Posted on 10/05/2010 6:01:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
The "Long Gray Line" is bringing pressure on the Vegas department following Erik Scott's death in a hail of bullets.
It was a foregone conclusion that a coroner’s inquest in Las Vegas would find three Metro police officers justified in gunning down Erik Scott in a hail of bullets outside of a crowded Costco on July 10, even though five of the seven bullets hit him from behind, and at least one appeared to have been fired while Scott lay prone, dead or dying on the ground.
Police were called to the store after an employee described Scott as both armed and acting as if he were under the influence of narcotics. As Scott and his girlfriend emerged from the store along with dozens of other shoppers, he was confronted by a trio of officers with weapons already drawn. Scott was identified by a Costco employee, and seconds later, Scott lay dead on the ground. These are the facts of the case that are not in dispute.
What is very much in dispute is whether or not Costco employees unnecessarily escalated the threat, whether the store chain’s unclear policies on customers carrying weapons and their employee training contributed to the events that led to Scott’s death, and whether or not police officers violated Erik Scott’s civil rights when they killed him in a confrontation that some argue was little more than an ambush or assassination.
Erik Scott’s family is expected to file a civil case against Costco, the Metro police, and the individual officers over his death, but that isn’t the only action being called for because of this incident. Metro has raised the ire of the the Long Gray Line — Erik Scott’s fellow graduates of the United States Military Academy.
Sources have provided PJM with copies of communications between members of the group. Alumni in the threaded discussion seem almost universally suspect of the coroner’s inquest process used in Las Vegas, where prosecutors and law enforcement control the witnesses called and the questions asked, and disallow cross-examination. Since 1976, law enforcement officers have been in front of the coroner’s inquest more than 200 times, and none has resulted in criminal charges being filed against an officer for even the most controversial shootings.
One alum wrote to the president of one of the larger West Point Society chapters:
I don’t know if you are aware of the tragic shooting of Eric Scott ‘94 in Las Vegas not long ago. It looks more and more like a police screw up and cover up on top of that. We are trying to bring as much political pressure to bear, as possible, to make sure the “truth” comes out.
Another suggested that members bring the Scott case to the attention of West Point and Naval Academy graduates in Congress: Rep. John Shimkus, Rep. Joe Sestak, Rep. Geoff Davis, Rep. Brett Guthrie, Senator Jack Reed, Senator John McCain, and Senator Jim Webb, and well as Nevada’s Congressional delegation, plus Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy and Chairman of the House Judicial Committee John Conyers. (Interestingly enough, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s name was never mentioned.)
One of the strongest comments openly suggested that the Metropolitan Police Department should be considered as an adversary:
I think that we, as a society, need to take a more active stance. This needs to go to the AOG. Remember the words of “The Corps.” We all took the same oath the Erik Scott did many years ago, on the Plain “to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic.” The abuse of due process, not only for Erik, but all of the others who didn’t have a voice is an attack on the Constitution.
There were at least three of us at the vigil last night. I think that we need to have a much more visible presence to show our support of a member of The Long Gray Line.
Another graduate called Metro PD an “out of control police force,” a characterization that seems to match up with the analysis of the shooting conducted by Mike McDaniel, a former police officer and SWAT operator (also my co-blogger at Confederate Yankee) who recently analyzed the audio of the 911 call and the police radio transcripts. Troubling bursts of static in the Metro radio traffic at key points indicate that these communications need to be examined, and the lack of in-car camera footage from the multiple police cars is also odd — to put it mildly. This is on top of the fact that Costco’s cameras seemingly malfunctioned in the days before the shooting, meaning that none of the four cameras pointed at the scene of the shooting recorded the event according to Metro and Costco — the two entities that have the most to lose from disclosure of such evidence.
A letter composed by one of the officers has been submitted to Thomas E. Perez, assistant attorney general for the Civil Rights Division in the Department of Justice, outlining “an on-going pattern of police misconduct” by authorities in Las Vegas and citing 63 officer-involved shootings since 2005.
Eric Scott’s death may have been ruled justifiable during the coroner’s inquest, but the pending civil trial to be filed by his family, and the specter of a federal civil rights case being filed against the department, means that the spotlight on the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department and its leadership will only get brighter.
“As soon as Mosher approached Scott, Scott reached for his gun, failed to follow any commands, and eventually pointed the gun at Mosher, which any CCW holder should know not to do if he’s in his right mind.”
Nope. Didn’t happen. How do I know? Because in the two seconds from the first word to shooting, there wasn’t TIME for Scott to pull his holster out and “eventually” point the gun at the cop. In two seconds, at best Scott could get the holster into his hand, nothing more. And by that time, Mosher’s brain had already told his finger to contract.
TWO SECONDS!
Failed to follow commands? If I start giving you orders, how long will it take for you to comply? Do you wait for me to finish giving orders? Most people would. That is how we handle real life - if someone is giving us instructions, we don’t start obeying while they are still talking. Not in TWO SECONDS!
First word to shot: TWO SECONDS.
If I shout “Get down on the ground! Right now!”, I just used TWO SECONDS. And Mosher fired at the second exclamation mark. That means he made the firing decision at the first exclamation mark.
If you aren’t expecting it, how long does it take you to register that A) Someone is a cop, B) they are talking to YOU, and C) comply with an order to get on the ground? It would take me two seconds or more to get on the ground even if I anticipated the cops command.
“Everything Scott did reinforced everything the dispatchers told the officers on the scene about Scott: that he was armed, threatening, and under the influence of drugs. That was WHAT MOSHER’S EYES SAW! “
Horseshit! SIX SECONDS before they shot Scott, they didn’t know he was the suspect. Scott was pointed out to them. With 4 seconds left, Mosher touches Scott. Scott turns and checks his gun - like a good CCW holder would. Scott now has 2 seconds to live. The cops start giving him commands - more than one cop, since it isn’t possible to say everything that was on the tape in 2 seconds. Physical evidence says those who claim multiple cops were giving commands were right. Before the commands were finished, Mosher fired.
He never gave Scott a chance to comply.
“Based on what Mosher knew, Scott was just as likely to take a bystander as a shield and start shooting if he was approached with your method of courageous restraint and politeness.”
Nope. Scott was leaving quietly. NO SIGN of abnormal behavior. Mosher acted on what he thought he knew, rather than what his eyes told him.
NO ONE seeing Scott without first being prejudiced by the Costco employees considered him any kind of threat. And that is why the Costco employees may be liable.
“Scott was just as likely to take a bystander as a shield and start shooting if he was approached with your method of courageous restraint and politeness.”
With two armed cops behind him? He wouldn’t do it for long, would he!
“here was conflicting witness testimony. However, after six days of testimony, the jury unanimously decided in less than two hours that the shooting was justified. I’ll leave it to you to determine which witnesses they found the most credible.”
One of my points is you ALWAYS make the physical evidence primary. Scott’s gun, in a holster with the hammer down. Two seconds from first word to first bullet. Those are FACTS. We have the photos. We have the recordings.
“IF you ever confirm your time line, then I will be interested in your theories derived from it. “
Time to get interested, then. The time line is the one presented during day 2 at the inquest.
[Honesty Disclaimer]: That is what they showed on a moving display with a time hack for each sentence. I tried to follow the tape, and got about twice that...12 seconds. As garbled as the tape was, I have to guess that the time line the inquest displayed in minutes and seconds was accurate - otherwise, why add a distorted time line? When I reviewed the full tape, my stopwatch regularly varied from the time line shown at the side...maybe due to their playback machine? At some points it seemed to freeze up for 10-15 seconds.
the fact that curly was close enuff, and actually did reach out and touch scott, and noticed his 'bloodshot' eyes without noticing that the pistol was holstered is more problematic for me...
that and the chaos of a mass evac, which triggered [sorry] the hasty confrontation...
that and the fact that helos and swat and everybody but the friggin maytag repairman was called out because a pu%%y costco employee wanted to be a badass...over a legally carried pistol...and dont even get me started on 'legally'...
One more point.
“Sometimes threatening people with bad intent act cool when they are trying to elude the police, but I’m sure you already know that.”
IOW, assume he is guilty and shoot him before he can do anything wrong. Doesn’t quite sound like due process, does it? Judge, jury, executioner, and you don’t even have to wait for wrongdoing. Just anticipate and shoot!
> “Asecond shooter on the knoll is impossible, a shot fired by Oswald that hit both men is possible, ergo...”
.
Disregarding all the very competent analysis that disproves both of those assertions, the grand fact of the entire mess is that if Oswald were the shooter, there would have been no possible reason to seal the evidence.
Case closed.
.
yer beatin yer head against a wall Sir...theres a disconnect, either naive or evil, that this shoot was good, because a one sided inquest says so...
This is true.
BUT! Metro, and Metro's defenders, including Moonman62, have taken that fact as carte blanche to pretend that Erik Scott's gun WAS loaded.
I'm not going to let them get away with it any more.
You'll notice that Moonpie simply won't answer the question or respond to it in any way - because if it was unloaded, then Erik Scott KNEW it was unloaded, and what he was doing was just handing over a harmless piece of hardware, as ordered. And Mosher committed manslaughter - shooting an unarmed man down like a dog.
Furthermore, unless there was an objective observer to watch as Scott's gun was checked for a "round in the pipe", it must be presumed that Metro is willing to lie about it.
an unloaded weapon does speak to his frame of mind in that regard...
i merely suggested that the argument was and is falling on deaf ears...just as the 2-6 second timeline for compliance to orders from a servant...
from day one though, the fact that cops were there, and in such force over one guy is mindbogglin...
“from day one though, the fact that cops were there, and in such force over one guy is mindbogglin...”
Worth repeating. A lot of response for a guy carrying concealed and not acting like a threat. The tape played at the inquest has the Costco employee talking about about how someone was knifed earlier and they take this sort of thing very seriously - again, painting Scott as a homicidal maniac. He later tries to back it down, but I think there will be a valid civil case to bring against him.
Got to teach the peasants who is Boss.
If Scott hadn't been a West Pointer, and his dad wasn't so forceful, he'd be just another bug on Metro's windshield...
So, Moonpie - you were going to explain to us all how Erik Scott was likely to take a bystander as a shield and start shooting an unloaded gun in a holster.
Was he going do a Blazing Saddles, and grab himself by the neck, hold his holstered, unloaded gun to his head and shout "Nobody move, or the drug-crazed red-headed dope addict gets it!"?
Interesting that you make that point, when the fact that the carcass of Flight 800 is on permanent display doesn’t dissuade you from that conspiracy theory. :-)
no doubt he hoped to see scott froggmarched, but he set the events in motion, and then when he really shouldve screamed 'OH S#!t' once the evac happened...instead he took the cowardly way out and weakly tried to call off the rabid dogs...
the day after, i heard zero witnesses state that scott was acting anything more than annoyed...supposedly the other employee even helped him load the stuff into his cart...hardly a wild eyed and threatening presence in the store...
but you cant un-ring a bell, so he paid the price for our police state of security, hopefully it awakened some sheep......
>dang shark, you made me go there...8^}
Maybe I should warn people about *my* warped sense of humor....
Nah, it’s far too amusing to let them experience it first.
;)
she was an amazon of the german variety and shared a sick sense-o-humor too...
unfortunately, threads like that distract me from where Im supposed to be...
a distraction of >6 seconds can prove to be fatal in vegas...
"Zero tolerance" has moved from the socialist government schools into the broader society.
We'll call it "Zero Tolerance for the peasants" - double tap in the chest, 4 in the back, and one up the @ss to remind everybody who the master is, and who the servant is...
You can't tell if it did? How were the cops supposed to know?
At the time of the Erik Scott incident, the Metro police get the benefit of the doubt - they get to assume the gun is loaded.
After the fact, however, once it becomes apparent that Erik Scott was a legal CCW holder, a former military officer who was quite familiar with firearms, who had a whole 2-6 seconds to "pull his gun and fire at a police officer", then it becomes a question that any reasonable armed citizen wants an answer to.
I know that right now, my 9mm has a clip in it, but there's no round in the chamber. I know when I'm carrying, I check my piece multiple times for an empty chamber, just to be safe.
On the other hand, while watching the defenders of Metro on the Interwebs, you see them going overboard with wild assumptions stemming from the unproven assertion that "the gun was LOADED!!!". After Officer Mosher claimed at the inquest that he had a holster like Erik's, and that he could fire his gun through, skeptics on another forum were subjected to a Metro defender ramming around for multiple days betting everyone a hundred dollars that he could have fired at the police through Erik's holster.
Not if the gun was unloaded.
On this thread, we have Moonpie claiming that Erik may have used an innocent bystander as a shield.
Not if the gun was unloaded.
I'm willing to grant them it at the time of the incident, but they don't get to smear the dead after the fact with it, capice?.
They should assume it's not? Please.
I refuse to concede the point, Metro defender.
No, the cops shouldn't assume there was no round in the chamber.
Metro defender.
Sorry, just pointing out your faulty logic.
It is your logic that is faulty. We should be thankful that you're not a computer programmer.
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.