Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Bill Scott, center, father of Erik Scott, speaks to reporters after a coroner’s inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Tuesday, September 28, 2010. With Bill Scott are his wife Linda and attorney Ross Goodman. The jury found that the shooting of Erik Scott was justified.
By Kyle B. Hansen (contact) 
, Dave Toplikar (contact)
Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2010 | 9:56 p.m.
Audio Clip
- Unidentified caller from within Costco talking to dispatchers
-
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Audio Clip
- Shai Lierley on the phone with dispatchers
-
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Audio Clip
- Metro Police radio traffic during the July 10 officer-involved shooting that left Erik Scott dead
-
You need to upgrade your Flash Player
Sun archives
- Detective: Erik Scott had pain medicines from several doctors (9-27-10)
- Day 5 blog: Homicide detective returns to witness stand with more evidence (9-27-10)
- Witnesses give conflicting accounts of Costco police shooting (9-25-10)
- Day 4 blog: Witnesses recall fatal police shooting at Costco (9-25-10)
- Shoppers recount police shooting outside Costco (9-24-2010)
- Day 3 blog: Witnesses back officers’ decision to shoot Erik Scott (9-24-2010)
- Officer in Costco shooting says man raised gun, didn't know it was in holster (9-23-2010)
- Day 2 blog: Officer in Costco shooting: ‘He was a deadly threat with that weapon’ (9-23-2010)
- Inquest testimony focuses on Erik Scott’s use of prescription drugs (9-22-10)
- Day 1 blog: Witness says Erik Scott appeared 'dazed,' aimed gun at officer (9-22-10)
The coroner’s inquest that on Tuesday found the Metro Police shooting death of Erik Scott justified “failed miserably,” Scott’s father said.
Bill Scott told reporters that the next step for the family would be to file a lawsuit in federal court “so finally we all will have the truth.”
The family plans to file a civil rights lawsuit alleging the officers used excessive force. Defendants will be Metro, Clark County, the sheriff’s office and Costco, where the July 10 shooting took place in Summerlin.
Up to this point, the focus of the coroner’s inquest has been on Metro, Bill Scott said.
“Metro pulled the trigger,” Scott said. “But Costco was the primary guilty party. Costco killed Erik.”
Ross Goodman, the Scott family’s attorney, said the lawsuit could be filed as early as two weeks from now.
Goodman and Bill Scott talked to reporters outside the Regional Justice Center about 20 minutes after a seven-member Clark County coroner’s inquest jury ruled the death of Erik Scott as a justifiable homicide.
Bill Scott called the six-day inquest a “horrific nightmare.”
“We gave the system a chance to work as it’s supposed to work. They had the chance to present the truth. They also had the chance to present the facts at the coroner’s inquest hearing. As we see it, the system failed miserably,” he said.
The jury of seven announced the unanimous decision at 5:29 p.m. after deliberating for about 90 minutes.
Jurors were instructed to determine whether the shooting was justifiable, excusable or criminal. Coroner’s juries do not have to be unanimous in reaching their verdict.
Sheriff Doug Gillespie did not release any comment on the verdict Tuesday. A Metro spokesman said Gillespie would not be available until a press conference set for 10 a.m. Wednesday.
Police responded to the Costco store after dispatchers received a 911 call indicating that a man with a gun was at the store acting erratically and destroying merchandise, testimony showed.
Police confronted Scott — who was armed but had a concealed weapons permit — as he exited the store with other patrons who were being evacuated.
Two of the three officers who shot Scott testified Tuesday that they felt Scott was an “imminent” threat before they fired.
Officer Thomas Mendiola testified that he heard officer William Mosher yell, “Hands, let me see your hands.”
Scott reached both hands under his shirt and pulled out a gun, which Scott pointed directly at Mosher, Mendiola said.
It was later determined that the gun was still in its holster.
“I immediately went to center mass, took aim and discharged my weapon,” Mendiola said.
Scott was a threat, Mendiola said. “I felt that my fellow officer was in immediate and imminent danger,” he said.
Mendiola said he remembered shooting three times, but was later told he fired four times.
“I just fired until I felt that the suspect wasn’t a threat. I perceived him as a threat every time I fired,” he said.
Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent asked Mendiola would have done anything differently in retrospect.
“Absolutely not,” Mendiola said. “We don’t pick what’s going to happen, we react to the situation, and that’s what the situation presented at that time.”
An interested party asked what Mendiola thought when he found out Scott’s gun was in a holster the whole time.
“It was still a threat, whether it was holstered or not. I did what I had to do,” Mendiola said.
Officer Joshua Stark also said Scott failed to comply with Mosher’s orders.
Scott reached to his back, exactly where Costco security had told police the gun was located, Stark said.
“He pulls out the gun and it comes forward,” then shots were fired, Stark said.
“I wasn’t sure who had been shot. I just knew shots had been fired,” he said, explaining that he was focused on Scott’s hands.
“I fired my handgun because I thought my partner officer Mosher and everybody behind him was in the threat of imminent death,” he said.
Mosher testified Thursday and Friday. A fourth officer who was also at Costco at the time of the shooting testified Tuesday.
Officer Dustin Bundy was at the Costco but did not see the shooting because he was behind a pillar when Scott came out of the store, he said.
Bundy said he heard shots fired, but when he was able to see what was happening Scott was already on the ground.
Detective Barry Jensen was Thursday’s other witness. Jensen is a homicide detective assigned to investigate the shooting.
Jensen said he has investigated about 70 police use-of-force incidents in the last 10 years but doesn’t recall any having as many witnesses as this one.
Jensen testified that Scott didn’t have a permit to carry the gun that was in his pocket when he was shot.
Scott carried a Ruger .380 semi-automatic handgun and a .45-caliber Kimber single-action pistol. The Kimber was found in its holster not far from where Scott’s body landed after he was shot. The Ruger was found in Scott’s clothing as he was being taken to the hospital.
Scott had a concealed carry permit and seven gun registrations in his wallet, but the permit didn’t include the Ruger.
“That’s a felony crime in Nevada,” Jensen said.
The permit did list a .380 Kel Tec, which is similar.
Jensen also testified that Scott was not a Green Beret and had not served overseas in the military.
Costco employee Shai Lierley previously testified that Scott said he was a Green Beret when he was told his gun was not allowed in the store.
Jensen said when he interviewed Scott’s girlfriend, he asked if Scott was a Green Beret. She told him he had done some stuff “they don’t talk about.”
Jensen said he checked out Scott’s DD-214 separation papers from the military.
“We found he had no special forces training and wasn’t a Green Beret,” Jensen said. Jensen said they also found Scott was honorably discharged in 1996.
The final witness Tuesday was Coroner Mike Murphy, who testified that the family was told more than once how to provide the names of witnesses to bring to the inquest but had not done so.
Goodman previously indicated that the family was withholding its witnesses until there was a fair hearing into the shooting. More than 60 witnesses testified during the six days of the inquest.
Goodman indicated that the family would be seeking punitive damages in the federal lawsuit.
“Part of the statute is punitive damages, if a jury finds that they acted excessively,” Goodman said.
Metro Police Officer Thomas Mendiola testifies during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Tuesday, September 28, 2010.
Goodman and Bill Scott complained that, unlike a regular jury trial, where a prosecutor presents a case and a defense attorney presents a rebuttal, only the district attorney is allowed to present a case in the coroner’s inquest. And the district attorney was defending the police, they said.
“So you’ve got the police’s version and that’s it,” Goodman said. “Now we’re going to be able to get the actual information, the actual evidence, and we’re going to file a case in the next few weeks in federal court. And we’ll present the real case and the real truth.”
The truth, Goodman said, was “Erik Scott was walking to the parking lot with his gun in his holster and he was ambushed by these three officers who gave him about three seconds from the initial commands to respond.
“And as he was turning around, you heard witnesses testify that he was frozen in time, looked like a deer caught in the headlights, and he responded within a few seconds with the best that he could do by handing over the holstered gun, at which point they shot him two times in the front and five times in the back.”
Goodman said the family still has not seen the final police report, still has not seen written statements from witnesses and still has not seen any of the evidence.
That’s the reason the family did not provide any witnesses that would be favorable to their version of the events, he said.
“When a real jury gets to hear both sides of the facts, I think you’re going to find a much different verdict,” Goodman said.
Bill Scott indicated that the family would also have its own independent autopsy performed
Goodman said the family didn’t believe police reports and Costco reports that there was no actual video of the events. Testimony from store employees was that the video recorder was not properly working at the time of the shooting.
“I don’t believe at all there was anything wrong with the video that day,” Bill Scott said. “If there had been a slip and fall accident at noon that day, they would have had it all on video. I guaran-damn-tee you.”
However, Scott said, he wasn’t alleging that the video was destroyed.
He said the real message of the jury’s verdict is that “this circus, this cop-clearing circus that they call a coroner’s inquest process, is now making Las Vegas the laughingstock of the nation.”
Goodman said there was no point in having the coroner’s inquest hearing because the evidence was presented by police and by the district attorney’s office, which works hand-in-hand with police.
“There’s an institutional bias; there’s a vested interest in making sure there’s a justifiable finding here, and you got exactly that,” Goodman said. “The prosecutors spun the evidence to ensure that the police were found to be justifiable.”
Metro Police Officer Dustin Bundy testifies during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center on Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2010.
Goodman said that the presiding officer, Justice of the Peace Tony Abbatangelo, wouldn’t allow the family to file a motion to address the flaws of the system.
Maggie McLetchie, an attorney for the ACLU of Nevada, said the verdict was expected, but the process was flawed.
“We’re not surprised with this verdict because no matter what the evidence is, no matter what the case is, officer-involved shootings are almost always found to be justified,” she said.
The one good thing to come out of the inquest is the heightened awareness in the community, she said.
“The time for change is now,” she said. “I think people were able to observe some of the things that we’ve been complaining about.”
McLetchie said she can’t take a position on whether the verdict was right or wrong, but the inquest showed many of the flaws of the system, such as no cross-examination of witnesses or checks on district attorney.
“It’s really too bad that we don’t have a system that lets the truth come to light,” she said.
In coroner’s inquests, witnesses are not cross-examined, but interested parties may submit questions to the judge, who can ask them of the witnesses. More than 1,500 questions were submitted during inquest, but many were not asked because they were not appropriate, irrelevant or already had been asked, Justice of the Peace Tony Abbatangelo said.
Questions submitted but not asked were read onto the record by Abbatangelo outside the presence of the jury.
Members of the jury were also allowed to ask questions of witnesses and frequently did so. The jury included four men and three women. Four alternates also participated in the proceedings, however one was excused Saturday when he became ill. The other three, two women and a man, were excused before deliberations began.
Explore Las Vegas’ past and present
Boomtown: The Story Behind Sin City
Neon Boneyard: A 360° look
Mob Ties: See the connections
Implosions: Classic casinos crumble
Sigh, and now here come the lawsuits. I really hope the county fights this one just to set a precedent.
This is not unusual though. Every person that is killed by the police was a perfect angel or was just getting their life back on track, at least according to the family. I for once would like the family to say, "you know what yeah he messed up and he paid with his life." Instead us taxpayers have to pay for their son's mistake.
God I hope they lose this lawsuit and pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawyer fees.
oh boo hoo. Scott was carrying 2 guns in a public store opening store merchandise ( shop lifting) and was high on drug's. he drew a gun and pointed it at police. now the family is crying foul. your son was a steroid jockey who had no common sense. get over it !!. now you want to sue the county and costco. for what. a drugged up steroid jockey who liked to play tough guy...GOOD JOB METRO...
What a joke. Now Metro can give the jurors their paychecks and send them home.
A 'Frame' well done!
Amen lisa99
Bill Scott is rationalizing and in denial as are the conspiracy minded posters. Thank you jurors for seeing clearly what the family denies, that their son was at fault and needed help that his family failed to provide.
Looks like Metro #ucked Up this time.
Bill Scott says "they gave the system a chance to work"....
How is that Mr. Scott when you withheld your own witnesses? You can't say you gave the system a chance when you refused to supply witnesses. That isn't giving the system a chance. That is simply trying to impede the system. That is your right, but don't claim that you gave the system a chance.
I think they are in denial. "Erik did nothing wrong"
Yeah, maybe on another planet. Not here on Earth. It's tragic what happened but justified based on his actions.
Is there anyone here that doubts the verdict would have been the same if there had been 100 witnesses that said Scott did nothing wrong and only one cop who said Scott was a threat?
This is no longer about the tragic event that took place that July day. It is about the lack of respect and trust that a large portion of we, the public, no longer have in those we elect or hire to protect us.
Our elected officials and public servants MUST understand what is happening and take immediate steps to correct this situation.
Mr. Scott: The facts or evidence do not support your case. Your lawyer is going to take you to the cleaners. Sir, you seem intelligent, but unable to face reality.
For a country with a government founded on checks and balances these situations show a sore lack of both. AS the public so often hears, unless someone is guilty and has something to hide they have nothing to fear from the system. It seems quite telling that Metro and its union are so change adverse regarding changes to the officer involved shooting policies and procedures. It's alarming that the officers appear so afraid of the very system where they spend so much time.
As noted in the article, "Jensen said he has investigated about 70 police use-of-force incidents in the last 10 years but doesn't recall any having as many witnesses as this one."
He also testified that he couldn't remember if he was involved with any other of Officer Mosher's officer involved shooting investigations.
If that's true, he's overpaid and the taxpayers could probably find someone else with a better memory to do the job. They could probably find a better ADA who might actually follow-up on that line of questioning. Or, which side is the ADA on?
Officer Mosher's air of impunity and apparent lack of any remorse for having killed someone makes me leery to go out for fear of a chance encounter where Metro will want to take a look at my papers on some pretext.
Having spent years in Germany during the Cold War, and traveled behind The Berlin Wall at the government's request, I'm somewhat familiar with government agents that operate with full knowledge they will be able to escape accountability for their actions. So, Metro isn't the only law enforcement agency that acts with impunity. Whether or not Metro is consciously trying to emulate the infamous agency that came before them, the similarities just continue to grow with every incident.
Beware GESTAPO 911.
Like I have said before. I expected no less than the outcome that I witnessed today, as it has simply been an ongoing pattern for this process. As much as I would like to feel comfortable with the jurors' decision, I am left with a bitter taste in my mouth, because instead of witnessing a fair and thorough examination of the officers' actions, I saw one man put on trial. Erik Scott. I saw more evidence presented in an attempt to justify the death of Erik Scott than an honest look at all of the events surrounding the shooting itself. I saw more testimony regarding Erik Scott's prescription medications than a thorough examination as to why there was a discrepancy between what had been reported by the officers and what was revealed in the 911 recording. I have found it difficult to fathom how one Costco employee yeilded so much influence in such a deadly outcome. I have found it difficult to understand why a man (supposedly acting erratic) and his girlfriend would follow directions to evacuate the Costco by a lowly stock boy and yet want to take on three armed police officers with absolutely no chance of even getting off one shot from a holstered weapon. I have found it difficult to understand why there has been a complete disappearance of surveillance video that could set everyone's opinions aside and point toward the truth. I have found it difficult to understand why the the investigators could obtain federally regulated medical records, emails and other background information used to build their case against Erik Scott, but report being "unable" to obtain cell phone records for Erik Scott's Blackberrry, which might help to shed light on his state of mind or his action around the time of the shooting. I have found it difficult to understand why a man who was walking out of Costco, causing no commotion or harm to anyone, would be detained and given multiple orders in a 7-8 second period by officers, in front of approximately 100 witnesses, and end up with 2 rounds in his chest and another 5 rounds in his back. What went wrong? That question has yet to be answered. continued.........
Doesnt matter if Erik had pain meds.. He was smiling at the cameras.. a great big colgate smile..we all know who is at fault.. but you know what Bill Scott and family??? In the end.. its God who prevails.. and these things we call protection... well in the end.. God prevails.. when it's time for all of us to meet our Great Maker in Heaven.. we are all going to be judged...some just won't make it to Heaven..but I'll bet Erik made it there.. just remember cops.. murderers never make it to Heaven..Don't forget the TEN COMMANDMENTS!!! love tiabear
I was personally involved in one of these "kangaroo court" scenarios.
They happen.
.continued:
If your answer is, "Erik Scott pulled a gun and aimed it at officers," well I have heard that about a million times. If you are complacent with that answer alone, well then congratulations. It looks like this jury decided the same as you. If the 911 call doesn't bother you, well then I guess you are content. If the missing surveillance video doesn't bother you, I guess you'll sleep tight. If the excessive amount of time spent during the Inquest trying to depict Erik Scott as worthy of his fate sets well with you, then back to business as usual for you. If the seemingly wreckless and potentially catastrophic engagement by officers in the middle of a heavily populated storefront seems reasonable to you, well then I guess you can tune back in to your regularly scheduled programming. If the one sided, agenda-ridden Inquest process makes you yawn, well then I guess you can take a nap now. But if you are like me, I am left shaking my head, no so much with shock or surprise, but rather with a feeling of emptiness. Somehow the term collateral damage keeps popping up in my head as much as I have no intent toward thinking of it. Is it all about politics? Is it about the power of big business to wield its ugly head once again? Is it about trying to maintain a system, that for better or for worse, the public has accepted for so long, simply because it knows of no other? Who knows?
continued..........
.....continued:
Today I watched very closely at Officer Mendiola's testimony, and I watched hungry for words that would help me to understand why he had fired as many rounds as he did into Erik Scott while his back was to him. The only conclusion I could come to was, it must have been sheer fright. Submariner, he said he had been while in the service. I know a few who have been. On a nuclear submarine I think he said. Then I tempered that with the information about him not performing well on a few exams while at the academy. Really? I said to myself. A nuclear submariner? They don't put you on a nuclear sub if you are not sharp at something. Why did he choose law enforcement afterwards I asked? Any one's guess is as good as mine. But I do know that on a sub, you take life from a distance. If you really even want to take life at all. On a sub you work closely with others knowing you yeild the capacity to stop wars by your very presence in a region. You work closely with your shipmates for months on end, with no contact from outsiders. You work with tight structred protocols with zero room for error. You have to be able to, or you don't get on one of those vessels. It just wasn't all adding up to me. For a few moments I blocked out all I had heard
prior and just attempted to listen. In the end I just reflected on what I thought I had heard between the lines- the body language- the tone in his voice- the movement of his head- his facial expressions. What was revealed to me? What did I just observe? What I came away with was I was watching someone who had testified that was frightened. Not by being on the stand but by what he had done; that he had been told by many that what he had done was what he needed to do; but yet, he was still was not right with himself; that he was perhaps catapulted into a situation by the sound of gunfire and that it all should have ended another way; that he did not sign up for this; that he had not said everything he wanted to say; that maybe something had gone terribly wrong and he wished he could go back and do it all over a different way, even though he is supposed to say that he would do it all the same way if it happended again.
Maybe I am way off. Who knows? Maybe I am right on. Who knows? It doesn't really matter. I do not profess or have an egocentric desire to know or be right about everything. All I do know is that I am left feeling the same way I observed Officer Mendiola coming across to me: unsettled with it all. And somewhere within that wordless revelation from him, for a moment I saw the truth.
Every police department has good and bad cops. Having watched the inquest, its clear that Mendiola and Mosher are rogue cops who believe they are above the law. Just like Chris Yant, they will be back on the streets soon and someday they will get trigger happy and shoot and kill somebody else. Even if Erik Scott did not reach for his gun, Mosher was most likely going to shoot him anyways just because he saw him having it. In time there will be justice for the Scott family.
I also hope I never get pulled over by any of these police officers. I am sure they will be reading these comments and will remember the names of everybody who is not on their side on here. I believe they would be inclined to take retribution against ANYBODY who did not support them.
Las Vegas, welcome to New Orleans.
The most murderous COP city in the United States. Now since Metro is second best, watch them try harder...
.....and we STILL don't know where that video machine is and its recording components are.
Don't you just love a cover-up!
Three COPs and not a single COP had a TASER. And for all of you weasels out there whose constant refrain is: 'You don't bring a TASER to a gunfight', what's wrong with just having two trigger happy murderous cops with guns pointed at the suspect while the third (behind him) has a TASER?
What they're really saying is:We really like the gratuitous violence!
Murder first, ask questions later.
"Two of the three officers who shot Scott testified Tuesday that they felt Scott was an "imminent" threat before they fired."
That's all they had to say...Case closed.
I wonder if the DA would prosecute a private citizen if they said the same thing?
Felt...feelings???? And a man is dead based on feelings.
The call made to the police by a Cosco employee, did this person when telling them that there was a man in the store with a gun, did they say the gun was holstered?
How did the jury figure Scott was an eminent threat when his gun wasn't even drawn.
The police were more an eminent threat with their guns drawn yelling out confusing commands.
This is very sad.
Take this to a Federal court. At least the prosecuters can be called on leading the witnesses when asking questions.
Public outrage and distrust of the system is painfully obvious. Not only the participating cops but their supervisors who allow such seige mentality are WRONG. METRO IS WRONG to think they must protect themselves from us,We the People,
Has there been any explanation of the round that hit Erik Scott in the buttocks, traveled up through his bowels, and lodged in his chest? Did anyone ever explain how that happened?
@halo182: I had the same impression of Mendiola. He said what he needed to say on the stand. Yet, he appeared to be tortured at having to say it. As I was watching, I thought to myself, "Man, this guy looks like he knows he made a mistake, but also knows he can't admit it without some serious negative consequences".
Four shots is tough to justify. I hope Mendiola is seeing someone besides the police psychologist.
It is easy for Attorney Goodman to say that Scott's intention was to reach for his weapon to hand it over to police. But three Metro officers had a fraction of a second to decide what Scott's intention was. Their lives and the lives of customers in the area were at stake if they made the wrong choice. In the meantime they believed, from Scott's own words, that they were facing an individual with special forces training.
I would love to see what Goodman pulls out of his hat at the civil trial. Personally, I think he is only looking out for himself using this poor, grief-stricken family.
not at all surprised by the outcome. in my 40 years i've found the justice system to be very one sided and unfair. cops side with cops. da's side with cops. judges side with cops. i mean come on, is the math really that difficult? i'm former military. i've got specialized weapons and tactics training. i'm a ccw. i carry EVERYWHERE. unless its OTHERWISE POSTED that weapons are not allowed. there are usually BIG HONKIN SIGNS on the entrances to these places. taking weapons into a place like this is ASKING for trouble.
i've encountered metro while i was fully armed and armored. but i never touched my weapon. not once. metro took my weapon out of its holster. and i let them. because my mother didnt raise a damn fool.
knowing what i know about metro, knowing how uber horny to shoot someone they are, WHY WOULD I PUT MYSELF IN THE SITUATION TO BE SHOT?
duh?
erik scott should have known not to touch his weapon when metro showed up on the scene. startled? ok well get a grip there cool breeze, slow your roll, check your 6 once in a while.
trying to disarm? why dont you just take their gun from them and shoot yourself? only an idiot would do this.
let metro disarm you. a "furtive movement" has a pretty broad definition. its kinda vague. an all encompassing blanket statement that could include you scratching your nose the wrong way.
dont give them an excuse to execute you. dont give them the opportunity for them to justify it. dont allow yourself to become another toe with a tag on it.
just some food for thought.
As I said before, Mendiola and Moser are clearly rogue cops.
That there was no video available (just as with Jim Gibbons in the parking garage) is very troubling. The fact that the family never saw the final report or witness statements was also not right; they will have to file a suit just to see those. Finally, why so many shots fired after he went down with a weapon still in its holster?
Back to the first point, WHERE'S THE VIDEO? Whether or not Metro was justified, I won't buy the justification without the video that was so conveniently lost.
Trevon Cole and Erik Scott are bookends to a problem.
Is Bill Scott going to throw his late sons GF to the wolves for illegally obtaining prescription forms so Mr Scott could continue down the path that lead to the Summerlin Costco that day?
I would guess that that would come up as a 'no line' at the sport books!
Time for a new Sheriff.
The incident was murder plain and simple. If a Las Vegas citizen would have killed the guy they would be doing 20-life. The guy was obviously sick and needed help not a chest full of lead.
"There's an institutional bias; there's a vested interest in making sure there's a justifiable finding here, and you got exactly that," Goodman said. "The prosecutors spun the evidence to ensure that the police were found to be justifiable."
That's a fact. Undeniable fact.
The Eric Scott case has been a good Civics lesson for us.
And, it has exposed a process that is absolutely FARSICLE...
and lends itself to a further EROSION of Metro's public image.
WHERE IS THE MISSING VIDEO???
That is the BURNING QUESTION, and a festering boil with the public... it stretches credulity that ON THAT DAY, a 4-hour block of video is missing, while OTHER CAMERAS, with video that does not impune Metro's version of events, is READILY AVAILABLE.
LVMPD should not be the investigating agency on their own shootings. It goes to the issue of being "fair & impartial", and exacerbates the notion that Metro has a "public trust" issue...
Civilian Revue Board & outside agency investigations of lethal police actions would go A LONG WAY in restoring public trust in Metro.
Protect & Serve.
It's not just a "concept"...
It's a directive and a pledge.
Is it being practiced with uniformity here in County Clark?
THANK YOU METRO!!!
As a whole, you do outstanding work in a city that makes that very, very difficult.
It ain't over, 'till it's over!
There is clearly corruption and cover ups going on in LVMPD. Let's hope the Justice Department and The FBI start a major investigation soon just like they did with the LAPD in the 90s.
good job Metro....maybe all you people who think you are better then the fine officers of our city should go out for the force....learn that not everything is as simple as you make it out to be. keep up the work metro and ignore all the civilians who think they are capable of doing a better job then you
I'm amazed at some of the comments. LasVegas9 - did you actually read the blog on this inquest? Where do you NOT understand that basically, Erik Scott "killed" himself by touching his holster with a gun in it? You do NOT touch your weapon while the police are pointing a gun at you. YOU DO AS THEY SAY! Now that we know he was not a Green Beret as he indicated, his judgment was way off. But ANYONE with a brain would know not to touch your weapon.
pmmart: I wonder if the Scott family will "find" the girlfriend (there is something "fishy" about her alleged disappearance).
I figured the Scott family would sue. My guess is some of the witnesses they allegedly have now will not testify because by the time this goes to trial, things change. People may just figure it's not worth it. Also WHY did they not submit the witness list for this inquest? Why would they not want these witnesses to testify at the inquest? These witnesses could have made a difference. Now the taxpayers have to pay for a most likely long and controversial trial with the outcome the same as the inquest.
I said this before and will say it one more time: MANY of you have no idea what it is like to be a cop. You sit there and arm chair quarterback on something you know nothing about. Cops make life altering decisions in split seconds. They make those decisions to protect you. Sometimes things go wrong. It happens. But most of you think it is so damn easy. It's not. Again, if it was some typical bad guy that lives in the valley, some gang banger illegal and/or ghetto inhabitant drug dealer - you'd all be applauding the actions of Metro. But this person was a white guy, educated, military background, had a good job. He had a permit to carry his guns (into a store which prohibited firearms being carried inside). You all assume the drugs he had in his system were okay and did not impair his judgment because...yeah, the white guy thing again. He could do no wrong in your eyes so Metro must have been wrong. Well, I guess he did do wrong, he wasn't as smart as you all think he was. And Metro was just doing their jobs.
Just a question to ponder....
Why did Erik Scott go against all his military and CCW training when confronted by the police by not following orders and reaching for his gun?
Did it have something to do with all the drugs in his system or were there other reasons?
I know you all just want to hate on the police but answering those two questions plays into some common sense thoughts.
Frankly, I fear metro more than the gang bangers.
TomD1228 wrote: "How is that Mr. Scott when you withheld your own witnesses? You can't say you gave the system a chance when you refused to supply witnesses. That isn't giving the system a chance. That is simply trying to impede the system. That is your right, but don't claim that you gave the system a chance."
You apparently don't understand how this works. The testimony of Metro's witnesses is now written in stone. Goodman can prepare a case at his leisure, knowing that Metro's lawyers shot their wad getting their boys off at the inquest.
The testimony of Goodman's witnesses isn't on official record, so Metro has NO idea what they're going to say, other than through discovery. Goodman & Metro are playing poker, but Goodman's hand is hidden, and Metro's cards are face up on the table.
The only thing that Metro has left is to go after Erik's girlfriend - which would be the slimy action of a Police State.
vegaslee wrote: "Why did Erik Scott go against all his military and CCW training when confronted by the police by not following orders and reaching for his gun? Did it have something to do with all the drugs in his system or were there other reasons?"
I listened to the audio tape of the shooting. Check me if I'm wrong here, Sandy, but Erik had about 4 seconds between the first barked order and the first shot into his chest.
Do the math.
vegaslee I believe the officer who shot him from the front yelled to drop your gun after he yelled get on the ground now.
Alot of what the officers said at the hearing was figured out before hand with the evidence that was found out after the incident.
Was Scott a menace to society, as he was walking out of the store with no gun drawn? Was he a menace to society 2 seconds after he was pulling his gun out? How could the police say he was on drugs or his drug induced state caused him to act crazy, when they had no evidence if he had any drugs in his system at that time of the incident?This hearing did not bring the whole truth out. I hope a trial does.
Vegaslee, hows that harley running?
It is easy for Attorney Goodman to say that Scott's intention was to reach for his weapon to hand it over to police. But three Metro officers had a fraction of a second to decide what Scott's intention was. Their lives and the lives of customers in the area were at stake if they made the wrong choice. In the meantime they believed, from Scott's own words, that they were facing an individual with special forces training.
**********************
Exactly, '..so let's kill him before he can kill us! Dollars to Donuts that was the fat Cop's thought process was.' ( i.e. Rambo..) With a weapon trained special forces person you can expect he would react to a weapons confrontation differently in military style- it's the COPS who couldn't react properly -- not the deceased!
By the way, he had his hand on his holster, NOT ON THE GUN and was holding the HOLSTER IN SUCH A WAY it could have never presented a threat to the COPS.
This was just murder by COP - plain and simple..they are simply rationalizing their murderous conduct.
Clear Criminal Civil Rights Violation.
"Metro pulled the trigger," Scott said. "But Costco was the primary guilty party. Costco killed Erik."
Sadly, it seems all his parents want with this situation is stir up enough controversy to create a jury pool that will be favorable to them when they sue Costco. What a noble crusade of theirs.
Like the saying goes, live by the sword die by the sword. This guy believed that problems should be adjudicated by guns, so he carried them. And when a problem presented itself, it was resolved by the very guns he believed in.
That should be the end of that.
"Frankly, I fear metro more than the gang bangers."
Frankly I fear the people who post their incessant anti police garbage on these web sites on a daily basis because logic and common sense aren't qualities that might give them enough time to cease whatever drives their actions!
Just as common sense failed Mr Scott!
@Talkingman
Your statement to me is simply NOT responding to what I said. I know how it works. Apparently you can't read my words. The Scott family said they gave the process a chance to work. How did they do that when they refused to put their witnesses up??
I know all too well the motives for what they did. They get people on record. Yeah, we know that. My point, once again is that by Bill Scotts OWN words he said he gave the inquest process a chance to work. How did he do that by withholding witnesses? I fully understand his intentions are for the civil suit. Got it. Just don't tell me you gave THIS INQUEST process a chance when you refused to cooperate.
That is all I am saying. Got it?
In my mind, the system worked just fine.
Certainly this ruling is no surprise to anyone who cares and has followed police action in this city for the past forty years. In my opinion what we have is a justified police murder under color that is fully sanctioned by the state. As evidence that these murders can be claimed to be sanctioned by the state, we have an inquest process designed to clear the officer of any wrong doing, and laws that make it impossible to charge a police officer for murder.
"Why did Erik Scott go against all his military and CCW training when confronted by the police by not following orders and reaching for his gun?"
Scott was following orders. Officer Mosher said "Drop It" when Scott didn't have a gun in his hand. Scott went to "Drop It". Officer Mosher opened fire. The 911 tapes only serves to confirm the order in which the commands were given and the brief time in which the who incident unfolded.
The DA did effectively turned the panel's focus onto several issues that would never have been allowed in a real courtroom and spent very little time on how the officers were supposed to have responded.
Good ole America, land of no accountability. Here we have a man with a history of domestic abuse and violent behavior. Here we have a man with an addiction to drugs. A man who uses his girlfriend to commit a felony just so he can get high. A man who disrespected life every day he drove while intoxicated. A paranoid man who for some unknown reason carried TWO guns AND numerous rounds of Costco on a day he continued to disrespect his fellow man. All of those things and some people still defend him to no end. They act like he is totally innocent.
Did Scott deserve to die because of all of that? NO. He was a total jerk, but he did not deserve to die because of that. Did he pose a threat to law enforcement and everybody else around him with the way he acted? YES. You don't pull a gun on law enforcement. Period. End of story. Can all of you honestly say that if a drugged up man approached you or your family, said he had a gun, then reached to his holster an started pulling said gun out you wouldn't feel threatened? If you answer no I feel sorry for the family you should be protecting.
The best part of all of this is now the family of said individual is using his death as a way to make a quick buck. Don't tell me this is for justice. If they really believed in justice their witnesses would have appeared at the inquest. This is for cold hard cash. Plain and simple. AS soon as they lost the inquest they changed the focus of their suit from Metro to Costco. They just want to cash in on this. Erik probably told them his suicide by cop plan ahead of time so they could cash in on it.
This is really one unjust system. THE PROCESS STINKS. This farce needs to be eliminated and a new "just" system put in its place.
Bill, give it a rest. Your son was carrying at least 1 weapon illegally, while intoxicated on prescription narcotics that he was addicted to. Realize that your son's actions are what killed him already.
It's horrible,and it's hard to think of a child being killed, but he was a legal drug addict. He also carried a gun. My questions they are all there for him now, but where was dad and mom when he was downing all those drugs?
Summerlin
Give it a rest. He was told to drop it after the gun was already in his hands or grabbed on to. He ignored the original commands, proceeded to go for his weapon and got shot.
This isn't rocket science. It's over.
@TomD1228: Funny, I was thinking it's just beginning....
When you compare the sequence of commands heard on the 911 tape with the officers' testimony, it become quite improbable that Scott had a gun in his hand when Officer Mosher ordered Scott to "Drop It.
There will be a real trial at which point some of these inconsistencies will get cleared up, one way or the other.
For all you posters that don't understand, he was walking out of the store with his gun holstered, he never had his gun un-holstered while he was in the store, the officer with his gun drawn approached Scott and told Scott to get on the ground and drop your gun, Scott decided to drop the gun before he went to the ground, at that point he was killed.
I'd would like to see the protocol in Metros patrol manual and read what they write on the step by step actions on how to react and what to do and say when this type of situation occurs. I don't think these officers acted according to protocol.
LVPD + Scott = TARGET PRACTICE
The coroner's inquest is done, the police's fault is gone; now Mr Scott go for the next step and Erick will have a true justice from the people who really care about the "one side inquest". We need an Independent Panel ASAP; because anybody, I mean anybody could be in the middle of the next police "justified" shooting.
@mschaffer: This is one of those rare instances where you and I are in total agreement. I take my hat off to you, sir. You are spot on with your analysis: Erik Scott was at fault and his father, along with the conspiracy minded, ARE in complete and total denial.
"By the way, he had his hand on his holster, NOT ON THE GUN and was holding the HOLSTER IN SUCH A WAY it could have never presented a threat to the COPS."
@Haven22: Testimony does not support this claim. In fact, multiple witnesses reported the muzzle of the weapon was pointed in the direction of officers and citizens. If his intent was to disarm, all Erik had to do was remove the holster from his waistband and let it drop to the ground. By extending his arm, gun in hand with muzzle masking the police/public, Erik violated one of the most important firearm safety rules: never point your weapon at something/someone you don't intend to shoot.
Justified! It was a given. And in less time than it takes to eat lunch. I hope that Steve Sisolak follows through and changes this incredibly PRO METRO procedure. I also hope all you voters DON"T vote for David Roger, Doug Gillespie and any other "homies". All this taxpayer waste of money was horrible to watch. As for Mosher, God help any of us who get pulled over by this fat assed, trigger happy, run amuck lowlife scumbag.
To the Scott family, I'm so sorry for your loss. I'm so sorry that your son was vilified in the coroner's inquest and I'm so sorry that our elected court reps heartlessly "killed" your son again...on television! All I can say is that Metro best keep away from me because I have nothing nice to say about you or to you. Better get new tapes for your waistbelt recorders, we'll see if mine matches yours should you decide to stop me for any trumped up, made up reason. The entire inquest made me sick to my stomach. The DA's office thoroughly enjoyed this and it showed. Pathetic, sad and disgusting!
"You apparently don't understand how this works. The testimony of Metro's witnesses is now written in stone. Goodman can prepare a case at his leisure, knowing that Metro's lawyers shot their wad getting their boys off at the inquest."
@TalkingMan: Apparently, it is you that fails to understand how this works. A civil action doesn't give the Scott Family any edge over the police. During the discovery process, each side will depose all witnesses well in advance of any actual trial and, as such, testimony will be "written in stone" for all involved.
What you and the others equally in denial fail to realize is the Scott Family civil lawsuit is a loser. The girlfriend (and only witness the family has in their pocket for certain) will never testify, as (1) she has already damaged her credibility with her taped statement to police and (2) she will run the risk of incriminating herself in the crimes of assisting Scott in fraudulently obtaining prescription drugs to feed his long-term habit. IF Goodman really has additional witnesses (and that's a very big IF), their credibility is already damaged by the fact they (a) weren't used at the inquest or they (b) didn't come forward on their own to provide testimony at the inquest. Why they weren't used will become a focal point in a civil trial and the conclusion will be they each have an agenda. Additionally, Goodman isn't up to the task. He's widely regarded amongst his peers as a D-leaguer. One has to look no further than the family's failed PR campaign and post-inquest press conference, during which the family has backed themselves into a corner of their own, for proof that he's in over his head.
pmmart wrote: "Is Bill Scott going to throw his late sons GF to the wolves for illegally obtaining prescription forms so Mr Scott could continue down the path that lead to the Summerlin Costco that day?"
Only an out-of-control Police State machine could justify savaging Samantha Sterner after offing her fiance & defiling his corpse.
We'll see how low they go.
Det_Munch wrote: "I'm amazed at some of the comments. LasVegas9 - did you actually read the blog on this inquest? Where do you NOT understand that basically, Erik Scott "killed" himself by touching his holster with a gun in it? You do NOT touch your weapon while the police are pointing a gun at you. YOU DO AS THEY SAY!"
Officer Mosher told Erik Scott to "Drop it!" Mosher had to be reminded of that fact.
I'll remind YOU of that fact. Mosher TOLD HIM to touch his weapon. Capiche?
Det_Munch wrote: "I figured the Scott family would sue."
You figured wrong. It's a CIVIL RIGHTS suit, which ISN'T a "civil suit". If you're going to post opinion to try to sway others, please make sure you have at least the the basic information correct.
Thanks in advance!
@fremmasmind
Seems EVERY juror disagreed with your analysis. That should tell you something.
I seriously doubt Goodman has credible witnesses. If it was me that witnessed this shooting I would want want to testify. Is Goodman really telling people "no, no, don't testify, we want to save you for the civil trial"
Most people with common sense would laugh at him.
MWCRob wrote: "Sadly, it seems all his parents want with this situation is stir up enough controversy to create a jury pool that will be favorable to them when they sue Costco. What a noble crusade of theirs."
OK, let's get this straight, one more time:
Bill Goodman is NOT suing Costco. It's a "civil rights suit", not a "civil suit".
Look up the definition of both phrases, please.
Wow! All I see in many of the comments is there are a lot of you who must have gotten speeding tickets or were pulled over for DUI and hate police officers for doing their duty. Having driven a cab in Clark County for 9 years, I was stopped by Metro & NHP patrol officers on more than 1 occasion. In every case, they were respectful, courteous and in no way threatening. Of course, I also was repectful, courteous and non-threatening. Sometimes I received a citation, sometimes they let me off with a warning. In any case, I appreciated the fact that I was at fault and they were just doing their job. So, I suggest to all you cop-haters: next time you are burglarized, vandalized, mugged, raped, assaulted or otherwise taken advantage of by the criminal class, don't dial 911. Call the ACLU and have Allen Lichtenstein come out and help you. I'm sure you'll be glad you did.
TomD1228 wrote to me: "Your statement to me is simply NOT responding to what I said. I know how it works. Apparently you can't read my words. The Scott family said they gave the process a chance to work. How did they do that when they refused to put their witnesses up?? I know all too well the motives for what they did. They get people on record. Yeah, we know that. My point, once again is that by Bill Scotts OWN words he said he gave the inquest process a chance to work. How did he do that by withholding witnesses? I fully understand his intentions are for the civil suit. Got it. Just don't tell me you gave THIS INQUEST process a chance when you refused to cooperate."
I was going to give you a big long rebuttal, but I'll go with two quick points:
1. Anything you say can and WILL be used against you in a court of law. (That phrase should ring a bell)
2. It's a civil rights lawsuit, NOT a civil suit.
redmage wrote: "The best part of all of this is now the family of said individual is using his death as a way to make a quick buck. Don't tell me this is for justice. If they really believed in justice their witnesses would have appeared at the inquest. This is for cold hard cash. Plain and simple. AS soon as they lost the inquest they changed the focus of their suit from Metro to Costco. They just want to cash in on this. Erik probably told them his suicide by cop plan ahead of time so they could cash in on it."
No. It's a "civil rights lawsuit", NOT a "civil suit". Thanks for your attention in this matter.
riotact wrote: "@TalkingMan: Apparently, it is you that fails to understand how this works. A civil action doesn't give the Scott Family any edge over the police. During the discovery process, each side will depose all witnesses well in advance of any actual trial and, as such, testimony will be "written in stone" for all involved."
It's not a "civil trial", etc., etc., - see my above comments for elucidation.
Another lawsuit but who didn't see this one coming if the truth be known that was in the making from day one. OH!!!! Let me guess "it's not about the money, it's to keep some other family from going through the same miss justice" All I can say, The Scott family are true HERO'S protecting us from the mean ol cops.
<To the Scott family, I'm so sorry for your loss. I'm so sorry that your son was vilified in the coroner's inquest and I'm so sorry that our elected court reps heartlessly "killed" your son again...on television!>
To add to lvelegante's post:
To the Scott Family : Sorry for your loss, but you would NOT have had this loss if your beloved son used common sense. First mistake being addicted to prescription drugs; second - having a girlfriend who helped support his addiction/problem knowing full well it wasn't such a good idea; third you family not telling the authorities on the whereabouts of said girlfriend (your family knows damn well where she is - afraid of what she might have said?); third - your son being sooooo paranoid that he had to have on his person TWO WEAPONS while just going to Costco - in Summerlin no less; and lastly - NOT following police orders. Maybe somewhere in the State of Nevada you will be able to find a jury who will consider YOUR side.
<All I can say is that Metro best keep away from me because I have nothing nice to say about you>
Golly gee - I'm sure Metro is heartbroken by your feelings, lvelegante. I hope you never need Metro's services in any way. Remember: They know your real name.
It is a little late in the day but, for what it's worth - the DEFINITION for a "CORONER'S INQUEST" per Black's Law Dictonary is: "An inquisition or examination into the causes and circumstances of any death hanppening by violence or under suspicious conditions, held by the coroner with the assistance of a jury."
I submit that it SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE the JURY could make ANY legitimate finding if they only hear HALF OF THE "STORY." Without the "OTHER SIDE" of the story to consider - and measure against the DA's version - this finding of "justifiable homicide" is nothing more than a ONE-SIDED agreement, by the jury, with what the officers said.
It's good our Courts of Law don't run this way. We wouldn't need Defense Attorneys, and biased convictions or absolutions would rule.
The poster comments herein, and daily LV SUN summaries of the Inquest, clearly demonstrate CONFLICTING TESTIMONY - as given by the officers, and some witnesses. So what now. Does the Inquest Judge just say: "good job, well done. Case dismissed!" How is Justice served?
For instance, Officer Thomas Mendiola testified that he heard officer William Mosher yell, "Hands, let me see your hands." BUT THAT IS NOT ALL Officer Mosher said. MENDIOLA WAS NOT LISTENING. It appears that Mendiola's apparent inexperience, and the heat of the moment, caused Mendiola to draw and fire his weapon - ONLY AFTER SCOTT WAS IN THE PROCESS of OBEYING MOSHER"S second command: "DROP YOUR WEAPON." NEXT, MOSHER immediately told SCOTT TO GET ON THE GROUND (according to HIS testimony.)
How do drop a weapon if you don't reach for it?
Officer Mosher says HE shot FIRST. But Officer Mendiola also says HE fired FIRST. Then we have Officer Stark WHO DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON - SO HE SHOT TOO. Stark says: "I WASN'T SURE who had been shot. I just knew shots had been fired." - explaining that he was focused on Scott's hands. - [NOTE: it was stated that ONE of Scotts "HANDS" was ALREADY in the AIR.] - SO, "I fired my handgun because I thought my partner officer Mosher and everybody behind him was in the threat of imminent death," he said." These contadictory stories don't match!
Testimony given says the officers were within 8-9 feet of Scott. Is that not close enough for Stark to KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON? Also, why didn't the "experienced" COP (5 years on the force - and 2-shootings previously) Mosher, tell Scott to "reach for the sky," and then, "to get on the ground?" Or did he panic too?
This is a "travesty of justice" because (1) the "other side of the story" was not heard, and (2) because there was no suggestion of "reasonable doubt" considered, or offered (per this article and poster's who attended the Inquest).
The MOB in Las Vegas should have had it so good! They would all still be in Las Vegas if only (one) their side of the story was told to a jury.
TalkingMan,
Since nothing has been filed yet it's neither a civil rights suit or a civil suit. Goodman claims he is going to file a civil rights suit but unless you have a crystal ball you have no idea what will actual be filed.
<...figured wrong. It's a CIVIL RIGHTS suit, which ISN'T a "civil suit"."
Civil Rights suit, civil suit. Whatever. Bottom line: the Scott family wants monetary compensation for the death of their son. When they lose the "civil rights" suit, they will file a "wrongful death" action.
BTW - the matter will GO TO TRIAL. That is why they are doing this. Discovery will start after the initial complaint is filed; the Metro and Costco will have 30 days to answer the complaint; then a discovery timeline will be established by the court. That means all these "witnesses" that the Scott family did NOT wish to testify at the coroner's inquest will have their depositions taken. A trial date may not be set until late next year.
Det_Munch wrote: "To add to lvelegante's post:
To the Scott Family : Sorry for your loss, but you would NOT have had this loss if your beloved son used common sense. First mistake being addicted to prescription drugs; second - having a girlfriend who helped support his addiction/problem knowing full well it wasn't such a good idea; third you family not telling the authorities on the whereabouts of said girlfriend (your family knows damn well where she is - afraid of what she might have said?); third - your son being sooooo paranoid that he had to have on his person TWO WEAPONS while just going to Costco - in Summerlin no less; and lastly - NOT following police orders."
And furthermore, Erik - you needed to learn to multitask - holding your hands up in the air, "dropping it", getting on the ground, rubbing your belly & top of your head while winking with your left eye and standing on your right foot, while singing "America The Beautiful".
There, fixed it for ya, Det_Munch.
To qoute lvfacts101, "So, I suggest to all you cop-haters: next time you are burglarized, vandalized, mugged, raped, assaulted or otherwise taken advantage of by the criminal class, don't dial 911." Well a friend of mine was sexually assualted and called Metro and what did that fine outfit do about it? Nothing!
reydogirl wrote: "TalkingMan, Since nothing has been filed yet it's neither a civil rights suit or a civil suit. Goodman claims he is going to file a civil rights suit but unless you have a crystal ball you have no idea what will actual be filed."
Oh, I apologize, reydogirl - I just assumed that when Kyle Hansen & Dave Toplikar wrote in the article that "the family plans to file a civil rights lawsuit alleging the officers used excessive force", they meant that the family plans to file a civil rights lawsuit.
My bad. Sorry I jumped to that conclusion.
hermit wrote: "Well a friend of mine was sexually assualted and called Metro and what did that fine outfit do about it? Nothing!"
Look on the bright side, and tell her to count her blessings. If Metro had gotten involved, and it had been in their best interests, she would have gotten smeared as "a slut" or "a prostitute" , and it would have been "proven" that she was "a drug addict", and was "asking for it".
@TalkingMan: You do know there can be monetary settlements with civil rights cases, don't you? I'm guessing the Scott family would gladly accept one well beyond attorney fees.
hermit
Since sexual assaults are numerous in Vegas and yes Metro has their own relatively new "SVU" because of all the assaults, I cannot believe Metro didn't respond. Did your friend in fact call the police?
Summerlin,
Like always you are using only 1/2 your twisted brain...
"Scott was following orders. Officer Mosher said "Drop It" when Scott didn't have a gun in his hand. "
It was heard on the tape played at the inquest that Mosher first yelled, "show me you're hands," then "drop it!"
That would CLEARLY indicate to a rational person (unlike yourself) that he was told to show the officer his hands, instead reached for and pulled out a gun, and was then told to drop it, and get on the ground...
Summerlin, please, view the actual evidence, then make an educated statement to what happened.
You have been anti police since the start, and saying that Scott did nothing wrong...And that the officers were inept and need more training.
Guess what? Scott was told (on recorded line played during the inquest) to show his hands, THEN WAS TOLD TO DROP IT! He did neither, refused to comply and pulled a gun out and pointed it at police....Please get the DOCUMENTED sequence of event correct!
Until anyone on this meassage has been involved in a life or death situtation - take a deep breath and bite your tongue. Is Metro a little trigger happy, maybe - who knows what events transpired in those 3-5 seconds that Scott was given to comply to the officers' request(s) to show his hands and get down. Metro receives a 911 call that tells of a man acting out of the ordinary and is armed - personllay my initital reaction is that this could turn ugly in a hurry. Scott was put in a box and stereotyped as soon as that 911 call went out that he was armed
@talkingman
You don't get it. What does the statement "we gave the process a chance" mean to you. To me it means you did what you could to allow the process to play out. Provide testimony, provide witnesses.
Bill Scott would have been better served to say "we did NOT give the process a chance because we feel it is unfair. We withheld our witnesses"
Get it?...probably not.
redmage wrote: "@TalkingMan: You do know there can be monetary settlements with civil rights cases, don't you? I'm guessing the Scott family would gladly accept one well beyond attorney fees."
Yes, there can be monetary settlements with civil rights cases, but a civil rights suit and a civil suit are not even the same species of animal.
Metro & its fanboys will find out to their dismay that Bill Scott isn't in it for the money. It's precisely these sorts of smears that are flinging gasoline on the fire. Those who are flinging the gasoline had best be sure they don't get any on them...
as botfx says:
This is no longer about the tragic event that took place that July day. It is about the lack of respect and trust that a large portion of we, the public, no longer have in those we elect or hire to protect us.
The bigger issue at hand is the loss of trust we have in public officials and those in power. A quick search of the Internet and the amount of abuse of power and trust can quickly make the pessimist out of anyone. LVPD has lost the trust of its citizens (thus, the massive outcry at hand over the inquest), and if nothing is done to try and regain that trust, events such as these will continue to happen, and the citizens will continue to fight them, irregardless of whether LVPD was right or wrong in their actions.
LVFACTS_101 wrote: "All I see in many of the comments is there are a lot of you who must have gotten speeding tickets or were pulled over for DUI and hate police officers for doing their duty." We are not talking about getting a speeding ticket, we are talking about state sanctioned police murder while under color. The inquest process and laws relative to a police officer use of force guarantee that they will never be charged with murder. The use of force training insures that at some point, innocent people will be murdered by the police. The argument of LVFACTS_101 might just as well of been made by a NAZI SS officer about people complaining about the Jews and Gypsies being murdered in the street, because they resisted being rounded up and being sent off to the death camps. After all, those NAZI's were also only doing their jobs.
@TalkingMan:
A lawsuit, or "suit in law", is a civil action brought before a court of law in which a plaintiff, a party who claims to have received damages from a defendant's actions, seeks a legal or equitable remedy. A lawsuit may involve dispute resolution of private law issues between individuals, business entities or non-profit organizations. A lawsuit may also enable the state to be treated as if it were a private party in a civil case, as plaintiff or defendant regarding an injury (i.e. civil rights), or may provide the state with a civil cause of action to enforce certain laws. A "civil suit" and a "civil rights lawsuit" are exactly the same animal. You are aware the term "suit" is short for "lawsuit" aren't you? It is you who appears to have the need to educate himself.
As a side note, I find it interesting that the one thing you targeted for rebuttal was my use of the term "civil suit."
Talking man said: "Yes, there can be monetary settlements with civil rights cases, but a civil rights suit and a civil suit are not even the same species of animal.
Metro & its fanboys will find out to their dismay that Bill Scott isn't in it for the money. It's precisely these sorts of smears that are flinging gasoline on the fire. Those who are flinging the gasoline had best be sure they don't get any on them..."
What exactly do you feel the family is trying to get out of this? Why bring Costco and their deep pockets into this if it is truly about "civil rights"? Guess we will see how quickly Scott rejects any monetary offers, won't we? Maybe the family will start a prescription medicine drug addiction clinic in Scott's name. Nah, they'll probably go for the yacht.
Just a quick question for ya TalkingMan: do you truly believe that all of Metro is evil? I believe there are bad apples in Metro, as there are in every field. And those bad apples should be thrown out. But most of your comments (the latest a response to the girl getting sexually assaulted) seem like you think all of Metro is corrupt, and none of them care about the citizens of Vegas. If you truly believe that, why in the world would you live here?
riotact wrote: "A "civil suit" and a "civil rights lawsuit" are exactly the same animal. "
Oh, you're right - I'm sorry.
So when the the Rodney King LAPD officers were acquitted in a state court, the later federal trial for civil rights violations which ended with two of the officers found guilty and sent to prison is EXACTLY the same as a "civil trial", where you can get sent to prison if you lose.
Oh, wait - you can't get sent to prison in a civil trial, can you...
redmage wrote: "What exactly do you feel the family is trying to get out of this?"
If you can't figure it out from all the voluminous news coverage, who am I to burst your sheltered bubble?
redmage wrote "Just a quick question for ya TalkingMan: do you truly believe that all of Metro is evil? I believe there are bad apples in Metro, as there are in every field. And those bad apples should be thrown out. But most of your comments (the latest a response to the girl getting sexually assaulted) seem like you think all of Metro is corrupt, and none of them care about the citizens of Vegas. If you truly believe that, why in the world would you live here?"
Good Lord, no. I think most of Metro are consummate professionals, trying to do a difficult and oft-times thankless job.
They don't need guys like Mosher & the guys who covered for his mistake screwing things on the street up for them. WHOOPS! I guess they already did...
TomD1228 I don't know if you watched the proceedings on TV or just read about them. Watching the hearing I noticed the D.A. was misleading the witnesses more than once. This won't happen in a civil suit.
I think saving some of the witnesses until the civil suit will help.If he thought that using them would have helped he would have used them. I don't think it would have helped the case anyway.
A worthless lawsuit. The family is in denial. Erik had enough dope in him to kill an ordinary person. I bet you that the family had NO idea what Erik was truly like or why he was taking so much dope.
Did his girlfriend know?
A civil lawsuit will be fun watching Erik Scott remaining reputation being torned to pieces by high price wolves (lawyers).
The family is suing Costco? Is it really their fault a guy armed with a handgun stumbles into the store stoned out of his mind on various pharmaceuticals?
@TalkingMan
Here's a history lesson for you: The civil rights lawsuit brought against Powell, Wind, Koon and Brisano in the Rodney King affair (and resulted in the incarceration of Koon and Powell) was initiated by the Department of Justice as a result of the State failing to gain a conviction. This is what is known as a CRIMINAL action (suit). There was a seperate CIVIL action (suit) brought against these same officers, by King, seeking monetary damages for said civil rights violations.
In this case, the Scott Family will be the ones filing a CIVIL action (suit) against Costco and the LVMPD, et al. This lawsuit will be exactly like the CIVIL action taken by King in that the Scotts will, too, be seeking monetary damages for what they perceive to be violations of Erik's civil rights. The officers WILL NOT be facing prison should this CIVIL action (suit) be successful. The DOJ would need to bring a case forward for this to occur.
Please think before you speak (or type in this case). Thanks in advance.
Unbelievable. These are rogue cops in a rogue department. Federal intervention is badly needed before more innocent people are killed.
All Erik had to do was get on the ground with his arms out and he'd still be alive! End of story!
Jay Havens, who are you working for?
Hello everyone. There seems to be a little bit of confusion regarding the inquest proceedings. So, I'm going to try to offer a little bit of insight for the folks that would like to see it changed.
The inquest procedure works just like it is supposed to. The key here is the word "imminent". All officers are trained to use deadly force if they feel the individual poses an imminent threat to to anyone,including themselves. That's right, you can be shot for threatening to shoot yourself. A few people have brought up the seventeen year old murder suspect who was shot in the back while handcuffed. As stated in that inquest, the officer believed that the suspect posed an "imminent" threat to the public. The 5'1"ice cream lady with a pairing knife posed an "imminent" threat to 9 Henderson police officers resulting in her being shot.
My point is that if you want something changed, it would be the "policy" of when Metro is to use lethal force. As long as officers are taught to use lethal force to neutralize an "imminent" threat,you can't fault them for doing as they are told. Even one of the officers that shot Mr.Scott testified he would have been in trouble with his supervisors if he had used any thing else. Just like they can change the policy of when to write a seat belt ticket, they can change the policy of when to use lethal force.
Okay, now that the circus court put on by the police is over we can hopefully move this to civil court and find out what REALLY happened. Both sides must be allowed to participate in order to find out the truth. Costco had no posting by their entrance indicating CCW was not allowed. Costco's cameras were working EXCEPT the part where Mosher shot Mr. Scott dead while he was complying with police orders to drop it! Costco employee "Shai" escalated this into what it turned into, murder. The pain killers Mr. Scott was taking was from a parachute injury in the Army he suffered while serving his country. Scott's girlfriend is obviously in hiding in fear of her life, however I suspect she will show up for the real trial. How much is your son worth to you?
@Det-Munch: These cops did not make this decision to protect the public, they made the decision to protect themselves. Secondly, its clear you will always take the side of the police officers no matter if they are right or wrong. Even if they were to kill somebody in cold blood and brag about it, you would think its ok. I don't know if you are a cop or not but you have clearly shown that you feel that all cops can do what they want, when they want without consequences simply because they carry a badge. I'm sure you feel if one cop testifies against a bad cop then are a sell out and traitor right?
@Det_Munch: There is no need to insult the Scott family. You got you wanted and that is your fellow police were exonerated. Obviously you have a problem with what a lot people have to say on here, including me. Well, cop or no cop, I am not afraid of you. You will not bully me or intimidate me from making comments on here.
Daddy is blinded to the facts by the dollars in his eyes.
They lost their son when he got hooked on drugs. I too watched it on TV all week and the jury made the right choice.
It is typical comments that either hate police officers or don't look at the facts. I say stop the Monday morning quarterbacking. Some of these people should think about walking in those Police Officers shoes before they criticize their actions. I think they performed properly after all the testimony at this inquest.
Come on, guys, get real, this was no circus court. Every side had plenty of opportunity to put witnesses on the stand. The PLAIN TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THAT ERIK SCOTT WAS A DOPE HEAD CARRYING GUNS. Now, all you folks out there who think that the cops were totally wrong in shooting Erik, think that this: if this had happen in some ghetto supermarket in LV would any of us still be talking about this incident. The answer is clearly no. The only reason why we are still commenting about
Erik Scott's unfortunate death is because he was an educated upper-class guy whose parents have money and connections and who think the drug reports are flawed.
Mr. Mark Schaffer - you have the brain stem of a single cell amoeba: this was an absolute one sided inquiry. This is not how normal justice is served. This is totally contrary to how the federal court system conducts a trial with a jury. Mr. Bill Scott is right on: This is a cover up to a murder of an innocent man. Witness reports are that Erik did NOTHING wrong. Nothing. THIS inquiry IS BS! LAS VEGAS police department is corrupt. Period.
Erik did not have a level of intoxicating "dope" in him. For those of you that are slandering the man, you should choke yourself. the cops tried to make him out to be the bad guy, when he didn't do anything wrong. (So if someone has to take pain meds, hes a dope addict? That logic is idiotic.)
Las Vegas has the worst dirty cops in the USA, arrogants that their only purpose it's to give tickets for no reason and to kill people.
@Pete Garrett: I have talked about what Chris Yant did when he shot the unarmed African American during a raid in based on false information. Yant even admitted he falsified information on the search warrant.
@John Waldrip: So what does that have to do with this case?
The Vegas DA and Sheriff were counting on public ignorance like many of the posters on here to take their bait! Many of you are as ignorant as they were hoping! It takes the attention away from THEM!
Why try to investigate the VICTIMS neighbors, personal and company e-mails, several ex-gf's, and medical records in an effect to find some dirt and mischaractorize it? That's right... Erik wasn't on "DOPE" he didn't have a "DRUG HABIT", you show your ignorance with statements like this.
Erik was a chronic pain patient! Sure his opioid medications levels were high enough to possibly kill a normal person... HE WASN'T A NORMAL PERSON! It's called TOLERANCE! If any of you had a friends or family members that rely on pain centers or pain specialists for years of treatment for a chronic pain condition, you would know that tolerance increases every 6 months and dosages need titrated (medical term for increasing dosage) ... 100% of pain center patients that have been receiving opioid medication treatments for more than a year or two would injury or kill a "normal" person with "no tolerance"... Erik's doctors tried to describe this. Many medications work this way like Anti-Depressants, ADHD medications, Sleep Aids, Anxiety medications, etc -- patients that have been on these medications for years would ALSO KILL "A NORMAL PERSON".
But the Vegas DA and Sheriff are counting on many of you to take the bait when he screams ignorant phrases like "lethal dosage". Erik received MS Contin (morphine sulfate); schedule 2 and Hydrocodone; schedule 3. Patients are supposed to manager their short-acting opioid (Hydrocodone) when pain levels increase (AKA break through pain) while taking their long-acting opioid (MS Contin) around the clock (taken the same often once every 12 hours). This is known as PAIN MANAGEMENT... lets all say it together now!
Now, because patients like Erik must learn to manage their pain levels with different medications based upon their doctors instructions, at times they can MAKE AN HONEST MISTAKE in an attempt to relieve their pain, that won't seem to go away. Though his Hydrocodone was written as PRN (As needed for pain), it may have been a bit too much taken in to account his current engery levels, the amount of food in his stomach, etc. He wasn't on ANY ILLEGAL INTOXICANTS!
As for the ignorant comment, "why was he carrying two guns"... why do people like sports? or cars? ... maybe because it's his right!
Bottom line, Erik Scott didn't deserve 7 bullets! As for Erik's pain levels, no one can judge another persons pain -- he went through a number of surgeries. But if so many people on here are experts enough to judge his condition... keep in mind what him and his loved ones are going through. Karma...
John Waldrip,
Who is "Chris Yant?"
The officer's name is Brian Yant....This is the same type of uninformed commentary that we see from SummerlinCC at each of their posts...Not knowing the facts but still pretending to know the truth!
PLEASE GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT!
saltydawg (Pete Garrett):
----QUOTE FROM SaltyDawg (Pete Garrett):------
if this had happen in some ghetto supermarket in LV would any of us still be talking about this incident. The answer is clearly no. The only reason why we are still commenting about
Erik Scott's unfortunate death is because he was an educated upper-class guy whose parents have money and connections and who think the drug reports are flawed.
----END QUOTE----
Why not show your ignorance a little more... His name was Trevon Cole, unarmed 21 year-old African-American father and husband, killed by Vegas Metro after serving a search warrant for marijuana that had "bad information" . Trevon Cole was killed in the bathroom of his apartment. The Scott family spent tens-of-thousands of dollars by taking the numerous billboards down of their son Erik around Las Vegas, for two weeks to put up an advertisement for Trevon. They also gave legal resources to the Cole family because they couldn't afford it.
As for the "drug records" ... no one disputes any records. As stated above, everyone understands that his opioid levels were normal range for life-long pain patient given medication titration.
SaltyDawg... chalk another one up to your ignorance! I'm glad you take such comfort in the Scott family's pain.
Oh yeah... and the Las Vegas County Commissioner is moving to change the Las Vegas Inquest process after watching the results of this inquest:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/sep...
Hey, Pete, I know you are not that stupid. Did you ever hear of "Pattern"??" Come on, Boy, I know you will never admit it, BUT LETS GET REAL,
SHALL WE??
I notice that Talkingman got real quiet one it was explained that a criminal civil rights action initiated by the department of justice is completely different than a civil lawsuit brought alleging civil rights violations (which is an ordinary civil suit). You think maybe he finally realized that the only thing that Bill Scott is after is to make a buck off his son's criminal acts? (since monetary damages is the only thing he can win in a civil suit)
Ah Alex2, *NOW* you want to discuss "patterns" huh? So I guess now you feel that all of Erik Scott's past history *IS* valid evidence in the case to show that he had a "pattern" of irrational violent behavior?
@DevilDawg: I see I did have the first name of the officer incorrect. However, what I discussed is true. Yant admitted to submitted falsified information to a judge in order to obtain a warrant. The Trevon Cole shooting is worse than the Erik Scott incident.
riotact & wendor: Don't count your "civil suit" before it's hatched. I think Bill Scott is looking for bigger game, though if the taxpayers of Las Vegas are dumb enough to sit still for the smear-fest put on by Metro and Metro's fanboys on the Internet, then they deserve to pay for the privilege.
I smell a federal grand jury in Metro's future...
LasVegas9 (John Waldrip) - that's to say nothing of the handcuffed kid the Metro gang backshot because he was "running away".
Justified!
Ya know, Munchies, I think it is very interesting that your posts have a sideways "V" mark. Sweetie, there is no such button on my computer. The mark usually indicates that someone sent you a message and you decided to print it. Maybe your killer cop father? Be careful, my boy, he just may kill you next!
All that is necessary for evil to win is for good people to do nothing. If you want to do something, if you really care and want to make our community better, here is a way to do it. Write a letter, make a phone call, and express your outrage. Send your letters to this man Thomas E. Perez Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division 950 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington DC 20530 phone(202)514-4609 fax:(202)514-0293 If you truly care and want to do something to get Metro under control, write to or fax Mr. Perez.
Just check out the website for the Department of Justice. How about the Minneapolis cop who is facing federal charges for beating up a kid? Yep, Attorney General. How about the deputy sheriff in Choctaw County OK who will spend 18 months in a federal prison for beating up some inmates? Yep, right again, Attorney General. How about the two police officers in Tuba City Arizona, who have been indicted for violating Civil rights of a suspect, one for beating him, and his supervisor for not stopping it? Right again, the Attorney General. How about the two New Orleans cops who are facing life in a federal prison, for you guessed it, civil rights violations. One more time, Attorney General. How about the two Natchez Mississippi police officer who were indicted for civil rights violations for beating two people who had been arrested? Yep, Attorney General again. All of these have been announced since July 29, 2010. How do you think the Attorney General found out about those cases?
If you don't believe me follow the link.
http://www.justice.gov/crt/
I think officers should be accountable for going above the law. Officers think they can break the rules that the state (their employer) has in place for them. Officers are allowed to speed without lights and sirens, which is against their rules. Even with lights and sirens, they are only allowed to go 20mph over the posted speed. The rules their employer, (the state of nevada) has given them, are for public safety. This is only ONE of many rules given to the officers by the State of Nevada. Officers are there to enforce the laws NOT break them at will. They are not ABOVE the law! This inquest is proof that the system is majorly flawed. Officers know that they will not be held accountable at all for any misconduct. Any regular person that would have shot a citizen (armed or not) in the chest, THEN continued to shoot him in the back, would be charged for murder. They would say he went past the point of incapacitating, to murder.
Amazing. The family withholds all of their "witnesses" then claims the system failed. Gee, if a jury only hears one side I wonder what their verdict will be. It's obvious that the family of Erik Scott planned all along to file a lawsuit. It's obvious that his father is just using spin when he says "As we see it, the system failed miserably." I have no doubt that while this is a tragic event for them they have decided to try and use it to their financial advantage.
I take hydrocodone for chronic pain{MS} in quantities that would have staggered me just five years ago, so the supposedly lethal levels of morphine and Xanex found in Scott's body fail to impress me. And I carry a concealed weapon when I shop at my Costco,there are no signs prohibiting those of us with CWPs from being in the store. The odd fact of the who Costco thing is that when Scott paid his 50 bucks to join, the picture showed him clear-eyed and smiling; now if Scott was acting like a crazy man,or at all drugged, why did Costco let him join? If his first application was so messed up because he was so stoned, as I heard, where is that application? And why did they let him into Costco membership? I've been a Costco member for many years, there are cameras just about everywhere, both inside and outside the entrance, so there should be video of the incoherant Scott trying to make out the application; so, where is it? This may be a very expensive suit for Costco, at least it should be.
Tanner Chamberlain's mother had better go into hiding. Metro will get her to the inquest, then smear her and her dead son.
After "Justified!", then Metro's Internet fanboys will smear the grieving mother as "after the money!"
I find it highly offensive Bill Scott thinks "justice failed miserably". The jurors were able to hear witnesses who saw 2 different versions (surrendering his gun or taking it out to fire at police) and were shown images that the gun was still in its holster. Evidence was fairly presented and the decision was unanimous. I think the unanimous decision speaks for itself about this case.
Is it true Erik Scott had 5 bullet entries in his back?
Wow talkingman, your credibility just went to zero.
The inquest over the Tanner Chamberlain shooting happened about a year ago. The shooting was found to be justified because there was video evidence showing Tanner holding a knife to his mother's throat.
But your attempt to spin the story to support your point when you obviously had no idea of ANY of the details of the case tells us everything we needed to know about your "point".
KeolaGOP - "Is it true Erik Scott had 5 bullet entries in his back?"
Yes. It is true. But it is also irrelevant. When an armed man, already confronted by police, still pulls out his gun....he's a deadly threat that needs to be stopped. Whether the police are in front of him, behind him, or both has nothing to do with the fact that at that point, he needs to be stopped by any of them that have the opportunity to do so.
wendor wrote: "Wow talkingman, your credibility just went to zero. The inquest over the Tanner Chamberlain shooting happened about a year ago. The shooting was found to be justified because there was video evidence showing Tanner holding a knife to his mother's throat."
I'll grant you the point, wendor, but in my defense, the stacks of Metro bodies all blend together after a while.
Maybe we'll end up with a candlelight vigil for every day of the year here in Vegas.
Brian Yant and Officer Mosher are ALL over that job!
"hermit
Since sexual assaults are numerous in Vegas and yes Metro has their own relatively new "SVU" because of all the assaults, I cannot believe Metro didn't respond. Did your friend in fact call the police?"
Yeah Det. Munch she did call gave them the attackers cell phone number and they still did nothing.
Thank you Las Vegas Sun for following this tragic incident. Thank you to everyone who has followed the inquest. To the commenters, a general suggestion, please remember that we are discussing the death of a man and also the effect that death had on the officers who killed him and the Costco employees and the other witnesses. For the Scott family and friends, and all of the other parties, including the police, I'm sure this has been a nightmare of nightmares. I'm sure everyone involved wish that things had turned out differently. A suggestion, stick to the facts without disparaging or insulting the people involved. We all have different experiences. Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean that they are evil or sub-human. It is always good to remember the saying, "There, but for the grace of God, go I."
FACTS:
Erik Scott ILLEGALLY carried multiple firearms into a private business where firearms are PROHIBITED.
Erik Scott's actions endangered the lives of Costco's customers and employees.
Erik Scott's actions resulted in Costco having to evacuate and close its store resulting in a serious loss of income to the store as well as loss of pay for its employees.
Erik Scott's family is suing Costco? Erik's Scott's family should be thankful that Costco doesn't sue Scott's estate for loss of income.
So we know why the family dragged this all through the dirt, they are going to sue Costco.
They must be hoping for a settlement, they sure don't have much of a case from what has been presented.
I would suggest you let the poor guy rest in peace, but you are going to drag him through this all again.
What a bunch of horse patooties. So the actual complaint is that he played "Simon Says" with one of his guns, but hadn't played "Simon Says" with the other one? Or, more accurately, that he had played Simon Says with ALL of his guns (seven gun registrations in his wallet), but just hadn't played the RIGHT TYPE of Simon Says (adding it to his CCW) with one of them?
And we are to presume that the cops were immediately aware of this (without looking in his wallet) and therefore were justified in punching him full of holes, whereas otherwise they might not have been?
If that sort of chickenfeed paperwork "violation" is a FELONY in Nevada, Nevada needs to start tarring and feathering a whole lot of legislators.
1. Okay, there is something in law called "a reasonable man" concept. Can you honestly tell me that five rounds in the back are something that a reasonable man would do because I have to cry foul. To say that it is within the police rules of engagement is just as foul. I have lived under ROE and I have never heard of any ROE that liberal even in a combat zone.
2. COSCO video evidence disappearing? Hello! Their insurance is not valid without backup systems. You can't tell me that a company as large as COSTCO doesn't have that redundancy built in. You know that at least one of the systems had to have been manipulated. Did I cry foul yet? FOUL!
3. The levels of drugs in his system are irrelevant since they appear to be drugs that are not stimulants. Those drugs should have made him dopey - I question the drug test just on those grounds because the symptoms are wrong. Yeah - you know it: FOUL!
4. I think that everyone touched on the other stuff like the validity of the DA prosecuting their own people, the background of the people involved, and differing witness statements. It is my opinion that this was a criminal act and the police are being allowed to escape appropriate punishment. Unfortunately the way that the law is presently written, there is nothing that can be done. The solution is to develop a police training system that is more like the ones in other places in the world - a system that requires 1-4 years of training instead of an eight week academy. We need a system makes sure that there is sufficient training to avoid situations like this and one that weeds out police cadets that ere potential problems. Germany requires two years of school followed by a two year internship. Think about it - if one of our soldiers did this in Iraq right now, he would fry. That is the real combat zone - not the front of COSTCO.
Jay Havens wrote: "By the way, he had his hand on his holster, NOT ON THE GUN and was holding the HOLSTER IN SUCH A WAY it could have never presented a threat to the COPS."
You NEVER put your hands near your weapon when confronted by the police....NOT EVER.
I can easily, in under .7 seconds, clear my holster and fire. SO YOU DON'T TOUCH IT. It is tragic, but he picked the wrong time to screw-up. The cops get to go home too.
"This was just murder by COP - plain and simple..they are simply rationalizing their murderous conduct"
It's a pity that there are citizens like you who have no idea what you are talking about, yet call it murder.
"Clear Criminal Civil Rights Violation."
Very unfortunate violation of common sense. Those cops do not know if he is about to spray bullets. Sure, his CV sounds okay, but did the cops know that? When you are told by a cop not to move and you decide to present a gun, the cop has no time to think. If the man had shot six people dead as the cops filled him with bullets, you'd be asking why the cops didn't shoot when they saw the gun he should never have presented.