Posted on 09/24/2010 4:21:28 PM PDT by redreno
Wentworth Eatherton, the husband of the previous witness, Annette, said he called into a public radio program recently when he heard Scotts 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 wasnt true, he said.
Eatherton recalled words he heard Scott say while in the aisle at Costco.
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
force the truth
the lies bambi told have made liars brave
FORCE THE TRUTH AT EVERY TURN
i’m reserving judgement till i see more testimony. where are the tapes?
An article poster earlier today on this shooting said that none of the camera were working mysterously when this happened?
Someone on a thread from last month said Costco has an offsite backup system. Don’t know it it’s BS or not.
scott bookmark.
If I were a criminal, of course I'd give every one of them a hug.
So did they find high levels of alcohol (or drugs) in his blood or not?
So the COSTCO employees are in CYA, saying he was drunk. I didn’t see any mention of a toxicology report.
Then he was shot by Curley Joe.
I discount some of what the COSTCO employees are saying but for the most part they are regular people like you and me.
However, at least two customers with no dog in the hunt, testified Scott was acting weird or reached for his waistband.
I got to read more and and this time I’m reserving judgment.
Wow! I’m amazed. Looks like all the cop-haters went over to the Las Vegas Sun to post their spiteful comments!
I thought this comment by DTJ summed it up nicely:
“Two points: 1) Those of you assailing the girlfriend for not attending are WAAAY off base. She just saw her boyfriend blown away while he was standing right next to her, and now she’s expected to relive the trauma under examination by by a D.A., in a rigged setting when WE ALL KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOME WILL BE??? Knock off the presumptions and character assassinations of her. If she were my daughter, I, for one, would tell her not to subject herself to this farcical circus.
Besides, her “no-show” status is a red herring you guys are trotting out. We HAVE her testimony, by way of police recording. And that leads into point 2) Namely, the girlfriend, then the witness from Sweden, AND THE 911 RECORDING OF OFFICER MOSHER, HIMSELF, all confirm that Scott was ordered to remove his gun.
Then, when Scott did so, he was promptly shot to death. Thems the facts. No amount of excuse-making or diversionary, irrelevant, red-herrings (”the girlfriend didn’t show,” “Scott was on morphine”) changes it. The cops literally “jumped the gun.”
This is the second time around with Mosher, too. He needs to be reviewed, and possibly taken off the street and put behind a desk. Though unlike some of you above, I allow that Mosher would get his due process, before such a decision might be handed down. Scott, meanwhile, was unnecessarily and summarily executed.”
Do you KNOW if he was drunk or not?
Second, I will expect that a multi-million dollar civil suit against COSTCO's deep pockets will be coming shortly.
Hmmmm. Seems to me only a few weeks ago, some people here wanted to bestow sainthood on Scott and lynch the cops. After reading these eyewitness reports, what do you say now? It sure appears now Scott was “carrying while hammered”. A dumbass plan and a recipe for disaster.
No; that's your THEORY emanating from the facts.
He reached for the weapon with his GUN HAND, NOT his left hand, and should the officer have waited while he got fired upon?
I don't know what the "facts" ultimately are, in terms of INTENT. What I DO know is that several witnesses have testified to the agitated, incoherent, and wobbly conduct of the deceased, which was BEFORE the officer confronted him.
This officer might be a loose cannon, but rendering judgement that the deceased was trying to surrender the weapon is pure conjecture on your part.
What’s the penalty for legally carrying and being hammered?
How many cops could pass that test on or off duty on any given day?
I guess execution is the only way to resolve these situations /s.
“He reached for the weapon with his GUN HAND, NOT his left hand......”
Huh? Was Erik left or right handed and why that does it matter when the officer told him to drop it?
From lvmp1066:
“Fact: Erik Scott complied with Mosher’s instructions. He put his hands up. He told the cop he had a gun. He was told to drop it. He attempted to comply and in the process of doing so was shot to death.
Two witnesses in a row testify that the weapon Scott was holding at the time he was shot wasn’t even accessible for fire, as it was fully enclosed in a “gun rug.”
The DA’s office is attempting to make people believe that Scott could have somehow pulled the trigger through the fabric of either the gun rug or the holster shown in this article. Grasping at straws to make the cops look good, nothing more.”
Scott may have reacted wrong, but the fact that the gun was in a holster is pretty good evidence that he was NOT planning on shooting the cop.
Also, while I don't spend a lot of time practicing a draw (and I use this type of holster), I have yet to have it come out with the gun by accident. I either remove both, or just the gun, but never yet have I pulled on the gun and brought out the holster as well.
Also, when I remove this holster, I can't do it with a draw motion. I have to deliberate wiggle it out in a movement that is very different from the motion I use in removing the gun by itself.
The police need to review this policy of asking suspects to reach for their weapons. They cannot simultaneously order a suspect to reach for his weapon, and then fire on him for doing it. That is tantamount to an execution. Drunk or not. Stoned or not. On morphine or not.
Now, if I were Scott, and I were sober, I would defy the order to reach for my weapon. This, knowing what I now know. Reaching for your weapon with 3 cops pointing guns at you is a VERY BAD IDEA. Even if they order you to. It reminds me of the old west, quick draw style. Just keep your hands in the air. You do not want to be reaching for a gun when cops are pointing guns at you. Period.
I admit I don’t know all the facts, but, I lean towards the theory that the 3 cops were not working in harmony. One says “remove your weapon” and the other, seeing him reach for his weapon to comply with the order, lights him up.
No matter what being druged up, being stoned, acting silly, slurring your words etc etc are no reason to be shot to death. It seems to be an undisputed fact that he was ordered to reach for his weapon, and that he was shot when he did. His weapon was still in its holster, which makes it appear to me that he was lucid enough to know not to draw on the cops, but to remove his weapon while holstered to avoid the appearance of trying to draw on cops.
We all now know that this appearance is an impossible task. Better to keep your hands in the air.
...none of the camera were working mysterously when this happened?”
This happens at airports, too, when the TSA is misbehaving...
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.