Erik Scott was a West Point graduate who went on to serve honorably in the Army, get his MBA from Duke and establish a lucrative career in real estate and as a sales rep for a medical device company. He was 38 years old when he was gunned down in portico of a Las Vegas area Costco store by officers from the Las Vegas Metro Police Department. While it was 7 bullets from the only people we�re supposed to trust with guns that snuffed out Erik Scott�s life, what really killed him was an irrational fear of firearms � hoplophobia.

Scott and his girlfriend had been shopping in the Costco, but had been asked to leave when an employee spotted Scott�s lawfully carried handgun. Scott had inadvertently exposed the gun when he squatted down to inspect some merchandise. He informed the employee that he was legally carrying the gun and was in possession of a valid Nevada concealed weapons permit, but was informed that Costco has a policy against carrying firearms in their stores.

A brief argument ensued, some raised voices and obvious frustration on Scott�s part, but witnesses said it didn�t seem like a big deal. They saw nothing particularly threatening about the incident or the clean-cut, good looking young man. The store manager who had spoken with Scott seemed satisfied by Scott�s reassurance that he was a legal firearm carrier and would be finished with his shopping in a few minutes. But a store Loss Prevention Officer called the police and reported that an armed man was behaving erratically in the store.

That report, based on irrational fear, and perhaps some personal envy, triggered events which quickly spiraled out of control. It seems that the fear factor was taken up a notch with each description of the story to the point that responding officers believed they were going into a violent hostage situation with a heavily armed and dangerous Green Beret.

Las Vegas MPD responded with a city-wide alert, street closures, helicopter support and deployment of a Mobile Command Center. The first officers on the scene arrived as Costco employees were following telephone instructions from the police to calmly evacuate the store.

As Scott and his girlfriend fell in with other patrons flowing out of the exit door, the Loss Prevention Officer who started the whole mess pointed toward Scott and a police officer at the door suddenly began yelling �Stop! I said Stop! Drop the gun! Get on the ground! Get on the ground!�

He fired these conflicting commands in quick succession giving Scott no opportunity to comply with any of them and then fired two rounds at Scott�s chest. As the officer began yelling and Scott realized he was the subject of the commands, he turned, lifting his hands, and apparently tried to follow the legal requirement to immediately inform an officer that he was an armed weapons permit holder, but he didn�t have time.

The officer�s frantic orders lasted for a slow count of 3 and were immediately followed by the two gunshots, a momentary pause, and a volley of several more shots. There was no pause or hesitation between the commands and the shots. The first round struck Erik Scott in the heart, the second hit his right thigh. As he collapsed to the ground, two other officers fired 5 more shots into his back. Numerous witnesses reported that they saw Scott turn and declare that he was a permit holder. Many said they could see both of his hands and that he made no threatening move. All agreed that the only gun they saw was the one in Scott�s waistband on his right hip.

Other witnesses reported that they saw Scott�s body removed by EMTs and saw nothing on the ground except blood and a cell phone, or sun glasses. EMTs reported that they removed Scott�s gun and holster from the waistband of his jeans in the ambulance and that they saw no other gun, yet, after police broke into Scott�s apartment and confiscated the firearms there, the story came out that Scott was carrying two guns that day.

A picture of the second gun, on the ground near a cell phone, after the blood on the pavement had been cleaned up, is the �proof� that Scott had two guns and pulled one on MPD officers. The store�s video surveillance system inexplicably malfunctioned for the several seconds of the shooting.

A coroner�s inquest concluded that the shooting was justified, just as a similar inquest had concluded that the gunning down of an unarmed, small-time pot dealer in his apartment a short time before the Scott shooting was ruled to be justified. Just as such coroner�s inquests have concluded that officer involved shootings were justified in 199 out of 200 incidents since 1976.

Erik Scott�s family has strongly contested the conclusions of the coroner�s inquest and the entire inquest process. They succeeded in getting some changes made to that process, but those changes have been held up by suits from the police union.

The Scott�s filed a wrongful death suit in federal court, but recently dropped that effort, convinced that they had no hope of winning with the system stacked against them.

Erik Scott�s father, a former Air Force flight test engineer and writer for the prestigious aerospace magazine Aviation Week & Space Technology, has painted a sympathetic, fictionalized portrait of Erik and the events of that day as part of a new novel he is offering in serialized form at ThePermit.blogspot.com in hopes of maintaining awareness of Erik�s tragic death and bringing attention to corruption within the justice system and government of Las Vegas.

The police have a difficult job. They are put in positions and asked to do things that most of us would run away from, but authority and power must be tempered with responsibility and accountability. For decades lawmakers and courts have built up walls of protection around police and other government workers. It is critical that these public servants be protected from frivolous suits and baseless harassment, but they must be held accountable for their actions and investigations into their activities must be beyond reproach. That is not the case currently.

When one person�s irrational fear of a peacefully armed man can result in that man being gunned down by police with no consequences for anyone except the victim and his friends and family, something is terribly, terribly wrong. Hoplophobia killed Erik Scott and a corrupt system allowed his accusers and executioners get away with it.

This was a horrible incident. One that should never be forgotten, but it's a bit disingenuous to post the story without noting that it occurred two years ago.

It would be interesting to know what has happened to the LEOs involved in this. Do you happen to have that info?

Nothing actually ended happening to the officers as a result of the shooting. The lawsuit even got dismissed. But in an unrelated case one of the 3 officers is in serious trouble:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/may/13/officer-involved-erik-scott-shooting-indicted-gun-/

Yes it happened two years ago and the family is trying to get justice for their son and that is why it is in the news today.

Good luck in trying to get justice from the state and I don't mean Nevada.

I can't find anything about this story. Is the family suing Costco now or something to that effect ?

That's a shame ........

Horrible tragedy. I need to contact Costco and see if this is still thier policy and if it is, will need to cancel my membership there.

Sickening tragedy.

When the police have this sort of massive apparatus designed essentially for waging war against Americans within our national borders, they are damned sure going to be eager to put it into action at every possible opportunity. Leaves little doubt we're living in a police state.

The cops here have a rule. If it happened more than a month ago, you can't report it here because it's old news. If, however, it happened less than a month ago, you can't report it here because it's too fresh, and insufficient time has been permitted for all the pertinent facts to come out. Make sure to consult these rules before you post your next story here about cops doing stuff most folks don't approve of.

Too bad there aren't anymore Anse Hatfield types left to deal out some good old fashioned country justice to the offending officers.

If I recall, this got a lot of bandwitdth when it happened.

Edited for folks living in reality.

Witness accounts paint a entirely different story. The agendized,predisposed disenfranchised like hawkie ignore these accounts for reasons other than being intellectually dishonest and lazy.
======================

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/sep/24/coroners-inquest-day3/

horseshitt!

OUCH, it really pisses ya off when people start shootin' ya.

Gunner

What pisses you off more is when other police take up for and make excuses for this kind of police abuse of power

Yes, I understand that too, really sucks.

Gunner

If I lived in a hostile state and liked my guns, I would pack up and move to Oklahoma, none finer iffin ya like your guns and dont wanna be shot by the Police.

Gunner

FWIW, Costco has tinfoil on sale.

Unfortunately he's the sole creator of his integrity issues here.

Yup, most of his posts are whoreshitt

The Dem way, shoot first then call you a lier.

What seems so contradictory in the whole LEO/civilian/badguy thing is that homeowner, for example, would be put on trial for killing an intruder who had a gun out & visible, threatening or not, but a LEO can just gun a civilian down because of what he THINKS the civilian MIGHT do and fully get away with it.

In this case, it appears to be unbelievably bad judgement & way over reaction on the part of the LEO's

The 3 LEO's involved can be thankful that it was not my son who was killed in this fiasco............seems like the facts are distorted by all involved.

But if there's a lesson here for the rest of us, it is to be sure that your CCW is not exposed...............absent that, this incident might not have happened.

MM

You obviously didn't read the eyewitness accounts.

a bunch of blithering horseschitt from the usual suspects.

u guys got anything better to do than stir the schit pot?

Silly man, don't you know that the witnesses are all part of the conspiracy too........?

yeah silly man

the dead man would be guilty of trespass in missouri

It was the mans fault for obtaining a conceal carry permit to protect himself and his family , to bad it didn't help him against the Law Enforcement Ninja's

I usually shoot people for saying that...........

thats right we're all pricks

not u bonehead, the other bonehead esquire bob from Virgina

The guy is drunk, on pills,and carrying a gun making a dangerous fool of himself. So,tell me again how he was protecting himself and his family.

RISJR; I did; but this way there's no reason to stop the crucifixion. If you weren't a lawyer you'd find it easier to go along with mob mentality, and your life would be much simpler.

you said it not me

saved u the effort

thank you

i try to help the challenged when possible

Hey you two, I'm the real prick here

Gunner

i think not

Plodding through life basing opinions on preconceived assumptions and a total disregard for the facts must be a comfortable place to mwallow for the lazy and woefully ignorant. Prime example of the "ignorance is bliss" theory.

Scuse me Son, I forgot, Imma baby powdered something or other

Gunner

==============

Finally...a man who knows his facts!

LOL, and also know a dude from out Virginny way the has the lowdown on good smoke.

Gunner

Great company can even make a average cigar taste good. Well,good bourbon helps,too!

Hatari Hooch Main, I'm tellin' ya it was the HOOCH. LOL

Gunner

Now you've gone to far. I'm sending my personally owned drone to your house this afternoon.........say around 3 ish ?

Ah, yes. Another story of police misconduct.
I don't see who wrote the story. I don't see what the response by the cops was, and, above all, I don't see what the grounds were for dismissing the case. Considering the highly biased source, I'm very suspicious as to just what happend here. The fact that this is a an old case, which the poster decided to post makes me even more suspicious as to just what really happend. E

Perfect, Ill be out floatin' in the cement pond ona bic blue airmattress, uh..wouldja tell the drone not to take any pics of Wifey in her stringer suit?

Gunner

Hell gunner i want to see the photos of the wife swimming in the raw. Got to go mow the yard and you law enforcement type don't forget to tie down your holsters for the quick draw, you might run into a guy like the one in the article shopping at Walmart.

Hummm, maybe 2:30 then.

don't start making sense....takes away from the anti-le atmosphere that a sad few have created on this site

LOL

Gunner

I agree. Quoting your sources is day one chit. I'm suspicious as well.

I take it most of you guys don't think it was a good shoot?

It's all about service

From the link posted by RISJR on the first page.


5:24 p.m.

The inquest has adjourned for the day. Proceedings will begin again at 8 a.m. Saturday.

The last witness to testify today was Barbara Fee, who was waiting in line with her granddaughter when they were told to evacuate the store.

Her granddaughter pointed out that there was an officer with a gun by the door.

Fee said she heard the officer yelling at Scott to get down, but he didn't.

She saw Scott reach for something on his side and then bring his right hand up and point something directly at the officer.

Fee said she couldn�t tell what was in Scott�s hand, but his hand was pointed, �directly at the cop.�

The officer fired, and she looked away while pushing her granddaughter behind her, Fee said.

When she looked back, she saw Scott face-down on the ground and a black object on the ground.

After the shots were fired, she heard a woman screaming, �You shot him, you killed him.�

Fee said she was worried Scott was going to shoot the officer.

�I was hoping he wasn�t going to shoot the cop, but with a gesture like that I thought somebody was going to get shot,� she said.

She told police after the shooting that she didn�t think the officer had any option to shoot Scott.

�Thank God the officer was faster,� she said in her statement to police.

5:15 p.m.

Christopher Villareale was shopping at Costco the day of the shooting and also is a concealed weapon permit holder.

Villareale said he was one of the last people to leave the store and wasn't far from Scott when he was shot.

He testified that an officer yelled at Scott to get on the ground, �And Mr. Scott is just standing there not doing anything.�

Scott then lifted his shirt with his left hand and someone yelled �no, no,� Villareale said.

Scott then pulled his right arm forward with a gun in his hand, he said.

Villareale said it appeared to him that Scott was holding the gun by the handle, but he couldn't tell if the gun was in a holster since the gun was black.

The officer shot Scott, who turned, dropped the gun, was shot again, then fell to the ground.

Scott�s girlfriend yelled before the shooting that Scott was in the military, and once shots were fired, she became hysterical, Villareale said.

Villareale said he was involved in an incident previously in which he had to pull a gun on somebody, then deal with police when they arrived, so he has safely disarmed with a police officer present.

But Scott didn't respond in a similar and appropriate way, he said.

"He was acting in a way that I would think was not consistent with what would be the appropriate way to act in that situation," Villareale said.

He said he knew the officer thought someone could be harmed during the situation.

"I thought he did the right thing shooting him," Villareale said.

When asked during a question from an interested party, Villareale said it didn't look like Scott was going to hand the gun to the police, but he also didn't point the gun at the officer.

When shown a photo of the gun on the ground outside the store, Villareale said it was the same gun that Scott dropped.

4:44 p.m.

Arlene Houghton, another Costco cashier, also testified she saw Scott and his girlfriend while they were entering the store.

She said they walked behind her register, coming from the membership desk, when Scott tripped and fell on the belt by the register, even though there was nothing to trip over.

His girlfriend grabbed Scott and propped him up on the shopping cart for support, Houghton said.

Scott looked up at Houghton and said �I guess I really am ('messed') up,� Houghton said, adding that his eyes were glossy.

About an hour later, Houghton said she was near the cash registers helping to evacuate customers when she heard gunshots.

She went toward the entrance and saw a police officer holding a gun so she stayed inside the store, she said.

4:24 p.m.

John Nikitas, a Costco cashier, said he saw Erik Scott and a woman walk through the store. He heard Scott say to the woman that he shouldn�t have been in the store while he was drunk, Nikitas said.

He saw Scott knock a �closed� sign off a counter when he walked by, he said.

After being told to evacuate the store, Nikitas said he saw police officers outside.

The officers told Scott to put his hands up and get on the ground, Nikitas said. He said Scott did neither.

He was 40 to 45 feet away when Scott left the building, but the officers were loud so he was able to hear them, he said. Another employee dropped to the ground after hearing the officer, he said.

Scott moved his hand toward his right side and the officers fired at him, he said.

Nikitas said the woman with Scott started screaming after shots were fired. He didn't see a gun fall from Scott's body, but he saw it on the ground later, he said.

3:27 p.m.

Wentworth Eatherton, the husband of the previous witness, Annette, said he called into a public radio program recently when he heard Scott�s father and attorney saying things about the shooting that he said weren't true.

Eatherton said they claimed the police didn't need to shoot Scott and that the police were only 2 feet away, but that wasn�t true, he said.

Eatherton recalled words he heard Scott say while in the aisle at Costco.

"As we went by, Annette and I heard him say, 'well, I can do this in Texas.'" He and his wife talked about what that could mean as they walked down the sporting goods aisle and headed for the lettuce.

Wentworth said he told his wife that the only thing he could think of was that it was a reference to a gun.

"He was acting like he was irritated about the conversation (with the Costco employee)," he said.

Wentworth said that inside the store, he didn't see if Scott had a gun on him.

Eatherton said outside the store they heard an officer tell Scott �don�t touch it,� and �get on the ground.�

He saw Scott move his hand on his right side, then the officer shot him.

After he was shot, he saw a gun in a �gun rug� fall from Scott�s right side and slide about 4 feet in front of him.

He said he later noticed the gun was gone.

Eatherton said the gun in a holster shown to him in a photo by Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent wasn't the gun he saw.

2:58 p.m.

Las Vegas resident Annette Eatherton was shopping at Costco when she saw Scott in the store and then again outside when he was shot.

Eatherton said she and her husband saw Scott talking to another man in the store where Scott was trying to fit bottles into a bag.

After they were told to evacuate, they went to the front of the store and saw Scott and a police officer.

The officer told Scott to get down on the ground, but Scott moved his hand from the front of him toward his right hip, Eatherton said.

The officer yelled �don�t do that,� but Scott continued to move toward his hip, she said.

The officer then shot Scott, she said. Scott turned after he was shot and fell.

The officer was calm and professional, but was stern, she said.

Scott�s gun, in its holster, fell and slid on the ground toward the officer after Scott was shot, Eatherton said. She heard a woman with Scott screaming after he had been shot.

2:34 p.m.

The assistant store manager who confronted Erik Scott before Scott was shot testified that the man was acting strangely, his eyes were glossed over and �he did not seem right.�

Vince Lopez was called over to talk to Scott by Shai Lierley, a loss prevention supervisor who testified Thursday. On his way to talk to Scott, an older couple approached him and told him they were concerned about a man, who was Scott.

Lopez said he approached Scott and asked him what he was doing. Scott said he was trying to get water bottles to fit in a bag, but Lopez said Scott was trying the same type of bottles over and over again, even though they obviously would not fit, and he had opened multiple packages.

Lierley pointed out that Scott had a gun and Lopez backed off before approaching again to tell Scott that Costco does not allow guns since it is private club and not open to the public, he said.

Scott became irritated when Lopez told him about the policy, Lopez said. Scott became agitated and began using foul language, he said.

That is when he noticed that Scott�s eyes were glazed over.

Scott held his hands in the shape of a gun and pointed them at Lopez�s head, saying that if someone came in and held a gun to his head that he would take care of it, Lopez said.

Lopez said he was concerned and left Scott alone because he was worried about Scott�s actions.

By then, Lierley was on the phone with 911 and told Lopez to go to the front of the store. The officer told Lopez to not let anyone else in the building and to evacuate the people inside.

Lopez said he then left to help the evacuation and was in the back of the store when he heard gunshots.

In a question submitted by an interested party, Lopez was asked if he felt threatened by Scott.

�He was acting in a very threatening manner when I was talking to him, yes,� Lopez said.

Lopez testified this wasn't the first time the video system had malfunctioned.

"We have had problems off and on with our system," he said.

In fact, it has malfunctioned recently.

"It hasn't worked the past few days -- we just got it back up and running yesterday," he said.

He said he knew of some Costco stores that had no video surveillance at all.

"The security cameras aren't something that we rely on to do our day-to-day business," he said.

Lopez said a number of people would have access to the video equipment before it was taken to see if the video could be recovered, but the managers were told not to touch it.

1:57 p.m.

The coroner�s inquest has resumed after an hour lunch break.

The district attorney is playing the recording of an interview with another Costco customer who lives outside the United States.

Caroline Lagerholm, from Sweden, was visiting when she was at the store and saw police at Costco.

She said she saw a man with his shirt up and a gun at his waist.

Lagerholm said she heard the police officer tell the man to put the gun down, but she saw the man reaching for the gun.

She then turned to run when she heard gunshots, but she didn't know who fired.

Lagerholm said the man was moving kind of slowly as she watched him from near a pillar outside a store. She thought he could have been on drugs, and told the officer the man was "kind of weird-acting."

She said she thought she heard the officer give the man commands.

"I think he said, 'put the gun down, put the gun down.'"

12:42 p.m.

Lisa Holzgruber, a foreign exchange student, was at Costco when she was told by an employee to evacuate.

Holzgruber did not appear at the inquest since she is out of the country, but the district attorney played a recording of an interview with her conducted by police the day of the shooting.

She was outside the store when she saw a police officer and a man near the store's entrance. The man lifted his shirt and she saw a gun in his waistband, Holzgruber said.

The man was �going for the gun with his hand,� she said.

She then heard gunshots and started to run.

Holzgruber said she couldn�t tell what the man was doing; he may have been drawing his gun or maybe he was going to give the gun to the officer, she said.

She said she thinks she heard the officer tell the man to drop the gun, but she wasn't sure.

The inquest is now adjourned an hour for lunch.

12:30 p.m.

Javier Torres, a Costco manager, said he saw Scott on his hands and knees in an aisle at the store trying to put bottles into a cooler.

But before he could approach Scott, he says Scott turned and asked him if Costco sold the holders for the bottles. Torres told him no, and Scott seemed a little irritated, Torres said.

Torres said he noticed other store employees were watching Scott, so he left.

�He wasn�t acting normal,� Torres said. Scott seemed agitated, maybe nervous, and possibly impaired.

"He seemed like he was on drugs to me," he said. "I'm not sure what kind of drugs."

Torres later heard instructions to evacuate the store. He was going toward the front of the store when he heard the gunshots, but he didn't see the shooting.

Torres said he didn't think the evacuation was because of Scott; he figured it was because of a bomb threat or something else. Torres said Scott didn't seem violent and he didn't see a gun.

12:10 p.m.

Jerome Dwight Arcano, a Costco employee, testified that he saw Scott in an aisle at the store throwing things on the ground and trying to tear a box.

�He was acting unusual,� and he seemed paranoid, pacing the aisle like he was worried about someone watching him, Arcano said.

He also said Scott had a red mark on his neck and he thought Scott might be on drugs.

Arcano reported what he saw to management and left the area, he said.

He later heard the store was being evacuated. Arcano said he and other employees and customers ran to the back of the store because they didn't know what was happening.

Javier Torres, a manager at Costco, began testifying after Arcano.

11:47 a.m.

Linda Bem, the Costco employee who helped Scott sign up for a Costco membership earlier that day, is testifying.

Bem said Scott had a hard time understanding her instructions and filling out the proper forms.

Scott�s thought process seemed not to be working correctly, she said. Scott was able to have a conversation, but his responses were not as quick as they should have been, she testified.

His handwriting was illegible and he was writing things in the wrong places, Bem said. Scott then had his girlfriend fill out the form for him and she had no problems.

Scott seemed agitated, but wasn't violent, Bem said. She noticed Scott�s knuckles were bleeding.

Bem reported the odd incident to her supervisor.

�I sensed something was terribly wrong,� she said. �He was confused, his thought processes were very, very slow ... Quite frankly, I was worried about him.�

Bem later evacuated the store and heard shots, but didn't see the shooting.

11:40 a.m.

In a recorded interview, Scott�s girlfriend, Samantha Sterner, describes what happened at Costco on July 10.

Sterner said she saw Scott talking to a store employee, but �he was not irritated. The Costco employee did not seem irritated. Neither one of them was hostile.�

She said neither one of them threw anything in the store. Scott went to get another shopping cart, then an employee told her to evacuate, she said.

Scott returned and they agreed to walk out to the car and drop off the gun. She said while they were walking out of the store, they saw a police officer.

�He immediately draws his weapon, immediately, without hesitation,� Sterner said in the recording.

The officers told Scott to get on the ground, she said. Scott put his hands above his head, tried to tell the officer he was going to disarm and then slowly moved his right hand down to the gun, Sterner said.

Sterner said she kept screaming at the officer: �'Do not shoot, he�s a concealed weapons holder, he�s a military officer, do not shoot.'�

�I said it a million times,� she said.

She said the officer shot Scott once, then Scott started to fall back before the officer shot him twice more. She said she didn't see any other officers fire.

Sterner said in the recording she thinks the officer would have fired no matter what Scott did.

�He was extremely aggressive from the get-go,� she said. �I just think this officer was out of line.�

Sterner also said Scott never held the gun by the handle and it never came out of the holster, but he did hold the front of the gun to try to disarm.

11:03 a.m.

Falkner said he tried to contact Scott�s girlfriend, Samantha Sterner, but the phone number he had for her was not working. He left a subpoena with a man who said he was her brother at an address he found for her.

Falkner then said he contacted family attorney Ross Goodman, who said he wasn't sure if she would appear.

Since she never was found, she wasn't legally served with a subpoena to appear.

Falkner said he also ran into Goodman at the courthouse and asked him to provide a list of witnesses, but Goodman has not done so, Falkner said.

Goodman has told the media he has other witnesses to the shooting who haven't been contacted by the district attorney�s office.

The attorneys are now playing a recording of an interview done with Sterner on the day of the shooting.

�He carries a gun everywhere he goes. This has never happened before,� Sterner said in the recording after describing being asked to evacuate the store by a Costco employee.

10:46 a.m.

Erik Scott�s girlfriend was subpoenaed to appear at today's coroner's inquest, but has not done so, said William Falkner, an investigator in the district attorney's office.

Falkner had asked Ross Goodman, the Scott family attorney, if there were any other witnesses he wanted to testify.

Reports have indicated Goodman has 20 to 30 witnesses to testify, but he has not provided a list of them to the DA despite being asked in phone messages and in person.

The inquest is taking a 10-minute break.

10:27 a.m.

William Falkner, an investigator in the district attorney's office, is next to testify.

Mosher has finished answering questions from interested parties. About 200 questions were submitted for Mosher, many with multiple parts, but not all were asked by the judge, who said some had already been answered or weren't appropriate.

Mosher said he didn't expect Scott to walk out of the store. �We were in a standby mode waiting,� he said.

The officers were waiting for their sergeant and more officers to arrive before coming up with a plan to enter the store and make contact with Scott, possibly with a shield and some less-lethal weapons, Mosher said.

Mosher described the gun recovered at the scene as a Kimber 9mm, still in its holster. He said he believes the holster is manufactured by Uncle Mike's, and it is similar to one he owns for one of his guns.

The holster is made of cloth, he says. Although he personally hasn't tried it, he said he believes a person could slip their finger inside the holster and fire the gun without removing it from the holster.

A second firearm was found on Scott's body by medical personnel in the ambulance while he was being taken to UMC, Mosher said he later learned.

10:19 a.m.

When questioned about why he didn't use a nonlethal method to resolve the situation with Scott, Mosher said, "We're not trained to subdue people with a firearm with nonlethal means."

Asked if he ever used his crisis skills with Scott, Mosher said, �I would like to have done that and taken him into custody without this happening, but there was no chance to do that.�

The officer said he drew his weapon before reaching the store entrance.

Mosher said he knelt on Scott�s back to handcuff him. He didn't see a large amount of blood, but he did see bullet holes.

Most other people in the area got away quickly when they saw the officers with their guns drawn, Mosher said.

10:04 a.m.

One question from an interested party -- which includes Erik Scott's family and Ross Goodman, the family's attorney -- asked Officer William Mosher if it was typical for an officer to pull his weapon several hundred times in a few years. Mosher said it is normal for a Las Vegas officer to pull his weapon frequently.

Asked what makes someone a deadly threat, Mosher said: �Their actions.�

But Scott was not a threat until he reached for his weapon, Mosher said.

�As soon as he reached for it, he was a deadly threat,� he said.

Mosher said he followed procedure to handcuff Scott after he was shot, but did not follow procedure to search the body because he felt Scott was already deceased and he did not want to move the body. He did not think Scott would be taken to the hospital, he said.

He also said there were only a few officers at Costco to deal with a large crowd of people that had gathered and what had become an active crime scene. He took charge as senior officer to assign other officers to put up crime scene tape and move Scott�s girlfriend, who was screaming, Mosher said.

9:43 a.m.

Under questioning, Mosher describes himself as a believer in the 2nd Amendment and says he is a member of the National Rifle Association.

"I think CCW is a great thing," he said.

However, Mosher said it is illegal in Nevada to carry a weapon when under the influence of drugs or alcohol, so police had an obligation to investigate the calls they received about Scott.

The officers had been told Scott might have been high and Mosher said he noticed the man�s bloodshot eyes.

Mosher testified that he didn't administer CPR to Scott after the shooting and he didn't see anyone else perform CPR.

He also said he had been told Scott refused to leave the business, but the main motivation for his response was because of the way he was acting in the store and the fact that he had a weapon.

9:22 a.m.

Metro Police Officer William Mosher, one of three officers who shot Erik Scott, said he is a member of Metro's crisis intervention team and has gone through extra training to deal with situations that might involve people with mental issues.

Normally he would try to talk to a suspect in an incident, Mosher said, but since Scott had a gun, he said that wasn't possible.

�With the details we had and the fact that he had a weapon, that�s not really the time to talk,� Mosher said.

He also said he only observed Scott�s behavior for about 30 seconds between the time Scott was pointed out to him and shots were fired.

Mosher, who is a Marine, said Scott, a West Point graduate, should have known how to safely surrender a weapon to an officer, but he didn't act in an appropriate way.

One of the written questions directed at Mosher asked if he felt any remorse for shooting and killing Erik Scott.

He responded: "Remorse? Absolutely."

8:50 a.m.

The coroner�s inquest into the shooting death of Erik Scott on July 10 outside a Summerlin Costco has started for the day.

Officer William Mosher, one of three Metro officers who shot Scott, has returned to the stand to answer questions submitted to Judge Tony Abbatangelo by interested parties.

8:42 a.m.

The coroner's inquest into the death of Erik Scott by Metro Police is running behind schedule this morning.

The jurors and judge entered the courtroom just before 8:40 a.m. The proceedings were to begin at 8 a.m., but at 8:30 a.m. court officials were testing audio in an overflow room. Inside the courtroom, officials with the district attorney's office and Scott family attorney Ross Goodman were waiting before the arrival of the judge and jury.

Officer William Mosher�s testimony is scheduled to resume this morning with questions from interested parties, which includes the Erik Scott family and Goodman. Mosher is one of the three officers who fired his weapon at Scott, killing him.

Scott was killed July 10 at the Summerlin Costco.

Also, it's been learned that an agenda item has been filed with the Clark County Commission regarding the inquest process. Commissioner Steve Sisolak filed the item for the board's Oct. 5 meeting.

Sisolak's request says the item is "to discuss and make recommendations regarding the Coroner's Inquest Process, Clark County Code 2.12.080. This discussion is meant to include possible changes to said code, the possible formation of an advisory committee to make recommendations in this regard and/or the presentation of various processes that are currently in place in other jurisdictions, and other areas or issues related to the coroners inquest process which may be presented. This item is meant for discussion purposes, staff direction and possible action."

The Scott family, through its attorney, responded by releasing a statement at 6:43 a.m. today.

"We are very excited with the request by Commissioner Sisolak to place this item on the October 5th agenda to begin the discussions and consider the recommendations for change to the Coroner's Inquest Process. The process we have experienced over the last two days limit's our ability to find the truth by properly questioning witnesses regarding their testimony. We do not have the knowledge of their recorded statements. Challenging the last few day's testimony with facts that we know to be true is not possible given this process. We thank Commissioner Sisolak and the other Commissioners who will support this request. It is our hope that the Commission can find a place to give credit to our son Erik. His death then would not have been meaningless, but rather a catalyst for improving the Coroner's Inquest process for the community of Las Vegas."

That's not what I said. I merely pointed out that it should be noted that it didn't happen recently. I don't CARE that it's two years old, it SHOULD be brought up as something that shouldn't have happened, just wanted to note that it wasn't 'fresh' news.

Link

Here's the link to what I posted above. Shocking that there appears to be two sides to the story, I know.

I wonder why the family dropped their lawsuit? Maybe because multiple witnesses, including store managers, other CCW veterans, a tourist from Sweden and a foreign exchange student all paint the portrait of a drunk, argumentative guy who pointed his gun at the cops as he exited the store.

It is rather well know that the DA is not going to investigate any officer shooting in Las Vegas. In fact, in Las Vegas, the person DOA has always turned and pulled something, sometimes it is shinny. Amazingly las vegas criminal never learn as this is repeated each and every time. The local news paper is in the tank with the PD. Anyone who things that members of an industry which purposely mislead the public on a daily basis have suddenly become the gospel is foolish.
The local radio stations had lots of commentary which didn't support the official positions taken in the press. The simple fact is LVPD shoots first, and lots of it, then arranges the details. It's a story that goes back to Ralph Lamb, one of the last wild west sheriffs.
As a note, open carry is legal in Las vegas. The hysteria it creates is something else. The cops know it is legal, so the arrest citizens lawfully carrying and eventually charge disturbance of the peace, and provide a wall of molasses of paperwork to get your perfectly legal gun back.

It is a sad reality, especially in CA. Obtain a CCW, and you have a much higher chance of being shot by the police, than you ever had being shot by a criminal...how sad is that? There has to be a hundred times the ccw holders as there were fifteen years ago, sadly police education has not kept up.

Yep, it violates Campfire Cop Rule No. 1 (See my second post in this thread for Campfire Cop Rule No. 2).

I'll bet the folks here could have a field day designing "the rules" that govern your posts.

It's actually the hawkeye rule. Your ignoring of facts before spouting your repetitive moans and whines about LE have always been suspect. And,for good reason. A pre-disposed mindset coupled with a total disregard for facts is a bed you made. Don't blame others for you being forced to sleep in it.

We have folks open carry all the time but there's always a sheep dialing 911 saying a crazed gunman is walking the streets. I've had many encounters with peeps openly carrying and have yet to shoot anyone.

not a dig at you gunner. just talking aloud.

back from violating rights what did i miss ?

It was well documented that varying accounts existed; the paper ran with the version that suited their agenda.

RSIJR if you are so informed as you imply on the practice of The Las Vegas Review Journal and LVPD, please provide an account where the reporter state the officer involved shooting (doesn't that sound better than say, killer, which is the more accurate portrayal), where the officer involved shooting is suspicious. Just one will do.

HUH?

No way blue, all those folks were in on the cover up.

Yeah, those dang Swedes are known for being part of the international banking cartel-black helicopter crowd. Especially the Swedes who shop at Costco.

a cover up say it aint so....

damn swedes

I was refering to your statements; the hawkeye rule, ignoring of facts A pre-disposed mindset coupled with a total disregard for facts.

I only asked that you provide one example where the LVRJ, the newspapaer whom I'm suspecting your response to Hawkeye is predicated upon, one account where the LVRJ has published that an officer involved shooting was suspicious. Just one, so we know there is not a "ignoring of facts A pre-disposed mindset coupled with a total disregard for facts".

It is facts you were discussing, yes?

.

If you are packing heat and are confronted by a person that does not want you there , GET THE FCCK out of there . you cannot win , your carry permit is to protect yourself if you are being robbed. if you are in a store and the magament asks you to leave GO .do not argue. as he has already made up his mind about guns and you rubbing his face in the fact that you are legal will not change the facts.

finally some common sense

Yes.

L.W.

The last time this was brought up someone posted a link to a article that stated the fine citizen that got killed had enough pills in his system to start a pharmacy. Poor law abiding citizen.

Dink

This is such an outrageous incident. Basically, the cops murdered this man. And you know, I wouldn't say it was necessarily the result of a phobia of guns, but of an attitude that is epidemic in law enforcment that condones excessive force. Law enforcement should not have qualified immunity from suit in my opinion.

The article was from The Las Vegas Sun, jackwagon. The link's been posted twice.

Title of this thread should be changed to..." Drunk/high man points gun at cops and gets shot" ...

They don't have qualified immunity, jackwagon. Immunity from civil suits can be granted by a judge, they don't just HAVE it.

And the officers in this case weren't granted immunity, the case was dropped. And I know why.

Yes,facts as stated by a multitude of eyewitnesses,not some reporter's slant on thos eyewitness accounts. Please tell me you're kidding when you try to convince me to give credibiltiy to some dumb-schit reporter's slant of the witness accounts. The pathology report had the guy hammered and on Xanax and some other drug I can't now recall. Some eyewitnesses voiced immediate concern as to his health and stability.

Watching the pre-disposed,ignorers of facts crowd flailing as they try to rehabilitate their opening their mouths/inserting foot without knowing the facts or first engaging their brains is a most awesome,fun thing for a attorney to watch unfold. You guys complete me!

Now,quit your digging. Just admit you stepped on your dicks AGAIN and renew your Google searches for the next bad cop story. Major epic fail here.

Thanks for posting the rest of the story. Amazing how the few here always give a skewed side of the story instead of the whole story.

or

cops gun down man for illegally carrying a firearm and trespassing

or

[bleep] got whacked for being [bleep] idiot

==================

You're schizo,man!

Shhhhhhhh!

You are forbidden to discuss our plans for world domination! We have already cornered the market in potato bologna and lutefisk.

Break this rule of silence regarding the vast Swedish conspiracy and there WILL be consequences -- at the very least we will put fluoride in your water. Alternatively, we could activate our "sleeper" agents the pit bulls -- we activate one now and then just to rip somebody up and spread fear! We laugh every time somebody defends the pit bull breed -- fools! <insert evil laugh here>.

John (secret Swedish Banking and Pit Bull Cabal ID X2844u4721b)

Well said.

how about you send them female ski team members to bred a new dominate race with us po-po

This is, of course, true, but doesn't change the fact that the cops murdered this guy for, at worst, harmless trespass.

Or more idiot bait for the campfire azz holes to proclaim their faith to the anti gods.

spin it twat

Best post of the year.

=============

It's truly a very good thing that your school board tells you what you are permitted to teach and say in class. No surprise to me at all you chose a profession where poor,helpless kids are forced to listen to your cackling cluelessness.

So, if the individual was suffering from PTSS the police killing him is immediately justified; guess that settles it. To surmise, citizens should expect a death squad to attack if they're not properly functioning according to the police pre-determined norms.
This guy wasn't caught raping elderly ladies, pistol whipping store clerks, or committing random acts of violence. He was shopping in a store in complience with the law.

Is it lawful for a CCW holder to carry while under the influence od drugs/alcohol? I honestly don't know,so please fill me in. If not,then this guy apparently was not in compliance with the law. If he was suffering from PTSD or whatever,was he on medication for it? If so, should he have been carrying? How do these drugs affect peoples minds?

I agree that there have been many abuses of power by police over th years, but judging from the witnesses, I'm not sure this is one of them.Seems to me the officer did what he felt was necessary,and made the best decision he could in the few seconds he had.

You left out bobble-headed boob, doddering dolt, floundering flunky, lame-brained lump, meandering mental midget, nickering ninny, pusillanimous popinjay, sanctimonious scatterbrain, and unctuous underling.

Particularly when the pre-determined norms exclude pointing guns at the popo.

TRH,

Serious question...Do you have a response to the what the witnesses testified to?

A badge is not a license to kill; there was a mindset by all 3 LEO's to shoot the guy...........because they could; & they did, all 3 of them. There was no intention of doing anything else.

And they liked it & they will do it again.

There was never a chance the guy was going to get out of that situation alive. Not saying the guy who got killed was either right or very smart, but this was way over the line.

You can rationalize the outcome any way you like.

MM

I think we can all agree to a high standard of behavior while armed. What is not agreed is the high standard application to all parties. Unless one uses a flame thrower or just shoots on sight, there are very few methods of greater capacity to antagonize and escalate a situation than having a full body armored death squad surround an individual pointing weapons and shouting orders as a cursory perfunctory to take their life. Hard to imagine a more aggressive fashion of response. It doesn't take much to anticipate what a typical response would be.

Put yourself in the officers shoes for just a second. You respond to a call of a man who's reported to be acting "erratically" and the man is armed. You arrive and tell the man to halt/lay down/stop etc and he does not do what you asked, but instead, draws a weapon and points it at you. Would you shoot the man or wait for him to shoot you ?

How can you possibly hold this opinion after reading the account from multiple eyewitnesses? Unless you hate cops de facto, then you just ignore facts.

The guy was wasted on booze and pills (thereby negating his right to carry), and gave cops no option (since they are blamed by the public no matter what they do anyway). Good shoot.

Wow. I read this and was thinking... cops are getting to be better shots. the first two rounds made contact?
Amazing.
If this had been NY, 7 bystandards would have been hit.

BS. This death was due to a dangerous development in police culture in recent decades.

I used to co-facilitate a group therapy session for Vietnam War vets twenty some odd years ago at the V.A.. There was this one guy who had a terrible time of it. He was an Airborne infantryman at one of the worst blood baths in the Vietnam War, Hamburger Hill, and never got over it. He'd sleep with a revolver under his pillow, and came close to killing his wife a few times during night terrors. This guy would sometimes go out on the city streets in the middle of the night with his revolver in Fort Lauderdale and start shooting out street lights. Cops would be called on a man with a gun shooting in the streets. He never got plugged full of holes by a black clad tactical team. Always just got asked by regular uniformed cops to drop his gun, then got driven home to his wife. And this guy had a revolver in hand each time the cops arrived. Back then there weren't tactical cops looking to plug someone, all tactical-like.

Not saying that's the best way for cops to handle that situation, but it's an example that demonstrates that it's not us "civilians" who have a distorted view on the case in question about modern police overreaction. This sort of reaction is not something that's always been the typical police response to reports of a man with a gun. It's something new, and bodes very ill for our future as a nation.

I don't hate cops, but there's enough ambiguity to have some doubts that the guy was really pointing a gun at anyone.

When surrounded by 3 cops, all with guns drawn, why would anyone attempt to pull & use a gun?

I'm just saying that the LEO's were predisposed to kill him & that is exactly what they did...........& IMO, it likely could have been handled better than it obviously was.

Did you not read his GF's deposition...............totally conflicts with what others "think" they saw.

Naturally the LEO's are going to saw they saw a gun either in his hand or a move towards one............otherwise they'd be admitting guilt & a wrongful shoot.

I know enough LEO's & lived with 2 & I know everything coming out of their mouths is not gospel.

We weren't there & as such, none of us will ever know what really happened since we didn't see it ourselves.

MM

The cops aren't good witnesses because they've got skin in the game, but the GF's word is gospel. And let's just ignore the testimony of MULTIPLE unbiased witnesses.

MM News...Fair and Balanced

I think the cops probably were pre-disposed to shoot drunk people who pointed a gun at them.

Maybe it's because they're a death squad. Or maybe it's because they didn't want to get shot.

I've corresponded with Bill Scott (the father) several times regarding stories he's written in AW&ST. While the story is 2 years old, I know the pain he's still experiencing

This is exactly what I was going to say regarding to the Las Vegas PD. They do get away with murder there, and it has been that way as long as I can remember.

Lamb once joked to my dad that he can have anyone disposed of. It was a direct threat to my dad, who was defending someone the powers in LV wanted gone.

Prayers sent for the girlfriend and family.

Morphine. IIRC correctly the report stated the drugs very well themselves been fatal as they where in such high levels.

Shootings, both police and civilian, are not generally judged by the facts after the incident. Its the facts and beliefs before the incident that matter. Yes sometimes mistakes happen, but I promise you, if your ever involved in a shooting, you will want it that way too. Just imagine you shoot someone who pulls a gun on you, it turns out to be a realistic looking toy gun. That toy gun wasn't going to hurt you, but you didn't know that, you believed you were in serious jeopardy. The facts after the shooting say you shot someone who wasn't going to harm you. If the facts and beliefs before the shooting led you to believe you where going to die(or be seriously hurt, or whatever burden in your state), then you are justified in what you did.

I can understand the first POPO shooting for whatever reason,

but why did the other two POPO have to shoot the victim, while he was lying on the ground, with two bullets in him already?

Sounds like a lot of back peddling and "what ifs" going on by the anti's. I do feel for the families loss as no one deserves to lose a family member that young no matter what the circumstances.

The only lesson here for a reasonable man is to be faster and shoot straighter than a cop if the cop goes for his weapon.

Action is faster than reaction - - - - every time.

LOL, because shooting cops usually works out well in the end.

Bluedreaux,

The pointing of the gun at the LEO's seems to be somewhat open to question.

Are you a LEO?

MM

u point a gun at me and your a dead or hurting mother [bleep] and thats the truth.

So are you a LEO?

MM

Yeah, that generally goes for all of us.

MM

What has an innocent man got to lose?

With the mentality displayed on this forum,and seeing the aftermath of police actions once guns are drawn,your chances of survival are pretty slim if the cops believe, or know , that you are armed.

All your kids are going to remember is that you were shot down like a coward and then[if it suits them] your body is shot full of dope and cops can always find "friendly" witnesses.Video cameras malfunction.

Cover up has become an art form.

It's funny how ,on memorial day,some cops on here are so grateful to military veterans.But when a SWAT team breaks in and kills a former Marine in his home,or this veteran gets shot for doing NOTHING,they had it coming.....because cops are the HEROES.

You "defenders of the cops,no matter what" on this forum have earned your reputation.

This thread has just enhanced it.

And Keith,my friend,don't judge all cops by yourself or all citizens by TRH when it comes to "action vs. reaction".

If a man goes to work each morning focused on getting back home safely,he has the wrong attitude for a fight.

The unbiased witnesses who watched everything happen seemed to think he pointed a gun at the cop. One even identified it later as the gun found at the scene.

But you probably know better, carry on.

That's interesting. How does one become a co-facilitator for a group like that? Qualifications-wise.

Wow, I thought you were kidding. You are, right?

I mean, you seriously don't think the cops fabricated a witness as a foreign exchange student and a tourist from Sweden do you?

Please PM me a smiley face so I know you're not nuts.

I don't know anything any more than you do; it's all speculation.

You also didn't answer the question.

MM

An answer please, Why are two additional officers engaging with fire when the victim is already down? I'm assuming that part of the report was accurate...

Give a kid a hammer, he isnt going to write poems with it.

The billions flowing into Homeland Security $ to thousands of local depts is going to ultimately be used on people who gung-ho cops want to pigeon hole into being wrong in some way.

I don't know what happened that's why I'm listening to the unbiased witnesses who were there and watched it happen.

And I didn't answer your question because when I read it it sounded testy and rude. Take a guess you seem to be on a roll with those.

Not rude, just curious about both you & rockchucker; both your positions are very defensively agressive concerning LEO's.

If you are, why not just say so; would help understand your position(s) better.

Nothing to be ashamed of, we're all just friends & shooters here.

MM

M.S. Clinical Psychology.

That's great advise. Hopefully you and your friend's here will try taking that advise.

yeah

It's funny that you think what Bea posted is a "report".

i've been one for 18 yrs. had lead, schit, and everything else thrown or shot at me.

i've buried friends, co workers, fellow brothers and sisters, and just gave all i could afford and then some for one that was shot and paralyzed this week protect me and my family while we slept.

i stand for all my brothers and sisters who took the oath and followed it to the T, protecting YOUR rights and MINE and provided us a safe environment to live in.

i dislike and stand against those few turds that took the job to get over folks like me and those that chose to live lawful.

i have no agenda, but will call bullschit when i see it.

I agree, I really don't know the facts,

All three Officers did discharge their weapons, that part is clear.

I'm not saying the LEO were in the wrong here, truth be told It's a Job I couldn't handle,

But, if the victim was down, and then two additional officers opened up, that seems so wrong..But I've never worn your shoes...

I'm defensively aggressive, whatever that is, about people twisting off about something while purposely ignoring all the facts available. It's absurd and childish. It just so happens that right now that position tends to defend the cops. I've posted before when I thought cops were wrong and have posted about the times when I've helped incarcerate bad cops. But that doesn't get a lot of traction with the folks who purposely ignore all of the facts available to them.

I don't feel the need to answer every personal question that's asked of me by a stranger on the Internet. But since you said we're friends I will answer. I am a cop. I'm definitely not ashamed to say it, but it's not the crowning achievement of my life either. It's my job. I enjoy it and I'm good at it. But if I could sing and play the guitar I'd never do it another day in my life. See, now you know even more about me.

I agree that shooting a body that you know is dead or not going to hurt you is wrong and pointless.

But if you don't know that's what happened, why stomp your feet and demand answers to what you think might have possibly happened?

Thanks to both you & rockchucker for answering.

I sincerely hope both of you have long & safe careers.

I've been friends with numerous LEO's & most, are good, as are both of you I'm sure.

But I've seen far too many cowboys not to know the (newer) LEO of today is not the LEO of 20 years ago.

Since none of us was there & none of us really know what happened in LV, let's just leave it at that..........there is a lot of room for speculation on both points of view.

MM

blue,

i agree with you, if i had other skills that i was as good with as the ones i have i'd quit this job.

Not defending anyone shooting a dead body but do we know that he was already gone or was he still alive after the initial two shots and still armed. That has not been clarified and probably won't be. Much like many a expert elk hunter on here I would keep shooting until they were down and I was certain they were out of the fight. A man still holding a gun and with any life left in him is still a threat. YMMV.

true dat

And twenty years ago if you would have mouthed off to a LEO you would of had your azz beat, dropped at your door and been thankful for it. This aint the good ol days. Too many a lawsuit has changed that forever. Now everything is by the book and gone over with a fine tooth comb as you can see.

Oh, I've got skills. Maaaaad skills. But I want some different ones. I want some that'll make me rich and let me travel.

C'mon people, everyone knows the first round from a 9mm will blow a guy 10 feet backyards and through a plate glass window. Hell, I saw it on TV!

im working on new ones, but it's hard letting go of my jack booted ways

I've seen a guy keep shooting and running with three plus full charges of #000 buck shot from a 12ga. He literally had two of the shot shell wads in his chest cavity. 9mm aint got nothin on that. Dead aint dead until the pulse is gone.

I was a pretty good machinist in my day. I figure maybe I'll buy my military time, refresh a little on those skills and get a gun smithing apprenticeship somewhere. That and do a lot of fishing.

Did you bother with the eyewitness accounts?

It was harmless trespass, which is waaaay different than harmful trespass, which in fact DOES justify death squads.

The devil's in the details.

Gee, another dirty cop story. Not surprising in this day and age of "big brother" and similar attitudes by the 'law'.

Heres two of the eyewitness accounts from the linked article:

Holzgruber said she couldn�t tell what the man was doing; he may have been drawing his gun or maybe he was going to give the gun to the officer, she said.

Villareale said he was one of the last people to leave the store and wasn�t far from Scott when he was shot.
He testified that an officer yelled at Scott to get on the ground, �and Mr. Scott is just standing there not doing anything.�

You ever notice that the vast majority here are willing to give a soldier under life and death situations and stress all the slack in the world, but an LEO under the same stress is afforded no quarter?

STANFORD JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 25
The Problem with Eyewitness Testimony
Commentary on a talk by
George Fisher and Barbara Tversky*
Laura Engelhardt
The bedrock of the American judicial process is the honesty of witnesses in trial.
Eyewitness testimony can make a deep impression on a jury, which is often exclusively
assigned the role of sorting out credibility issues and making judgments about the truth of
witness statements.1 Perjury is a crime, because lying under oath can subvert the
integrity of a trial and the legitimacy of the judicial system. However, perjury is defined
as knowingly making a false statement�merely misremembering is not a crime.2
Moreover, the jury makes its determinations of witness credibility and veracity in secret,
without revealing the reason for its final judgement.3 Recognizing the fallibility of
witness memories, then, is especially important to participants in the judicial process,
since many trials revolve around factual determinations of whom to believe. Rarely will
a factual question result in a successful appeal�effectively giving many parties only one
chance at justice. Arriving at a just result and a correct determination of truth is difficult
* This commentary was written in response to a talk given by George Fisher, Professor, Stanford Law
School, and Barbara Tversky, Professor of Psychology, Stanford University. The presentation was given
on April 5, 1999 and was sponsored by the Stanford Journal of Legal Studies. In this presentation, George
Fisher placed Barbara Tversky�s research on memory fallibility into the context of police investigations and
jury verdicts, discussing the relevance of such research to our system of justice.
1 See generally George Fisher, The Jury�s Rise as a Lie Detector, 107 YALE L.J. 575 (1997).
2 See 18 USC �1623(a) (1998):
Whoever under oath (or in any declaration, certificate, verification, or statement under
penalty of perjury as permitted under section 1746 of title 28, United States Code) in any
proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States knowingly
makes any false material declaration or makes or uses any other information, including
any book, paper, document, record, recording, or other material, knowing the same to
contain any false material declaration, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than five years, or both.
The statute then goes on to list an affirmative defense: �It shall be a defense to an indictment or information
made pursuant to the first sentence of this subsection that the defendant at the time he made each
declaration believed the declaration was true.� Id., �1623(c).
3 See FED. R. EVID. 606(b) (preventing usage of juror testimony to impeach a jury�s verdict); Act of Aug.
2, 1956, ch. 879, � 1, 70 Stat. 935 (18 U.S.C. �1508 (1984 & Supp. 1996)) (criminalizing the recording of
jury deliberations in federal court).
Vol. 1:1 STANFORD JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 26
enough without the added possibility that witnesses themselves may not be aware of
inaccuracies in their testimony.
Several studies have been conducted on human memory and on subjects�
propensity to remember erroneously events and details that did not occur. Elizabeth
Loftus performed experiments in the mid-seventies demonstrating the effect of a third
party�s introducing false facts into memory.4 Subjects were shown a slide of a car at an
intersection with either a yield sign or a stop sign. Experimenters asked participants
questions, falsely introducing the term �stop sign� into the question instead of referring to
the yield sign participants had actually seen. Similarly, experimenters falsely substituted
the term �yield sign� in questions directed to participants who had actually seen the stop
sign slide. The results indicated that subjects remembered seeing the false image. In the
initial part of the experiment, subjects also viewed a slide showing a car accident. Some
subjects were later asked how fast the cars were traveling when they �hit� each other,
others were asked how fast the cars were traveling when they �smashed� into each other.
Those subjects questioned using the word �smashed� were more likely to report having
seen broken glass in the original slide. The introduction of false cues altered participants�
memories.
Courts, lawyers and police officers are now aware of the ability of third parties to
introduce false memories to witnesses.5 For this reason, lawyers closely question
witnesses regarding the accuracy of their memories and about any possible �assistance�
from others in the formation of their present memories. However, psychologists have
long recognized that gap filling and reliance on assumptions are necessary to function in
our society. For example, if we did not assume that mail will be delivered, or that the
supermarkets will continue to stock bread, we would behave quite differently than we do.
We are constantly filling in the gaps in our recollection and interpreting things we hear.
For instance, while on the subway we might hear garbled words like �next,� �transfer,�
and �train.� Building on our assumptions and knowledge, we may put together the actual
4 See Elizabeth F. Loftus & J.C. Palmer, Reconstruction of Automobile Destruction: An Example of the
Interaction Between Language and Memory, 13 J. OF VERBAL LEARNING & VERBAL BEHAVIOR 585
(1974); Elizabeth F. Loftus, D.G. Miller, & H.J. Burns, Semantic Integration of Verbal Information into a
Visual Memory, 4 J. OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCH, 19 (1978).
5 See Krist v. Eli Lilly and Co., 897 F.2d 293, 297 (7th Cir. 1990), (listing the findings of various
psychological studies):
Accuracy of recollection decreases at a geometric rather than arithmetic rate (so passage
of time has a highly distorting effect on recollection); accuracy of recollection is not
highly correlated with the recollector's confidence; and memory is highly suggestible �
people are easily �reminded� of events that never happened, and having been �reminded�
may thereafter hold the false recollection as tenaciously as they would a true one.
See also DAVID FRANK ROSS, J. DON READ & MICHAEL P. TOGLIA, EDS., ADULT EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY
(1994); Elizabeth F. Loftus, Eyewitness Testimony: Psychological Research and Legal Thought, 3 CRIME
AND JUSTICE 105 (1981). C.f. Lea Brilmayer & Lewis Kornhauser, Quantitative Methods and Legal
Decisions, 46 U. CHI. L. REV. 116, 135�48 (1978).
Vol. 1:1 STANFORD JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 27
statement: �Next stop 53rd Street, transfer available to the E train.� Indeed, we may even
remember having heard the full statement.
So what is an �original memory?�6 The process of interpretation occurs at the
very formation of memory�thus introducing distortion from the beginning.
Furthermore, witnesses can distort their own memories without the help of examiners,
police officers or lawyers. Rarely do we tell a story or recount events without a purpose.
Every act of telling and retelling is tailored to a particular listener; we would not expect
someone to listen to every detail of our morning commute, so we edit out extraneous
material. The act of telling a story adds another layer of distortion, which in turn affects
the underlying memory of the event. This is why a fish story, which grows with each
retelling, can eventually lead the teller to believe it.
Once witnesses state facts in a particular way or identify a particular person as the
perpetrator, they are unwilling or even unable�due to the reconstruction of their
memory�to reconsider their initial understanding. When a witness identifies a person in
a line-up, he is likely to identify that same person in later line-ups, even when the person
identified is not the perpetrator. Although juries and decision-makers place great reliance
on eyewitness identification, they are often unaware of the danger of false memories.
Experiments conducted by Barbara Tversky and Elizabeth Marsh corroborate the
vulnerability of human memory to bias.7 In one group of studies, participants were given
the �Roommate Story,� a description of incidents involving his or her two fictitious
roommates. The incidents were categorized as annoying, neutral, or socially �cool.�
Later, participants were asked to neutrally recount the incidents with one roommate, to
write a letter of recommendation for one roommate�s application to a fraternity or
sorority, or to write a letter to the office of student housing requesting the removal of one
of the roommates. When later asked to recount the original story, participants who had
written biased letters recalled more of the annoying or �cool� incidents associated with
their letters. They also included more elaborations consistent with their bias. These
participants made judgements based upon the annoying or social events they discussed in
their letters. Neutral participants made few elaborations, and they also made fewer errors
in their retelling, such as attributing events to the wrong roommate. The study also
showed that participants writing biased letters recalled more biased information for the
character they wrote about, whereas the other roommate was viewed neutrally.
Memory is affected by retelling, and we rarely tell a story in a neutral fashion. By
tailoring our stories to our listeners, our bias distorts the very formation of memory�
even without the introduction of misinformation by a third party. The protections of the
judicial system against prosecutors and police �assisting� a witness�s memory may not
6 See, e.g., James Marshall, Evidence, Psychology, and the Trial: Some Challenges to the Law, 63 COLUM.
L. REV. 197, 197 (1963) (�For the law, the basic problem of ascertaining truth does not arise so much from
the villainy of perjurers and suborners of perjury as from the unreliability of personal observation.�).
7 See Barbara Tversky & Elizabeth J. Marsh, Biased Retellings of Events Yield Biased Memories
(forthcoming). [Hereinafter Tversky-Marsh study].
Vol. 1:1 STANFORD JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 28
sufficiently ensure the accuracy of those memories. Even though prosecutors refrain
from �refreshing� witness A�s memory by showing her witness B�s testimony, the mere
act of telling prosecutors what happened may bias and distort the witness� memory.
Eyewitness testimony, then, is innately suspect.
Lawyers place great import on testimony by the other side�s witness that favors
their own side�s case. For example, defense attorneys make much of prosecution
witnesses� recollection of exonerating details. In light of psychological studies
demonstrating the effect of bias on memory, the reliance and weight placed on such
�admissions� may be appropriate, since witnesses are more apt to tailor their stories�and
thus their memories�to the interests of the first listeners. An eyewitness to a crime is
more inclined to recount, and thus remember incriminating details, when speaking to a
police officer intent on solving the crime. If later the eyewitness still remembers details
that throw doubt on the culpability of the suspect, such doubts should hold greater weight
than the remembrance of incriminating details.
In another part of the Tversky-Marsh study, participants were asked to play
prosecutors presenting a summation to the jury.8 Participants first read a murder story,
where two men were suspects. Participants were then asked either to prepare a neutral
recounting of all they remembered about one suspect, or to prepare a summation to the
jury about one suspect. Later, participants were asked to recall the original story.
Participants who wrote summations recalled more incriminating details and wrongly
attributed details among suspects more often than participants who originally wrote a
neutral recounting.
Bias creeps into memory without our knowledge, without our awareness. While
confidence and accuracy are generally correlated, when misleading information is given,
witness confidence is often higher for the incorrect information than for the correct
information. This leads many to question the competence of the average person to
determine credibility issues. Juries are the fact-finders, and credibility issues are to be
determined by juries. The issue then arises whether juries are equipped to make these
determinations. Expert testimony may not be helpful. Indeed, since the very act of
forming a memory creates distortion, how can anyone uncover the �truth� behind a
person�s statements? Perhaps it is the terrible truth that in many cases we are simply not
capable of determining what happened, yet are duty-bound to so determine. Maybe this
is why we cling to the sanctity of the jury and the secrecy of jury findings:
We can put such questions before the jury entirely without fear of
embarrassment, because the way the jury resolves the questions and, in all
likelihood, the soundness of its answers will remain forever hidden.
Perhaps the allure of the black box as a means toward apparent certainty in
8 See Tversky, supra note 7 at 22�28.
Vol. 1:1 STANFORD JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES 29
an uncertain world has tempted us to entrust the jury with more and harder
questions than it has the power to answer.9
The courts� reliance on witnesses is built into the common-law judicial system, a reliance
that is placed in check by the opposing counsel�s right to cross-examination�an
important component of the adversarial legal process�and the law�s trust of the jury�s
common sense. The fixation on witnesses reflects the weight given to personal
testimony. As shown by recent studies, this weight must be balanced by an awareness
that it is not necessary for a witness to lie or be coaxed by prosecutorial error to
inaccurately state the facts�the mere fault of being human results in distorted memory
and inaccurate testimony.

Many LEO's are pro gun. But too many aren't. With all of the para military training of our police forces today we will surely see a lot more of this before it gets better. Many LEO's serving proudly must be having a problem supporting the New police state we are developing.

+1

When it comes to the police, I have one rule. Be where they are not.

You were either recently f'kd or your chances of being f'ckd go up exponentially when they show up.

I don't dislike the police but bad stuff happens when they are around. That's their job, to be where the bad stuff happens or happened.

Heres two of the eyewitness accounts from the linked article:

Holzgruber said she couldn�t tell what the man was doing; he may have been drawing his gun or maybe he was going to give the gun to the officer, she said.

Yep - a crazed man (not obeying a lawful order - see below) acting in a manner that neither the witness NOR THE RESPONDING OFFICER could tell whether he was drawing his weapon or not. Not sure how you think this supports your position.

Villareale said he was one of the last people to leave the store and wasn�t far from Scott when he was shot.
He testified that an officer yelled at Scott to get on the ground, �and Mr. Scott is just standing there not doing anything.�

Evidently your interpretation of "not doing anything" means he wasn't doing anything wrong. Others might say he wasn't obeying a lawful order. Or that the timeline of witness statements might have an impact. (In other words for those of you in the constant state of Cop Hating, it might be good to know if the second statement preceded the first before using it to accuse someone of "murder".)


"...the fact that the cops murdered this guy"

Your grasp of the meaning of the word 'fact' and the concept of truth appear to need strengthening.

Ordered to drop the weapon. He proceeds to obey and is shot for reaching for his weapon. No way for a man with harmless intentions to avoid being killed in that circumstance. That's called murder.

To be fair, at least one eye witness had him pointing the weapon at the policeman. Not simply "reaching" so as to put it down.

Who knows though? He could of been handing it to the officer.

Either way, best to not be in that situation to begin with.

As usual,you're clueless as to the facts. Is your reading comprehension at such a elementary level purposely to cover your recurring epic failings or has it been a life long failing?

No, they don't; it's their goal in life.

Those appear to be fungible terms for that poster.

Eyewitness 1:

Fee said she heard the officer yelling at Scott to get down, but he didn't.

She saw Scott reach for something on his side and then bring his right hand up and point something directly at the officer.

Fee said she couldn�t tell what was in Scott�s hand, but his hand was pointed, �directly at the cop.�

The officer fired, and she looked away while pushing her granddaughter behind her, Fee said.

When she looked back, she saw Scott face-down on the ground and a black object on the ground.

After the shots were fired, she heard a woman screaming, �You shot him, you killed him.�

Fee said she was worried Scott was going to shoot the officer.

�I was hoping he wasn�t going to shoot the cop, but with a gesture like that I thought somebody was going to get shot,� she said.

She told police after the shooting that she didn�t think the officer had any option to shoot Scott.


Witness 2:

Christopher Villareale was shopping at Costco the day of the shooting and also is a concealed weapon permit holder.

Villareale said he was one of the last people to leave the store and wasn't far from Scott when he was shot.

He testified that an officer yelled at Scott to get on the ground, �And Mr. Scott is just standing there not doing anything.�

Scott then lifted his shirt with his left hand and someone yelled �no, no,� Villareale said.

Scott then pulled his right arm forward with a gun in his hand, he said.

Villareale said it appeared to him that Scott was holding the gun by the handle, but he couldn't tell if the gun was in a holster since the gun was black.

The officer shot Scott, who turned, dropped the gun, was shot again, then fell to the ground.

Scott�s girlfriend yelled before the shooting that Scott was in the military, and once shots were fired, she became hysterical, Villareale said.

Villareale said he was involved in an incident previously in which he had to pull a gun on somebody, then deal with police when they arrived, so he has safely disarmed with a police officer present.

But Scott didn't respond in a similar and appropriate way, he said.

"He was acting in a way that I would think was not consistent with what would be the appropriate way to act in that situation," Villareale said.

He said he knew the officer thought someone could be harmed during the situation.

"I thought he did the right thing shooting him," Villareale said.

When asked during a question from an interested party, Villareale said it didn't look like Scott was going to hand the gun to the police, but he also didn't point the gun at the officer.

Witness 3:

John Nikitas, a Costco cashier, said he saw Erik Scott and a woman walk through the store. He heard Scott say to the woman that he shouldn�t have been in the store while he was drunk, Nikitas said.

He saw Scott knock a �closed� sign off a counter when he walked by, he said.

After being told to evacuate the store, Nikitas said he saw police officers outside.

The officers told Scott to put his hands up and get on the ground, Nikitas said. He said Scott did neither.

Witness 4:

Eatherton said outside the store they heard an officer tell Scott �don�t touch it,� and �get on the ground.�

He saw Scott move his hand on his right side, then the officer shot him.

Witness 5:

The officer told Scott to get down on the ground, but Scott moved his hand from the front of him toward his right hip, Eatherton said.

The officer yelled �don�t do that,� but Scott continued to move toward his hip, she said.

Witness 6:

The assistant store manager who confronted Erik Scott before Scott was shot testified that the man was acting strangely, his eyes were glossed over and �he did not seem right.�

Vince Lopez was called over to talk to Scott by Shai Lierley, a loss prevention supervisor who testified Thursday. On his way to talk to Scott, an older couple approached him and told him they were concerned about a man, who was Scott.

Lopez said he approached Scott and asked him what he was doing. Scott said he was trying to get water bottles to fit in a bag, but Lopez said Scott was trying the same type of bottles over and over again, even though they obviously would not fit, and he had opened multiple packages.

Lierley pointed out that Scott had a gun and Lopez backed off before approaching again to tell Scott that Costco does not allow guns since it is private club and not open to the public, he said.

Scott became irritated when Lopez told him about the policy, Lopez said. Scott became agitated and began using foul language, he said.

That is when he noticed that Scott�s eyes were glazed over.

Scott held his hands in the shape of a gun and pointed them at Lopez�s head, saying that if someone came in and held a gun to his head that he would take care of it, Lopez said.

Witness 7:

Linda Bem, the Costco employee who helped Scott sign up for a Costco membership earlier that day, is testifying.

Bem said Scott had a hard time understanding her instructions and filling out the proper forms.

Scott�s thought process seemed not to be working correctly, she said. Scott was able to have a conversation, but his responses were not as quick as they should have been, she testified.

His handwriting was illegible and he was writing things in the wrong places, Bem said. Scott then had his girlfriend fill out the form for him and she had no problems.

Scott seemed agitated, but wasn't violent, Bem said. She noticed Scott�s knuckles were bleeding.

Bem reported the odd incident to her supervisor.

�I sensed something was terribly wrong,� she said. �He was confused, his thought processes were very, very slow ... Quite frankly, I was worried about him.�


All but two witnesses address just how [bleep] up the dead dumb guy was while filling out forms and stumbling though the store aisles. The guy was hammered after ingesting alcohol,Xanax and Morphine, a serious crime in and of itself,perhaps even a felony in that state. He was ordered not to touch his weapon and to get to the ground. He did neither. His GF was subpoeaned to testify and refused to appear. There were innocent bystanders all around this interaction and the dead dumb guy could have shot any one of them,much less the cop.

The dead dumb guy has noone to blame but himself.

The backpedaling of the fools here who demonstrated their usual ignorance and agendized blather without first reviewing the facts is truly hilarious reading but, even moreso, you all are a criminal defense lawyer's dream come true. It's folks like you that freed OJ. Be content and stand tall with the role you play in life.

It will be real interesting if there is video available if the video confirms the witnesses testimony. But that may have mysteriously been lost by now.

Lots and lots of video cams at my local Costco.

Didn't read the testimony,did you?

Thanks for posting that, Bob.

You would have me go to work focussed on losing every scuffle or fight and going to the hospital or the morgue rather than safely home? Gene, Gene. Texas air must have too much peyote in it. Going home safely at the end of a shift has got me ten and a half years of my pension, and some good time with my grandkids.

I don't know anything about this case one way or the other, and I don't pretend to.

But there's a fundamental problem with the system here.

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that you're a young lady who witnessed the whole thing, from beginning to end, and that what you saw was that the police gunned down an innocent man with absolutely no provocation and then high-fived each other and laughed about it afterwards.

So now somebody comes up to you and says something professional and polite and standard, but this is what you hear: "Excuse me, Miss. I'm with the government--you know, the folks who suddenly murder innocent people in broad daylight in front of dozens of witnesses for any reason or no reason. We're holding an inquest about the shooting you witnessed. We government folks are pretty sure the officers--who, after all, also work for the government--acted properly, but we'd like to get your statement to verify it. Just a moment while I set up this video camera. Okay...now that we have your name and address, can you tell us what you saw?"

What would you say?

Would you tell the truth?

Why would you assume that anyone would?

I'm not saying that that's what happened; I'm saying that if something like that did happen--in the incident under consideration here or anywhere else--official inquest testimony attached to real names and addresses is not the place you're going to find it.

If you want the government well and truly and honestly investigated, you can't be having the government doing the investigation. It's silly.

Just more proof that you're incapable of applying logic and reason to threads like these.

Keith,if someone near and dear to me is threatened by a "bad guy"with a gun,I'd rather have a non-leo campfire member entrusted with their safety than a cop.The odds of getting a "goodun" out of our membership ranks are better than getting a local LEO who would actually risk his life to save them.

Would you rather have Barak or DINK on the scene when action is called for?I'd take Barak in a heartbeat.

The exceptions to this are ED Bunchanumbers and AHF,who are LEO's,but would act as fathers and husbands rather than as LEO's.There may be some other LEO's among our membership who would step up-and you could be one- but I've shared a campfire with these two.

Cops adopting military TACTICS will continue to be a failure unless military attitudes are adopoted as well.

We were taught that your chances for survival were better if you focused on the MISSION rather than your own safety.

As long as "officer safety" is PARAMOUNT,the mission will suffer.Of course,if the "mission" of the LV cops was to kill anybody with a gun,then it succeeded.

Why did you leave out the rest of Villareale's account?

I think he's speaking hypothetically now. He must be.

"He said he knew the officer thought someone could be harmed during the situation."

And the jury would be instructed to dis-regard this portion of his testimony.........Right,Counseler?

And the part about how he "thought" the dead guy didn't disarm properly....and..

Once his "testimony" is reduced to actual facts,it doesn't help the cops.

Excellent points.

One would think that being he had a confrontation with a store employee regarding his carrying a pistol on private property he would assume that law enforcement may be coming in short order. Add to the fact that he was under the influence of something, and he knew it, that the situation would escalate. Then the store is being evacuated. You would think that he would have connected the dots and realized that maybe, just maybe this was about him and with that he might be wise to do whatever he could to de-escalate the situation as to not get himself shot. Listening to direct commands might be one, not going for his weapon might be another. Now that we are going down the hypothetical trail what if this guy began to take hostages and one of them was one of your own? I highly doubt you would be critiquing the response and actions that happened then.

The scenario you're describing didn't happen. You're engaging in fantasy.

so now your saying the suspect did not get into an argument with a store employee?

now u are truly delusional

it was in bea's first post you tool

==============

No,not right. Further,his behavior and actions in the store,his threatening of a employee,his reaching for his gun after being ordered not to and the fact he was drunk and on Xanax and morphine leaves a attorney hoping he gets the case on a hourly fee,rather than a contingency.

Easy,justifiable shoot.A no-brainer,not even debatable, save for those idiots who invent schit in their heads...and those who are deathly allergic to facts which puts their perspective in it's proper place... the dung pile.

With this guy's level of intoxication, he couldn't be expected to do anything rational. Given the information that this guy had military experience, it's starting to sound like he wanted to get shot. If that's the case, mission accomplished. Either way, the whole situation is sad.

If a Copper yelled at me to disarm, what would be wrong with doin a bellyflop spread eagle and let them disarm ya?

I would NOT touch the gun I was concealing.

Gunner

They dead dumb guy committed a crime the moment he holstered his weapon and then ventured out into the public domain.

The drunk dead dumb guy could have spoken up anytime he wanted to,as well. Instead,he went for his gun after being ordered not to.

Case closed.

Somewhere in the next few pages this guy will hypothetically have been smelling daffodils that were shot out of his hands while he was on one knee proposing marriage to the girlfriend who was pregnant with twins.

the guy is truly a piece of work

10-4 on the DDG, I did not know he was drunk, thats askin for a custom engraved rock.

For some reason I have had a calming effect on all LEO's I have ever had contact with, think they see an old crazy man that can still shoot and scuffle a little. I think they know I would side with them.

Gunner

plus your a big muther f'er

Yes I did. You just read something into my post. I go to Costco often enough I don't ever recall them having signs clearly posted at the entrance that guns are not allowed in several States I might add.

Now that plus the fact that one of the owners of costco just had a $35K a plate dinner for Obozo gives you some clues whats going on here. I sure wouldn't want to ever be going up on a gun charge were a few anti gun bozo's were going to be witnesses against me and not have it on video for comparison of facts vs statements. You'd get about as fair a trial as that "White Mexican" has a chance of getting trial by media.

Been a lot of years waitin' for this member to make a worthwhile post.....and he did.

A man has to KNOW that overreaction is the order of the day and withdraw immediately.Hopefully,the store guy hasn't already called the cops.

I sure wouldn't want to ever be going up on a gun charge were a few anti gun bozo's were going to be witnesses against me and not have it on video.
========

You mean like the conceal carry guy? Are you sure you read it? It's clear to me you didn't properly understand or read as to the Costco signs. And,if Costco had a 35K a head dinner for Bam-Bam,how does that help your position here? Bam-Bam let the cops off the hook because Costco had a fundraiser for Bammy? Is that where you're at?

Should be familiar territory for you and your boys. I'm glad none of you are LEO's as it would only take a week at most and 90% of you would be buried or on stress leave sucking your thumbs. Verbal judo doesn't work with folks hell bent on destruction. A philosophical conversation does not work with those high on drugs and bent on killing you. Thats from experience, something you don't have being that the only confrontation you get is on this site as you sit behind the screen. Face it, you and yours have been caught with your pants down again on this one. Dig up something new. Game over.

That be a big old freshly shaved and baby powdered F'er.

Gunner

Where I'm at is that I don't hear worth a chit. Worries me that someday if in a sitiation such as this, I'll get shot cause I didn't understand the command.
Yelling by a LEO doesn't help to understand. Guess I had better stay out of LV.

Yes I do now leave the pistol in the car at Costco.

You know damn well that I'm right!

You try to dispose of the point I made using three words;"No,not right."

Then you throw in a bunch of words having nothing to do with the point I made.

Damn,you'd a made a good lawyer.

Bobby be nice to your Daddy

Do you mean to say we have those stores in Texas?

You seem to be the all knowing authority here on the fire on this lets see a picture on one of those well posted you just can't miss it no guns Costco signs. I'll be looking very hard next week for one but you be the man with the handle on this lets see it.

Thanks Wtxj and that Boy wuz wantin to see pics of his step-mamma in the C-mint pond yesterday LOL

Gunner

Same here. Suicide. But one can understand the confusion of someone who hasn't thought that scenario through in advance, being suddenly ordered at gunpoint to disarm. That being the case, ordering him to disarm at gunpoint, when his weapon was holstered, followed by plugging him full of holes when he complies, is murder, plain and simple.

Looks like Zimmerman has done the smart thing and gone underground, perhaps skipping to South America where he'll blend right in. It's become clear that the system is trying to railroad an innocent man for political points, and no one is obliged to subject themselves to that process.

Nothing at all. Anything but pointing it at the cop or other furtive movement toward it.

At Conceal Carry Class they stress that when a store's Rep asks you to leave you are to do so, signs or no signs. Supposed to avoid confrontations.

==========

HUH? You asked "right"? and I said no,you weren't right as to that testimony. I didn't know you were trying to make a point other than your belief that testimony would be inadmissible. You didn't want me to give a layperson a lesson on the rules of evidence,did you?

You nailed Isaac's (Bob's) style of debate perfectly.

I'd divert from your flailing were I you,as well. From what is glaringly obvious as to your reading comprehension skills,I doubt you even read curdog's entire post much less understand it.

That case has baffled me. How is he a white man to start with? Am I seeing a different person. Florida must be one F'ed up state. Explains a lot.

Fort Worth. About the same as Sam's as far as items go but up scale somewhat.

Agreed. As soon as an agent of the owner speaks for him in asking you to leave, every moment of delay thereafter is a moment of trespass. He was guilty of harmless trespass, however, and nothing more. Not a capital offense. Not by a long shot.

Correct, a store is considered PRIVATE PROPERTY, not public. If you are asked to do something by an employee such as leave you are to do so. If you do not the police will be called to escort you off the property at the very least if not arrest you for trespass. Do as you're told, that's day one stuff.

==========

Good lord you're a dumbschit. He arrived back to Florida last night and is with his lawyer preparing to turn himself in by the 230 deadline. Done the smart thing and fleed? You would not be teaching kids if I lived in your part of Florida,that I assure you. You are one sick,idiot.

And he wouldn't have been shot if he didn't go for his gun or point it at the officer.

Should the Jews have remained in Germany too, because the law said they had to? When the state is obviously plotting to destroy an innocent party, the innocent party has no obligation to remain.

PS I hadn't heard that he had returned. Too bad for him. He's likely going to be railroaded now.

========

Another dumb-schit post. Did DD jump ahead of you on the 2012 KOTY running?

He was committing a crime by carrying the gun while severely impaired;he threatened a store clerk while publically intoxicated and under the influence of schedule 2 and 3 narcotics,he made a aggressive gesture towards a officer with his gun after being ordered to get to the ground and not to touch his weapon. Harmless trespass? The dead dumb guy,hammered and on Morphine and Xanax had more sense than you.

I wish you were there. The guy would have never been sho. They'd have all been too preoccupied laughing from watching the piss run down your pant's leg.

Not sure that's at all an accurate description of what happened, but regardless you are right to the extent that you mean he was unwise in the extreme to move a hand towards his sidearm under those circumstances, despite being commanded at gunpoint to take hold of it. He should have disregarded that command. For all we know, however, he could have been shot for disregarding it too, which illustrates the problem with the conduct of the police in this situation.

despite being ordered at gunpoint to take hold of it.
===========

You have the reading comprehension skills of a house plant.

If one's sidearm is holstered, how is one to interpret the command to drop the weapon? Only one way I can think of, but I'd have disregarded that command and raised hands over my head as high as I could instead.

Agreed.

Gunner

Concealed or open carry is encumbered by responsibilities. If you are going to carry you are responsible for, amoung other things, being neither inebriated or stupid. Carrying in either of these situations could bring the same outcome this poor stupid drunk brought upon himself.

No doubt, liberals will disagree. Responsibilities elude them.

You choose to interpret events like this as you do (in the worst possible light for the victim) because you wish to retain the conviction that so long as you are personally always on the up and up, and keep your nose clean, the cops present no danger to you. The reality is that, these days, that's just not the case.

==========

He was first told to raise his hands. He then takes his left hand,lifts his shirt and with his right hand goes for the weapon. He is then told to drop it. He didn't just drop it,he raised it in a holster in which a firearm could still easily be fired. He had lethal amounts of morphine in his system. He had a addiction to Oxycodone and on top of it all,he was severely intoxicated. The officer didn't have to try and keep figuring out what the erratic,drunk and drugged dead dumb guy was going to do next. That could have made him a dumb,dead cop.

Exactly. This guy never should have been carrying, that day, in the first place. Second, he was in a place that didn't allow the carry. Lastly, he points the gun at the cops. Outcome...? He's dead because of it.

Maybe TRH will read it this time?

And let facts get in the way of a glaringly obvious agenda? Sure Mac!

I'm a giver. It's just my nature to help those who can't help themselves.

Mac...when they say this guy was on Morphine,do they mean the same stuff my father was on during his last 8 days of life? Or,is there some other form of the drug which has a far different pharmacology?

Morphine is widely available on the streets in pill form. Usually an end of life drug or post op drug though.

That stuff made my father sing. I never heard my father sing.

I gotta get me some,Finn.

To be honest I don't know. I've never come across straight up morphine, just the other opiate based drugs.

Script abuse just like oxy and hydro? Not surprising.

I thought I had represented every type of drug use defendant. I was wrong. Never had a Morphine case...if I'm even spelling it right.

Great stuff if you're watching your calorie intake. No need to make unnecessary piss breaks either.

I don't think I even know anyone who's ever even had it outside of a hospital or Hospice facility.

Pretty much. Morphine's not nearly as abused or desired as Oxy "Blues" (30mg) or 80's though around here.

Just when I think you can't get any stupider you exceed my expectations. The Real Idiot.

Perhaps they should add " do not carry a gun and point it at the police" on the script bottle, that is if it were a script. That way there would be no excuses for such foolish behavior. Yes, I know, that was a sarcastic and ignorant statement, no need for the anti's to point that out I'm well aware of it.

Simply because it is harder to come by than oxy and it is less prescribed. You have to B&E the right house to get morphine.

=============

Oxy Blues,huh? We're just getting our first judicial look at the "bath salts" junk.

Finn/Mac...does your department have that device you carry with you that can go back a certain time period on one's cell phone and retrieve all it's previous ingoing and outgoing data?

Well, TRH finally brought up te Jews. This thread is complete. I'm out guys, have fun beating your head against the wall.

RISJR, and this would apply equally to LEO having a drink after work but still carrying? Or an officer under medication. Should we assume officers do not engage in drinking or peform their duties while under medication? How about the cops using steriods, should they be shot on sight? A citizen�s arrest outside a bar resulting in the officer�s death due to officer�s non compliance to citizen�s order to dis arm and hit the ground on his knees. That is what you would want isn�t it? Lawful conduct. So if the officer didn't understand a citizen could arrest him it would then be a justifiable shooting according to you. There would be no other position available if we all are as equal citizens, correct? That would have to be so unless you feel officers are above the law. I think anyone can see if the same standards are imposed equally what chaos would result.

You can assume all the irrelevance you wish to. I thought this thread was about this dumb,dead guy,not tomorrow's next dead,dumb guy.

So one should not attempt to frame your logic beyond the immediate position you stake. not a universal logic, but case selective.

+1. A point I've made many times at the Fire over the years, i.e., the double standard.

Can you imagine what the officer�s reaction would be to that lawful order? Bullets would be flying everywhere, unlike the Costco event which only had a holstered weapon and the imagination was sufficient to warrant the murder.

Morphine is more susceptible to abuse and addiction than other drugs of the opioid class. It's not used outside a monitored medical care often because there are other drugs that work as good or better with less problems.

The scenario you're describing didn't happen. You're engaging in fantasy. To use your own quote, just saying.

Dammit...I'm never going fishing again. Look at what I've been missing. Again.

In your case, you were using made up facts to justify what the cops did. Richard was saying, "what if the tables were turned," i.e., pointing out a double standard.

So Mr right on top of this [bleep] were's the picture of the no guns sign. Oh you haven't had enough time LOL

actually I stated a hypothetical scenario not claiming that they were facts. No different that what was mentioned by Richard.

Again indeed, I'm about to go fishing so you can fill in for me. Enjoy

GONE FISHING, BE BACK SOON.....Maybe

Different in that you were suggesting that your hypothetical justified the police response somehow.

You show unusual insight and wisdom for a thread of this type.

What can I say Main? Copper's like me.

Gunner

You're pretty hard not to like.

Agreed. If everyone possessed your common sense gunner, there would be no questionable shootings by Peace Officers. They would either be completely wrong or completely justified.

Good thing, cause iffin i was'nt you woulda kicked my butt at the Boar hunt.

Gunner

I think you're making all that stuff up. It's not like me to mess with people.

Gunner

We have some gadgets the dicks use. I'm not worthy. grin

Speaking of case selective, why didn't you quote all of villareal's account?

It'll be unfortunate for him if he's railroaded, sure; but imagine what's going to happen in this country if he's acquitted.

It'll be OJ backwards, except that there'll be no comparison--none at all.

Why would I? To answer - for the same reason i did not repost the entire article. I was only interested in what they said they actually saw, not their opinion or their speculation.

Then you should have posted the next two sentences in his account.

================

As compared to your flailing about with these silly "what ifs" of yours.

Lets see, was it this one:
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/may/13/officer-involved-erik-scott-shooting-indicted-gun-/

oh no no, thats the story of the murdering cop providing firearms to known felons. Somehow that seems much more dangerous than a hoilstered weapon. Should he have been shot on sight? Do you think swat just forgot to show up at that arrest?


OK, maybe it was this: Will Nelson said he heard an officer yelling at someone to get down. (Note -I guess Will is lucky he didn't get shot sine it would seem by this account he also failed to follow orders) When he looked over, all he saw was Scott�s hand, which was holding something brown and was extended in front of him, he said.

He said he heard a gunshot and the object, which he recognized as a holster, dropped out of Scott�s hand.

Scott didn�t look like he was handing the holster to the officer � it was more like he was displaying it to them � but he wasn�t holding it as if he was going to shoot it, Nelson said.

Scott didn�t seem to be a threat, but he also didn�t comply with the officer�s orders, Nelson said.

He said he believes it would have been a better situation had the officers confronted Scott in the parking lot rather than near the store entrance, where there were more people around.

Wait, I'll find it, hang on... this one?

Costco customer John Cooper said he didn�t see police when he first left the store but later saw an officer with a firearm in his hands.

Then he noticed Scott facing the officer.

�He was not in a defensive manner,� Cooper said. �He was just standing there, almost in a relaxed position initially.�

He said that he felt guilty he didn�t attempt to render aid to Scott after he had been shot. An Army colonel with 27 years of experience, he said he felt someone should have checked on the man before paramedics arrived.



This one! got it:
When asked during a question from an interested party, Villareale said it didn't look like Scott was going to hand the gun to the police, but he also didn't point the gun at the officer.

How long have you been out of the joint,bitter boy?

So very witty. I had no idea you were terribly clever. And do mean terribly.

Now that it is established you disregard that which suites you, lets follow up with some rather inane gibberish; see if you can recognize it and determine whom it suits best:


Plodding through life basing opinions on preconceived assumptions and a total disregard for the facts must be a comfortable place to mwallow for the lazy and woefully ignorant. Prime example of the "ignorance is bliss" theory.

You obviously didn't read the eyewitness accounts.

It's actually the hawkeye rule. Your ignoring of facts before spouting your repetitive moans and whines about LE have always been suspect. And,for good reason. A pre-disposed mindset coupled with a total disregard for facts is a bed you made. Don't blame others for you being forced to sleep in it.


I know you'll need some help. Here's a hint -not hawkeye.

Nope. It would have been the next two sentences in his statement like I said before, but they didn't fit your agenda.

I�m not certain how my not reprinting what has already been provided somehow validates you. I did not repeat any of the information of the article to assert that it was the entirety of the content. In fact, just the opposite. I reprinted to assert that the entirety of the content had not been presented. Since the guy was likely killed un-necessarily, I�ll willingly accept that as my agenda. Thanks for the elevated status.

How much back-up time do you have hanging over your head,junior?

RISJR, As you seem to be keenly focused on jail time and backing up, I'll defer to your no doubt considerable expertise in the matter. In the event you just felt the need to attempt some form of petty insult to further yourself in the conversation, please attempt intelligible content.

You might be asking for something Bob's not capable of.

Bottom line is you ignored facts that didn't fit your agenda. Your mind was made up as soon as you read the thread title and nothing will change it.

Stupid people make me tired. Especially when they try to sound smart.

Grin.

I don't think that is anything you two would be accused of pile.

Is that better if i approach you on your level?


grin grin.

Okay, I had to look that up.


1pile
noun \&#712;p&#299;(-&#601;)l\
Definition of PILE
1: a long slender column usually of timber, steel, or reinforced concrete driven into the ground to carry a vertical load
2: a wedge-shaped heraldic charge usually placed vertically with the broad end up
3 a: a target-shooting arrowhead without cutting edges b[Latin pilum]: an ancient Roman foot soldier's heavy javelin


Origin of PILE

Middle English, dart, quill, pole driven into the ground, from Old English p&#299;l, from Latin pilum javelin
First Known Use: 12th century
_______________________________________

WTF are you talking about?

That's "Pyle" Dick.

Gunner

Holy crap! Now I'm offended!

Me too

Gunner

As opposed to a level in which one intentionally misleads or ignores pertinent facts in a debate? You sound like a liberal.

Probably won't be able to sleep tonight?

I figure it will take at least a month for a guy like that to steal enough from his mother's purse to get bus fare to Texas.

You're on a roll tonight.

My dog leaves tightly coiled piles in the rear yard. Depending on ambient temps.......steam rises from same...

count your blessings


I just came home to two piles in the living room, 1 from each dog,

I guess my boys were just too busy to let them out today!


if I had my druthers I'd just as soon hang out with Mac and Lt. Pat at a real campfire than the two I just put outside.


sorry for the guy and sorry for his family, sounds like his dad is a pretty good egg.


really sorry he didn't decide to leave his piece at home or in the car if he was so under the influence he wasn't thinking correctly.

I'm thinking with a weapon drawn on you and a cop tells you to hit the ground it'd be wise to not worry about a soft landing and get there PDQ.



like most major screwups (this one with the ultimate price) it wasn't just one bad decision that led to the guy's death. He made a few bad ones that day. Helluva thing, who knows what kind of life he coulda lived? Imagine the gf is beyond herself with grief that she didn't put her foot down firmer with him, or maybe she just blames the cops, most folks don't want to take responsibility for their actions, leave alone their inactions.


which is what my boyz and I will be discussing tonite after soccer......lil chits

howdy sir from the frozen north

OK, pile dick.

I said it's "Pyle" Dick, not pile dick.

Gunner

So word for word quotes are misleading. If what you are saying is that anything less than the article in its entirety somehow alters what they said, please provide that explanation.
I would also be interested in hearing how limiting unwarranted government killing is liberal. You would be welcome to explain that as well.

Right. I said pile dick. Glad we were able to clear that one up.

Dude, I'm okay with you being liberal, but you gotta learn commas if you're gonna talk smart.

I'm thinking jasonb is back amongst us.

There is a much greater similarity between obama and cops; both like to assassinate citizens without due process.

no way never

Yeah, and even judges stand by and let it happen; they issue the warrants and oversee the death camps!

Everything is broken!

or

Your thinking hasn't really worked out all that well.

With the intellectual input of rockschugger, there is now a � of brain at work between the 3 of you.

whatever [bleep]

There..I fixed it for you.

Thank you. As I implied earlier, I really like gaming with people, but there is absolutely nothing more pitiful than a dumb person attempting to act smart.

Boy youz said a mouffull

If you can't address facts, you can rely on sympathy. That�s warming.

So pile. on one hand you make insinuations about stupidity, and then give thanks for having it pointed out that you and 2 of your buddies together add up to 1/2 a brain. I'm starting to admire your intellectual honesty.

We love you too, Dick.

Defending due process on this forum is going to get you labelled a liberal for sure. "Conservatives" here favor despotism, i.e., the absence of rule by law. Just remember that up is down, and black is white, and you'll start to fit right in here at the Fire.

More spin. Ok one last time. Partial quotes are misleading especially in the context in which you used it.

you should be okay RA, TRH has your back on this one, that'll win them over to your side in a heartbeat.....give or take, lol


yep I'm beginning to see your point now.


facts it is

a guy is severely under the influence of medication, this we know to be a fact

he goes into a private biz that evidently doesn't allow the exercise of his 2nd amendment rights on their PRIVATE property

he flashes his piece while trying to perform some form of primate intercourse (that's monkey humping for you folks in flyover country) with some water bottles in a bag


he's confronted about it and asked to leave


does he leave? with the embarrasment that most of us would have that while carrying concealed, he breached concealment?


oh NO he has to argue with the guy while he's packing heat and his eyes look like two pizzholes in the snow


the cops are called by the now concerned Costco employees because there's an agitated armed man in their store that appears to be under the influence


he's met at the door by the cops and instructed to hit the floor


now he decides instead of doing that, I'll show the cops my gun, holster, cell phone or whatever (it doesn't seem to be a fact as to what was actually in his hand, but it is a fact he decided to show the cop something that had a gun drawn on him instead of hitting the floor as instructed)


he gets shot and killed for his actions, that's a fact


perhaps the cop woulda been smarter to take his chances and see if the guy wanted to shoot him or just show him a really cool new app he'd downloaded onto his Iphone?


you're trying to assert that the cops that frequent this board are trying to cover up for their fellow officer

you're gettin your azz handed to you because the facts don't support your assumptions and assertions.


so you tell at least 2 or 3 of the guys calling you on it that collectively they have 1/2 a brain?


dude, even if we take that assumption to be true, those guys with 1/2 a brain between them are making you look stupid (though admittedly you've hauled most of the water in that endeavor)


Only thing worse than a dirty or rogue cop, is a citizen that's so jaded he sees every cop that way.

they're human beings, from all stripes of life and they deal with a chitty job often. Much of their day is spent dealing with folks in the lower 20% morally.


put yourself in that cop's shoes for just one moment, you don't know this guy is a vet, that he's supposedly a good guy, all you know is you've been sent out on a call of an armed man that's agitated at the Costco store.

when you identify him, you tell him to hit the ground, instead he reaches for something in his pocket or waistband to show you


shoot or no shoot?


it's embarrassing for you what you've tried to make of this imo.


P.S. Hi back atcha Bobby, my apologies that guys like you and Mac and Lt. Powell have to deal with guys like this Dick A.