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.
That's not the point. Some here claim that if no round was chambered, the cops should have known that before they fired.
Do you have that ability, or would you make an assumption?
I would assume that it was loaded.
However, if I accused the guy of attempted murder, and it was found that the gun wasn't loaded, how would that stand up in court? Would I still get to speculate in court WITHOUT REBUTTAL that the guy "could have shot through his holster" or "he could have used an innocent bystander as a human shield"?
I'd get laughed out of court.
Really? Who posted that? Can you point us to the particular post?
Me too.
However, if I accused the guy of attempted murder, and it was found that the gun wasn't loaded, how would that stand up in court?
Since we've agreed that the cops couldn't read minds, how should they react to the threat of the loaded gun?
Would I still get to speculate in court WITHOUT REBUTTAL that the guy "could have shot through his holster"
We've got one of those 20/20 hindsight things going on here.
I thought we agreed they couldn't read his mind and couldn't tell if the gun was loaded?
When Scott saw Mosher at the door, he took the initiative to disarm himself. Mosher testified that Scott told him "I have a gun." In a normal situation that's the proper thing for a CCW holder to do, for instance, at a traffic stop, although I think Scott should have said, "I have a CCW and I'm armed." It's much less threatening.
I believe Scott then lifted his shirt to show that he was armed, and then began to reach for his holster and gun. Up to this point, I don't believe Mosher had issued any commands. But when Scott started to bring the gun and holster out, Mosher became alarmed and issued all the commands in less than two seconds and fired his weapon as Scott moved his gun toward him.
Yes - the 20/20 hindsight thing where Officer Mosher said at the inquest that he owns the same type of holster, and the gun could be “easily fired” while in its holster.
Without being challenged.
BTW - I'm still waiting for you to point out the post where "Some here claim that if no round was chambered, the cops should have known that before they fired."...
You don’t do very well with the English language, do you?
The cops can’t tell if a round is chambered, right?
Quit changing the facts to suit your narrative.
Scott had his back to Mosher, and Mosher touched Erik from behind. "[Shai] Lierley testified that an officer--presumably Mosher--touched Scott, who pushed his arm away."
Right.
Mosher got to pretend that he knew that Scott could shoot through the holster, which was covered up until Scott lifted his shirt, in the 1-2 seconds before he shot him. This was unchallenged at the inquest.
"Hey!It'smyholster!Hecanshootthroughit!BLAMBLAM!!!"
That was 9 seconds longer than Erik Scott got before the circular firing squad.
Geez - it's not enough that Metro had a one-sided smearfest at Erik Scott's expense.
Now we got the Internet Metrobots making $hit up wholesale to further smear Scott, and justify Mosher's panicked actions.
.
Minus the four seat cushions with the rocket fuel residue...
.
> “You don’t do very well with the English language, do you?”
.
The Toad doesn’t do well with anything.
Just a F’n shill for the statists and atheists is all he’s ever been.
.
Right.
So why does it matter now if a round was chambered?
Tell us again about the grassy knoll. LOL!
As I wrote, I believe the lack of a round in the chamber speaks more to Scott’s mind that anything else. It means he WASN’T a threat - and since he was not a threat, why did the cops act as though he was a gun-waving madman?
Suppose all the cops had been told was that there had been a disturbance at Costco, and they had entered with no other bias. Do you think they would have shot Scott the moment he moved?
The only way I can comprehend going from first word to first shot in 2 seconds is if the cops entered believing Scott was a very dangerous threat that had to be stopped before he killed someone.
Could they decide that based on <5 seconds of watching him quietly exit? No. That is why I believe some of the Costco employees have liability - their reports prepped the cops. However, I also think the cops will be found to have some liability, because a cop should be able to adjust to what he is seeing.
If someone is exiting quietly, the presumption of innocence means he shouldn’t be shot without having time to comply or explain. The scenario Moonman62 gives probably is pretty close. Add in that Scott KNEW he wasn’t a threat, and that the whole incident covers just a few seconds, and you have the death of a man who didn’t need killing.
If the cops are trained to behave the way Mosher did, then the training is wrong and the inquest should have insisted on a full review. Without it, there will be a repeat.
If the time line the DA displayed is correct, then I think the cops bear significant guilt. We expect and get more from our soldiers in a war zone. The LV Costco isn’t a war zone. If anything, the presumption of innocence should be stronger there than in Fallujah. It wasn’t. That is wrong.
.
I’ll tell you again about that finger that keeps finding its way into your nostril...
.
I've got a box of rocks that's sharper than you are.
So, you just keep rephrasing the same stupid line of "reasoning", over and over, till your debating opponents fall asleep from sheer boredom?
BTW, I'm still waiting for you to point out the post where "Some here claim that if no round was chambered, the cops should have known that before they fired."...
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.