Posted on 03/28/2011 10:04:32 AM PDT by Kaslin
Witnesses often screw things up, and other witnesses gave different accounts. Follow the physical evidence - the gun, and the time line from the audio records.
According to the DA (the cops), Scott’s weapon was found afterward STILL IN ITS HOLSTER. So no, he did NOT pull his gun and point it at the cop. They showed a photo of it at the inquest, lying on the ground in the holster.
Second, if he was stoned as you say, why didn’t Mosher notice something just 6 seconds prior to shooting Scott, when Scott walked by him?
Third, lets suppose Scott was high as a kite. Being high is not a crime with the death penalty. We don’t shoot people for being high. We shoot them for endangering the life of the cop. And to do that, he would have needed time to pull a gun (two seconds from first word to bullet leaving the gun) and he would have needed to do something that could have killed the cop. His gun was found in its holster, and even if it had been pulled, Scott would have needed to rack the slide. But it was in the holster.
Less than one second from the end of Mosher’s first sentence, while the other cops are still shouting, Mosher pulled the trigger. Why? Mosher never explained it. He said Scott wasn’t obeying his orders, but he never gave him a chance to obey. And we don’t shoot people for failing to obey the orders of a cop.
I agree! And the dept. pleading the 5th and refusing all investigations and subpoenas reinforces my previous statement....
Did Mosher mention which of the simultaneously delivered orders Scott failed to obey - the one ordering him to not move, or the one ordering him to drop the gun?
With the caliber of policeman confronting him that day the poor fellow was doomed.
neither that or the 'cophater' label are relevant...facts are facts, and curly mosher had absolutely no evidence to suggest that erik scott was anything but a citizen, a mere 6 seconds before his death...by Polish firing squad in the middle of a crowded parking lot I might add...
all this other crap is strwman diversion...the tapes are useless, the full 911 call is squashed, and the circus style inquest and open rebellion of cops to refuse an open investigation all point towards the system tryin to circle the wagons...
yer union buddies need to be transparent like bambam, but then that would diminish the power of the bluebrotherhood...
“The PD never pays for their errors;”
That’s simply not true.
I beg to disagree. When the police overreact and the department or municipality is subsequently sued, the tab is always paid by the taxpayers. Our taxes go up, not PD wages down. Settlements have never been paid for by a pay or benefit cut of police or those responsible.
My suggestion was that the costs should be borne by the entire police department, in cut wages or benefits. That sends a message that bad behavior is not tolerated (but it typically is).
If you know of an example where the PD has been financially penalized let us know. If one works in the private sector and individual actions cost a business financially both individuals, and often peers will pay. It should work the same way in government.
Probably won’t happen. Cops are very protective of other cops. Remember how the antigang unit reacted to more over sight?
The dog charged him, and he pulled the gun in self-defense but didn't shoot.
The difference between Erik Scott and a police officer? A police officer would have shot the dog.
No threat, so it was a bad shoot.
End of story.
Bootlickers are falling all over themselves trying to smear the guy. That's become standard proceedure for the cover-up crowd.
I know what you mean, and yes, taxpayers would pay for any real fines. But I’m not sure I see the point in docking pay for all the cops. How about the cops in the next town?
Cops get fired all the time. Do they rally around their own? Sure, but they also purge the ones that make them look bad. They actually do. And no... I’m not a cop. I have known a few though, and I know from them what happens inside the dept.
If somebody at your employer gets a DUI do they punish everybody? How does that make sense?
I know... I know... this is FR and we hate cops around here. I’ll shut up now.
I don't hate cops. I have friends that are cops. I hate dirty corrupt cops that destroy the integrity and trust in the system.
I despise corrupt politicians too for the same reason and I don't care whether they D or R.
I despise those in the US military too that don't wear a white hat of respectability. I'd have no problem taking care of those who did wrong to all of us in the USA by deliberately murdering foreign civilians.
The Golden Rule is what life should be about. You follow it and you won't go wrong.
Same here. I generally respect cops the same way that I respect those in the military. Most of them, IMHO, deserve the utmost of that respect. But of course that doesn’t mean that there aren’t pyschopaths in there, either. It happens. I believe that both groups, just like us gun-owners out here in the civilian world, do honestly try to purge the psychos from our ranks.
But yes, it’s also true that groups tend to close ranks around their own. It’s human nature. Cops do it. Soldiers do it. Gun-owners do it too. WE ALL DO IT. But when the evidence gets to the point where they (or we) can see we’re defending a psycho... out they go.
In this case, from the facts so far in evidence, I don’t see that these cops are psychopaths. I think there was some really bad information given to the cops, AND the cops that fired were relatively inexperienced and they made a grave mistake under pressure. I don’t think they were evil, they were just wrong. Tragically wrong.
Scott had huge amounts of illegally obtained painkillers and Xanax in his system. He was in no condition to be out in public and he knew it. It's too bad the people closest to him chose to be enablers rather than getting him help.
That should read "The FR cop-ABUSE hating brigade aside."
I think we can all agree that we are against police abuse.
This is why I'm alarmed at the ever-increasing incidents of police abuse: The police are union personnel, protected and embraced by the Democrat party. It's like having a political police force, which is exactly what the SS and Gestapo were in Nazi Germany. I'm not at all in favor of a political police nor the arrogance associated with such a force. Arrogance such as appeared in the original posting above:
Amazingly, Metro officers, through their union, have announced that they will not cooperate with investigations, will not honor subpoenas, and will not testify, implying that they will simply take the 5th at best if they decide to bother to show up. And they mean this to apply not only to officers who are actually involved in a shooting, but officers who are merely witnesses.
Metro Police Officer William Mosher testifies for a second day during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Friday, September 24, 2010.
Wow, they're like the mob. They should fire every officer on the scene and their superiors.
There's nothing to talk about until after the REAL trial ends.
Duh yoonyin has their backs.
Thanks for reposting that link.
That older article sure paints a far different version of events than this thread’s article does.
It maks me wonder what agenda this writer Mike McDaniel has?
try throwing some facts into your statement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.