is one of the problems, the other Erik on drugs with a weapon. Nothing more, Nothing Less.
Bet you the family collects big bucks.
Welcome to America. Land of "not my fault"
Lets see, Erik Scott has 2 weapons in his possession. Costco informs him he's not allowed to have guns in store. Erik proceeds to point his hand and fingers in the shape of a gun at the head of an employee.
No, no...he wasn't acting erratically
The way his father has been writing articles, did little green men also partake in his shooting?
Justified. Idiot drug addict with an attitude and no sense of his CCW duties gets shot because he tried to pull out his gun when told not to.
@westvegas -- Exactly where in the U.S. Constitution does it say that drug addiction is grounds for the the government to ignore your civil rights? Federal courts have already ruled that Metro needlessly escalates situations to violent and deadly ends, and that administrators ignore cops they know to be threats to the public. One can even agree with the findings of the inquest and realize that not one bit of evidence has shown that Scott ever inrended to harm anyone. Scott, like you and I, had a right not be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. Scott's death sentece came without benefit of a trial. If you really want to save taxpayers money, demand Metro value the lives of its cituzens. If the past is any indicator Metro will push to settle this case in order to keep its secrets from being exposed in a real open courtroom. That kind of transparancy is not what Gillespie has in mind.
And here I thought the family would be swayed by the new "transparency" of the Inquest Process; & the whole notion that no verdict be arrived at... I really thought that one would have appeased them for the loss of their son.
This is so NOT just about Eric Scott, folks.
You would have to be completely blinded by Allegiance to The Man to solely blame Eric Scott for the Costco fiasco.
I assume we want to hold our Law Enforcement to a higher standard than the crooks; no???
This is another step in bringing about change in the way Metro does business... and it will be a very EXPENSIVE step. That's on Sheriff Doug and the rest of Metro's Admin., current & prior.
It's time for Regime Change.
State sanctioned murder, by the Police use of force policy, tactics and by shield laws that make any police officer immune from prosecution of murdering a citizen. It is truly sad that our society has devolved to this. The people no longer have a right to life as we can be murdered by the State (the police) at any time . . . and the State will claims that right over every citizen. It happened at Ruby Ridge with a Mother and Child . . . murdered, It happened a Waco, TX and it appears happens all the time in Las Vegas, NV. Murder, simply cold blooded, primed to kill, bloody murder by the State of its citizens. When will this stop? When will the people get justice?
If I was on the jury for the criminal case I would not have found Las Vegas Metro liable due to the fact that the officer stated he had not been trained to use nonlethal force when dealing with an armed person.
That being said, if I was on the jury for the civil trial, it is this admission of lack of training that would lead me to find the Las Vegas Metro Department negligent and liable for damages.
I think an award for an amount between $250K and $2Million would be reasonable.
Costco shares in the liablilty for not acting sooner to a clearly incoherent and potentially dangerous individual. Damage award up to $100K.
Just to head off the anti-gun nuts, the misinformed, and the simple-minded law enforcement types that are reading this:
It is not a crime to possess a handgun if you have been taking a prescription medication, narcotic or otherwise.
NRS 202.257 1. says it is unlawful to possess a firearm while under the influence of a controlled substance "to a degree which renders him or her incapable of safely exercising actual physical control of a firearm."
And before the Metro cheerleaders start braying, whether or not a person is "incapable of safely exercising actual physical control of a firearm" is a legal determination to be found by a judge or jury, NOT a police officer.
Oh, and a violation of 202.257 1. is a misdemeanor, not a felony as many have suggested.
His family needs to give it a rest already. Police do not have the easiest nor safest job in the world, and if someone appears unstable when they're called to investigate a matter, they have every right possibly to make sure that the safety of the public is their number one priority, thus, doing their jobs. It is sad Erik had to die in this case, but he should not have brought a gun (with a permit or not), into Costco, nor should he have been acting crazy. The family just wants money.
This is all about money!!! Stop bashing the men and women who put on a badge each day and are willing to take a bullet for you ungreatful morons!!
@eddie...Nice post. However, it should be noted that there hasn't been a criminal trial. While lots of people point out what crimes they think Scott may have committed, no criminal charges where ever filed against him or the officers involved.
Oh, knock it off, you crybabies! If you become the victim of a crime, you'll speed-dial 911! Maybe, with your childish attitude, you'd be better off calling the American Criminal Liberties Union and have Allan Lichtenstein come to your aid. Yeah, that'll work! Considering the number of low-lives they deal with every hour of every working day, and the fact that they never know how quickly a situation might escalate, Metro officers do a damn good job. Too often, they have to make split-second decisions in order to save others and themselves. If anyone is stupid enought to show a weapon to an officer and not follow instructions, he's not a victim, he's a moron!
The guy was a nut job and now it looks like he got it from his family. Sheesh!
I have no problem with further scrutiny of this tragedy. Indeed the inquest process leaves a good bit to be desired. District Court maybe the best venue to address this cleanly and transparently, for the sake of the family and the public.
A lot of things had to go wrong at Costco on July 10 for something like this to happen--by wrong I mean that no one intended for things to end in a shooting--Metro included. Based on what I read many events transpired in a short amount of time and the shooting was just the last one. I doubt if I could have done any better than the officers did at that time.
Nevertheless we need to collectively understand what happened and how it happened in a transparent process to try to avoid incidents like this from happening again. I am not convinced the inquest achieved this.
If Metro did nothing wrong, what do they have to fear from due process in a court of law. Interesting how the people that are concern about "the government being to big" give license to law enforcement to do anything they want.
Unlike Cole, Scott has money for the day in court.
I trust the attorney for Scott more than an ex-cocktail waitress or an ex-drug counselor, who happen to be talk show hosts, when it comes to this incident.
@ lvfacts101 (Jerry Fink) "Too often, Metro officers have to make split-second decisions in order to save others and themselves"
Sure, Jerry, tell that to Trevon Cole's fiance or his unborn child. Good thing these Metro officers are trained to fire when they detect a "furtive movement," huh?
The fact is, Metro officers are not trained to deal with situations, only to shoot. It's obvious that any escalation comes from the officers themselves.
@ uaintseeme...I truly hope this isn't just about money. I hope the family rejects all settlement offers and holds out for what they and this town really needs, accountability.
@stevejohn...This case proves you wrong. If those officers were really willing to take a bullet for me, then they would have waited until Scott actually threatened someone. The whole concept that the dangers of their jobs alone justifies killing civilians isn't based in fact. Cops aren't out there taking bullets for you, me or anyone else.
@Jerry Fink...So taking my stolen car report entitles them to kill as will and with no consequence? Ben Franklin was right, "Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither." Give me the name of one life Scott was going to take that day had Metro never arrived? Perhaps you would be pleased if we adopted a government more like Iran where civil rights always take a back seat to order? In your one post you showed your disdain for the 1st, 5th and 8th amendments.
Chunky says:
No surprises here! The Scott family has prepped and planned for this all along. They'll apparently do anything to further their denial that Erik Scott was an out of control prescription drug addict who was living lie and who was so out-of-control that he broke the law carrying multiple concealed weapons while under the influence of drugs and then failed to follow the orders of armed police officers.
That's just part of what Chunky thinks!
It is also no surprise that Chunky hasn't grasped the concept of using the first person. It is also no surprise that he completely ignores the Constitution. Scott was not guilty of any crime.
hey dipstick dennis maybe the girlfriend didnt want to testify and be sandbagged by the hostile D.A. Can you blame her? The very day of the shooting the public administrator and Metro broke into her home without a warrant after she refused permission and they changed the locks. Also she has been ticketed 3 times for not clearing the intersection and 4 to 5 miles over the speed limit in the last couple weeks. Cant wait to hear her side of things. In her recorded testimony she stated the gun was still in his holster, still inside his pants when he fell. The cell phone that was in all of the pics... no one at the inquest ever explained that. The comments saying that they should let it go are idiotic. We have only heard one side of things in a courtroom and even that was more than fishy. Why would you fault a family for wanting to be able to cross examine witnesses to get to the truth? Add to that the witnesses who didn't go along with the D.A.'s offices case that were never called to testify at the inquest.
Bullmoose,
I had looked at that NRS and you made a good point. But check out NRS 202.360. This is why they had Mr. Scott's doctor and former doctor's testify at his inquest.
I am past the point of feeling sorry for this hateful family...
@johnmanrules -- Exactly how did the doctors testimony explain whether or not the officers saw Scott do anything that made then fear for their lives or the lives of others?
Point, Set, Match metro. Now its time to face reality, and if you covered stuff up then YOU will be going to prison.
No one will ever side with Metro in this case. Its time this small town cops get put in prison, we run this town, NOT YOU.
I think I just saw Ross Goodman at Costco tonight! WTF? He still shops there? Put your $ where your mouth is.
The family understands very well that Erik had a difficult time. I fail to understand the necessity to legally murder this guy at close range. Apparently the Sheriff doesn't have a negotiation proceedure. I also think Erik could have been subdued without firing many rounds into his central body mass - what a term for delivering a bullet to where it will kill the other guy. It is NOT about crybabies - we are supposedly living in a sophisticated society - not one where the guy with the best shot and biggest one is always right. Everyone has rights. Even those who accuse others of being crybabies.
@Chunky. Which order would you have wanted him to follow? Mosher issued 3 different commands in the space of seven seconds according to his voice on the 911 tapes. He instructed Scott to "Put his hands up, drop it, get on the ground, get on the ground". His shots followed less than 2 seconds later. Really nice how he put his Crisis Intervention Team training to work. Which of the laws that you allege he broke carried a death penalty? Last time I looked, the Bill of Rights of the Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, and guarantees a trial by jury. All of those rights were denied to him by the actions of Metro officers, and that coupled with the Cole shooting, etc shows an ongoing pattern of behavior. Any bets on how soon additional suits are filed on behalf of Trevon Cole? Thinking pretty soon, probably by the end of the year and don't think that they will be filed in a court but a Federal Court.
@Tanker
Yet every single person on the inquest jury saw it differently and came back with a justified verdict.
At some point people have to come to terms with Eriks actions. Not a single person from his side has even acknowledged that his actions that day (within the store) were the slightest bit unusual. I don't understand how an an individual who uses his hands and fingers to mimic a gun and points it at an employee is considered normal behavior.
BTW, Moshers changing commands were a direct result of Erik ignoring them and making movements that forced Mosher to change his commands. Not putting up hands, reaching for waistband, grabbing gun.
@TomD. The jury instructions forced that verdict. The is only one person who testified about the finger pointing, and that person was not cross examined. The asking of written questions is not the same as a verbal cross examination. When you listen to the 911 tape, the sequence of commands is not command wait, command wait, it is command followed by command, with no reaction time between them. How do you explain the fact that a holstered weapon was found next to his body? That doesn't seem like the actions of a person who was going to fire at police, but rather the actions of a person who was attempting to comply with one of the first instructions given. Mosher didn't even recall giving the command drop it. How do you think that he will do under a true cross examination?
I'm glad to see the family suing Metro and Costco. How many more times will Metro have to pay up until its' leadership decides to provide proper training and weed out the bad cops?
"Apparently the Sheriff doesn't have a negotiation proceedure."
If someone walks into my place of business, carrying a gun, refusing to leave the premises and acting erratically, the negotiation period is over.
Scott was asked to leave the private property of Costco with his firearm. He refused. According to witnesses he acted strangely after being asked to leave.
The "negotiation" was being asked to remove the weapon from the store or leave. He refused, and thus immediately recast himself as a threat.
The guy made his choices. Let it go.
@Tanker
Are you really of the opinion that the employee simply made up the story about the gun mimic? If so, there isn't much left to say.
Moshers commands were quickly changed for each and every reaction by Erik. Since they followed Eriks actions, Moshers commands needed to be quick. He was always a step behind because Mosher had to react to Eriks changing actions, hence the quick succession of commands.
A jury will see a drug addled CCW holder, acting erratic and not following police commands. Same as the inquest jury. You guys for some reason think Goodman is some kind of super lawyer who is going to be Clarence Darrow. Goodman is a shyster, local attorney looking for his Johnny Cochrane moment. Costco, Metro attorneys will have a field day with Erik's actions that day.
Beyond that, this will probably never go to trial.
@RPJ -- Your post shines a light on the core problem with this incident. No matter how they spin it, they keep changing the "facts."
You wrote, "Scott was asked to leave the private property of Costco with his firearm. He refused."
Yet, the man who refused to leave the building was killed outside the building.
And, since I don't pay your salary and am not on the hook for any civil penalties you are hit with, I couldn't care less what you do in your store. (However, Metro would quickly throw you in jail if you did kill a customer with a holstered weapon. If they didn't just shoot you the moment the arrived to investigate.) But I bet you are pretty strict with the behavior you expect from your employees. I would love to hear your response if one of them told you not to tell them how to do their jobs.
That is what Metro does every time they ignore the will of the public and violate our Constitutional rights.
He initially did refuse to leave. Maybe not verbally, but he continued belligerent behavior after being told no guns allowed. His CCW training tells him to leave when asked and not to act confrontational (I'm a green beret, go read the fcuking constitution is not in the training manuel)
What bothers me more than anything else is that so many saw nothing wrong with Eriks actions and dialogue in the store. If that is considered civil, proper, respectable behavior...we are in trouble as a people.
For anyone who has closed the door on this case based on the one-sided sham of a "fact-finding" mission referred to around these parts as a Coroner's Inquest,
How do you explain the discrepant testimony of Shai Liery who had testified that Erik had, in fact, not pulled his gun out, when in his 911 call you clearly hear him tell the dispatcher that he did pull his gun out? Is this not a red flag?
Also, what happened to Erik's Blackberry? How and why did it suddenly disappear? Why did the DA not look into this more thoroughly? We all know that from recent shootings, officers have mistaken phones for guns.
Officer Mosher's statement that he thought the gun could have been shot through the holster would lead one to assume that the holstered gun was removed from Erik's side. Really? We heard testimony all across the spectrum from "I never saw him pull a gun" to "I saw a gun rug" to "He aimed the gun straight out at the officers" to "he had something black in his hand." Wow! That was really cleared up at the Inquest wasn't it?
What about the issue of multiple commands? I think a total of two minutes was spent on that issue and yet the issue is of critical importance. We have a 911 recording that clearly indicates multiple commands were shouted.
How do you explain the egregious breakdown of chain of custody of the surveillance video?
Why is it that the majority of the trial focused not on the officers actions, but rather on which medications Erik may have been taking?
How is it that protestors of this trial going federal easily overlook the fact that the decedent's history has nothing to do with whether the actions of the officers were appropriate at the time of the incident. Remember this: the officers had no a priori knowledge of who Erik was, so his medication history is irrelevant? He could have been on angel dust and it alone does not justify deadly force. Now had he been acting erratic and dangerous as the result of medications, then that is relevant. But yet you did not hear one witness state that they ever saw Erik acting erratic. Not one witness other than Shai Liery.
continued.....
.....continued
To say that Erik had been taking medications and therefore his death was warranted is a line of reasoning that is totally mind boggling. Why is it that Metro refuses to provide any reports, evidence, names and other relevant information to Erik's family? Come on now, if they are totally in the clear then why would they hold back? Did you ever consider that they are using the federal courts so that they could get the information that have been requesting all along? Now who is wasting who's money?
If you think that the use of excessive force by law enforcement is not grounds for a federal complaint under color of law, try telling that to the family who had to hear about how their son was shot an additional 5 times in the back while on the ground. This is even corroborated by every one of the DAs "hand picked" witnesses.
Did you hear anything about the blue card that Erik had in his pocket for the Ruger? Of course you did not.
What you heard during the Inquest was a one sided smear campaign designed to portray Erik as an outlaw, gun-slinging renegade amped up on pain killers looking for a shoot out. Hmm, I wonder why none of the doctors or patients whose pacemakers he serviced ever presented him in that light.
For those of you who think taking this case to the federal courts is just a waste of money.... perhaps if the Coroner's Inquest wasn't such a one-sided farce, it would never have had to come to this.
All he had to do was leave Costco quietly and non confrontational as his CCW training tells him. He would be alive.
To the people stating that he refused to leave the store... even the costco employees themselves stated that they never asked him to leave. Even Officer Mendiola was questioned at the inquest regarding if someone should leave if they are not asked and he responded in saying no not unless they are specifically asked to leave. Not sure where you get your facts but obviously not from the inquest itself.
By the way TomD1228 he was leaving the Costco quietly and non confrontationally. Every single person that witnessed him exiting testified to that until he was excitedly pointed out by Shai Lierly and the situation was professionaly de-escalated by Officers with guns drawn. He was so quietly exiting in fact that he had walked out past the officers twice without them noticing him. Once to get another shopping cart and the second time after his gf told him they were evacuating the store. How erratic of him.
Everything I predicted would happen did happen..broken video,hand picked witnesses at the inquest..justified as usual..Now I predict that this case will never see a courtroom..To keep the police department from being embarrased in a real trial, there will be a large settlement agreed upon and this whole thing will go away..And the beat goes on...
Don't count on a settlement. The Scott family wants the truth to come out, and the only way that can happen is if this case goes to trail. My prediction is that you will see several more lawsuits filed in Federal court based upon improper training and excessive use of force. The more that are filed, the worse it is for Metro.
@Tom D. According to the testimony of many witness that was exactly what he was doing when he was confronted by Mosher. He was walking out of Costco, no weapons in sight and had already walked by Mosher and had to be pointed out by Lierly. If he had not been pointed out, he would have continued to walk peacefully to his vehicle and left.
CCW protocol. When you are told no guns allowed on premises, you are to leave. He didn't do that. He got mouthy, confrontational. That is when police were called. I guess some of you feel mimicking a gun in your hand and pointing it at the head of an employee is proper, respectful, human behavior. I do not. Where were you people raised where you think his behavior in the store was acceptable?
Shoot enough people and you will eventually kill a white man with a powerful family. Watch for the quick settlement on this one folks.
TomD you are basing your whole argument on what only one witness said, who happens to work for the company who is on the hook for millions. Can't wait for that witness to be cross examined. You left out the part that Erik supposedly told the worker if someone were to threaten you, I would save you. Even Shai, who was supposedly a few feet away watching the two of them while he was on the phone with 911 did not see that happen. Furthermore it wasn't brought up until after the fact of the entire incident. Possibly to protect the company? It didn't have any impact on the officers actions because the person on the phone with 911 never saw it or reported it. CCW protocol huh? Show me in the CCW protocol where it says if you are not asked to leave that you should leave. I think you took the same class as Villareale. Where were you raised that you think it is acceptable to point guns at a man calmy walking out of the store and then open fire after a few seconds? Where were you raised to think its ok to tell someone to drop it, then use the person trying to drop it as justification for shooting them? Where were you raised to think its ok to shoot someone 5 times in the back, one in the buttocks thats ends up lodged in the chest? Please explain how a bullet can end up entering your buttocks and lodge in your chest unless you are falling down or already down. What did they teach you in your CCW class about firing into the back of someone, say if they broke into your house. If you shot the intruder in the back what do you think would happen? Or better yet while on the ground or falling and the bullet ended up going through the butt and lodging in the the chest.
@TomD1228
What part of "he was leaving the store peacefully" did you not get? You keep using information that the officers had no knowledge of prior to the shooting to justify their actions. Mr Liery created a dangerous scenario by lying to the 911 dispatcher that Erik had pulled his gun out before the officers had ever confronted him. The officers created a deadly situation by issuing multiple commands which can be verified via the 911 audio. The proper chain of custody of critical evidence was compromised. Additional rounds fired into the back of a man, already shot, lying unarmed on the ground can construed as the use of excessive force. No one, in fact, had asked Erik to leave Costco. Mr Liery's testimony verifies that he had not asked Erik to leave.
I tell you what. We'll agree to disagree. The problem is that these issues were not adequately addressed during the Inquest. The general public saw the one-sided clearing farce for what it was. Why do you think there is currently a panel looking into how the Inquest process needs to be changed? If they had done everything right, why will Metro not release important evidence to the family? Can you answer some of these questions? If you can, you would be doing something that the Inquest never did.
Make no mistake about it. The federal trials will be about truth and accountability. As I said before, if the Coroner's Inquest had been more thorough, it would not have needed to go this far. But don't be upset because there exists a contingent of concerned citizens who do not take kindly to a verdict being shoved down their throats when the evidence speaks to something else having occurred. In the United States of America, good sir, every citizen has an inalienable right to petition for redress of grievances in the proper courts. Balk at that, good sir, and you balk at the Constitution, the only thing that separates us from every other third world banana republic who attempts to oppress its citizens through propaganda, lies, fear and intimidation.
Regardless of what happens, the taxpayers will end up footing the bill. Scott was convicted of no crimes. The coroner tells us Scott had a "lethal" level of drugs in his system. Yet he died from the lethal level of bullets not drugs. Police and Coscto say he refused to leave the store. Yet he was shot outside. Metro lies the public. That is indisputable. Officers commit perjury. Metro (ie taxpayers) have paid out MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of dollars to cover up Metro's habit of false arrests, and murderous shootings. Keep that in mind when you cast your ballots. Gillespie was put on notice back in 1999 when a U.S. District Judge found that "Metro's policy of inadequate training and supervision was the moving force behind ... use of deadly force against [citizens]." Maybe had he been able to accept criticism and grow as human being, Scott would be alive and we wouldn't be having this discussion. If the Sheriff won't change...Let's change the Sheriff.
All he needed to do was leave the store when he was told no guns allowed. He got mouthy, nasty, belligerent. Erik Scott started the chain of events that led to his death. The inquest ruling will be no different than the civil suit.
Ross Goodman failed to provide one single witness during the inquest. That's his choice, but don't slam the result when you simply refused to show up.
Goodmans witnesses are non existent. Watch and see.
Some of you think this shyster lawyer is going to put on a show where every witness has his credibility destroyed. The only ones who will be destroyed are all these witnesses who failed to show up for the inquest, including Erik Scotts reject girlfriend.
Watch and learn. This case is all but over. Sane people know Erik Scott's actions that day killed him.
Chunky says:
Erik Scott died from a lethal level of arrogance and ultimately stupidity combined with a failure to obey the law and officers of the law.
That's what Chunky thinks!
...ssshhh........
if you listen real closely....you can hear it......
there it is.......
-its the sound of the sheriff giving you all the "bird"-
get one thing straight. he intends to do as he see's fit. those of you who choose to fall to your knee's before him and submit deserve your own fate.
there are others however who find the "sport shooting" of their fellow citizens to be unacceptable behavior. it seems rather unfortunate that it has taken this long, and this many deaths to get the people motivated.
nobody has expressed the opinion that a "when in doubt, SHOOT" policy is the will of the people. yet, that seems to be what has been happening all to often OVER THE YEARS. erik scott not withstanding, this has to be adressed.
Isn't Chunky Officer Moshers screen name???
Anyway, I hope that all you Erick bashing morons or members of your family end up in a similar situation with Metro someday... I would love to read your accusations against Metro then!
Only Chucky and maybe his mother cares what Chucky thinks, that's what most of us here probably think.
Any one that would show a Cop a gun and refuse to do
what he was told Has a Death wish, and He got his.
End of story. Don't blame it on the Officers, they
just want to go home in one piece every day!
@spdmrcht. How did he refuse to do what he was told to do? Which command of Mosher's was he supposed to obey? He may have been attempting to comply with the command drop it, but got killed for his trouble. Mosher didn't even remember that he said "drop it" and that appears to have been the command that Scott was complying with.
Erik Scott didn't die because he was "drugged up". Indeed there are doctor's notes that existed well before the shooting mentioning that even very levels of pain killers might not have much of an effect on Scott because of a potential liver enzyme deficiency.
Nor was Erik Scott killed because he was carrying a weapon, which is a constitutional right, whether one likes it or not.
Erik Scott was killed because a Costco employee with an outstanding criminal warrant for his arrest called 911, lied about the situation and one of the responding officers failed to give proper commands.
I watched the inquest and it would have been difficult for anyone to find the officer's conduct unjustified given the evidence that was presented and the instructions provided to the panel. That may be a flaw in the inquest process. Regardless, there were many open questions that the DA didn't explore. The DA has since acknowledged that he doesn't view the inquest process a means to find out facts, but views it as a process which helps plaintiffs' attorneys build a civil case. Basically, the DA views its' mission in the inquest as protecting Metro from incurring any civil liability.
I'll be very interested to see the real trial.
All Eric Scott had to do was put his hands up and get on the ground and he'd still be alive today!
Acting "erratically" means you can be shot and killed in public? Police Officers are supposed to be social workers not Rambo's. Is the only concern the safety of law enforcement? WHAT ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY, yours, mine, his?
What if Eric Scott had a hearing impairment and didn't hear Officer orders? What if there was other noise? WHAT WOULD AN INQUEST FIND IF A BYSTANDER WAS SHOT? Twas OK because the officers were afraid they'd be hurt?
The lawsuit brings the dual powers of subpoena and discovery to the process that was lacking in the Inquest, unless the plaintiff backs of for a monetary settlement. If this attorney, representing the family, has true convictions-he should not settle. The video has no bearing since there was no contradiction from any witness that he "walked out like any other customer". This should be the most clinching argument for the plaintiff since what happened afterwards was moot and beside the point.
Change the Inquest Process Tomorrow. Make your Voice heard at the Inquest Hearing: http://erikbscottmemorialblog.blogspot.c...
I understand that the family is devestated and needs to vent through law suits. Sue Metro, okay, but leave the Costco security guy out of it.
Whereas Metro has officers that are trained to deal with deadly situations, the Costco guy normally deals with shoplifters; not something lethal.
This guy has a responsibility to ensure the safety of the customers in his store. Erik Scott was acting erratically in the store. How egregious his behaviour was - none of us truly know. What we do know is it was egregious enough to bring the attention of Costco security, and they found an erratic behaving customer who was armed.
I think it's understandable that the security guy acted in the fashion he did. He has to err on the side of caution. He can't possibly know the mind set of Erik Scott. I do believe that Erik Scott meant no harm, but how is this guy to know that? He did what he had to do.
As for Metro, we all watch too much television. These officers don't deal with deadly situations often. I truly believe the public has a Hollywood induced mindset that police authorities deal with these kind of things commonely.
The truth is - they don't. Ask yourself; you drive up to a situation with an armed assailant, you order him to drop his weapon, and he doesn't respond. How do you react?
Could this have been handled better? Of course. All I know is I've walked into Costco and other stores countless times and I've managed to leave without the police drawing down on me.
I feel bad for the Scott family, but Erik Scott brought this on himself. There was no reason he needed to enter into this store packing, and there is no reason that he walked out of that store, faced Metro with guns drawn, and acted in a manner that they felt a need to fire their weapons.