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.
where did you dig up that nugget ???
If you want to do an experiment then join Las Vegas Metro. Every time you get a call that someone is armed, threatening, under the influence of drugs, and reaches for his gun when you first approach him, do your politeness routine. Let us know how it goes.
The doctor testified at the inquest.
>> In any case, I don’t see how that justifies the cops shooting a man whose gun was still in its holster,
Every so often we get a situation that reeks of gross injustice. Such is the case here I believe.
Oh, don't get me wrong, those cops were buttheads. So were the nasty female cop that threatened me with arrest for standing on a sidewalk with a protest sign minding my own business. But that doesn't mean all cops are bad, or that there aren't some whole departments that suck and some whole departments that are really professional. In fact, every other interaction I've had with law enforcement has been professional, including a run-in with more cops on the same street corner a few weeks later.
I stand by my statement. Much of the anti-cop stuff on this board amounts to bigotry, plain and simple.
BTW, what did you do about those cops?
As far as I can tell the source of your information is Erik's father and he admits the search and taking of items was legal. Do you have any more information about it?
must be nice to allow hearsay testimony, uncrossed at an 'inquisition'...
Im supposed to believe he went to a doc and asked for pain meds for depression, when he had demonstrable injuries that could actually result in pain ???
and as far as yer petty lil 'stand in the trenches' routine, garbage men are civil servants too, without all the life & death split second decisions...maybe curly couldnt pass the physical though...
I know a few people who carry two. Most of them have past military or LEO service and heartily believe in having a 'backup' (often smaller and lighter caliber) weapon in case their strong side arm/hand is disabled in an altercation so they can continue to defend themselves without fumbling for their main weapon.
No, I neither consider it unusual nor 'crackpot', but simply good preparation for any fracas one might end up in. Since these are guys who have been in such situations either in combat or the line of duty, it seems prudent.
Keep in mind that I come from a state where the CCW is for the person, not the individual weapon: the number of weapons on your person is at your individual discretion (you do not require an individual permit for each firearm or other dangerous weapon unless NFA rules apply).
Now it's a "search"? I thought they were just securing property & firearms...
LOL! Fastest I've ever seen a "civil servant" move. The Public Administrator’s Office is to be commended for their zeal & single-minded dedication to "gettin' 'er done" on a Saturday evening. ROTFLMAO! A Saturday evening!
BTW - Waco and Ruby Ridge were legal too...
“Every time you get a call that someone is armed, threatening, under the influence of drugs, and reaches for his gun when you first approach him, do your politeness routine. Let us know how it goes.”
Except you are comparing apples with oranges. Scott was visibly exiting the store calmly - so much so that 6 seconds before shooting, the cops didn’t realize he was the person they had been called about.
Nor did Scott reach for his gun as the cops approached him. As best as I can figure out the testimony, someone (Mosher) touched Scott from behind. Scott turned and faced him, while also touching his gun - commonly done to see if it is still there after someone puts their hand on you from behind. The cops then said ““Put your hands where I see them now, drop it, get on the ground, get on the ground...” and opened fire - almost in one motion. As quickly as they could say it, they opened fire - TWO seconds from the first spoken word to shooting.
That says a lot about what happened.
In roughly TWO seconds, Mosher touched Scott, Scott turned to face him and also reached to check on his weapon. The cops shouted “Put your hands where I see them now, drop it, get on the ground, get on the ground...” and fired - all in the next two seconds.
So here is your 6 seconds sequence:
During the first two seconds, Scott is identified to the cops and Mosher moves behind him.
During the middle two seconds, Mosher touches Scott, who pushes Mosher’s arm away while turning to face him & checking for his gun.
During the final two seconds, the cops start issuing commands and open fire. Frankly, Scott never stood a chance. What he did was immaterial. In the course of 4 seconds, he went from exiting the store to a bullet in his heart. Try it yourself - you’re walking along, believing yourself to be a law abiding person. In 4 seconds, someone touches you from behind, you turn, they start giving commands and point their guns at you and open fire...what would you have done? Would you have realized, that quickly, what was happening and dropped to your knees while raising your hands? You have TWO SECONDS from first word to death!
If the time line posted on http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/306409.php is accurate, Scott never had a chance. He was killed before he could realize that HE was the suspect, and that the cops were ready to use deadly force.
Now, think about MY way...don’t confront at the entrance because it is crowded. Wait until the parking lot, then walk towards him - so he can see you - and simply ask him if he can talk to you for a minute. If that had happened, do you think Scott would have drawn his gun and opened fire?
Remember, to fire Scott’s gun, he needs to pull it out of the holster & rack the slide to arm it, and then fire. Is there ANYTHING that makes you think Scott was interested in killing any cops that day? ANYTHING?
No one has accused Scott of having a gun in his hand as he exited the store. No one has accused him of acting erratically leaving the store. No one - including the cops - looked and thought “That man is behaving dangerously!”
No one.
Yet within 4-5 seconds of being identified to the cops, Scott was fatally wounded.
And you call that good police work? Based on the time line, it is at least manslaughter - taking actions that a reasonable person could expect to result in the death of an innocent person.
“If you want to do an experiment then join Las Vegas Metro. Every time you get a call that someone is armed, threatening, under the influence of drugs, and reaches for his gun when you first approach him, do your politeness routine. Let us know how it goes.”
One other point - I’ve been in combat. I’ve been shot at. I didn’t just start shooting back. Know your target. Know the ROE and comply with it. Discipline!
It is something Mosher doesn’t seem familiar with...
I listened to the audio tape!!
The girlfriend did not give them permission to enter their apartment.
I have seen no evidence where the father condoned this.
That means Scott unclipped his holster from his rear waistband and moved it and the gun in front of himself very quickly if you're timeline is correct, which we don't know.
I don’t think the father condoned it, but he didn’t call it illegal either. There’s a letter to the editor by him with the information. It’s easy to find if you care to check the accuracy of your sources.
It is something Mosher doesn’t seem familiar with...
Mosher complied with the laws of Nevada and his training based on the information he had. Mosher identified the person who was known to him to be armed, under the influence of drugs, and threatening. He gave the person a chance to comply with verbal commands. The person didn't comply, but went for his gun and pointed at Mosher. Mosher fired at the center of mass, which reduces the chances that a bystander will be hurt. The other officers also fired at the center of mass until the threat was ended (sometimes the suspect has another weapon). The threat was ended and no bystanders were hurt. The jury at the inquest made a unanimous decision (though unanimity was not required) in less than two hours that the shooting was justified.
The police had NO WARRANT !!
Here’s what the father said........
The Public Administrator (PA) gambit. On the day Erik was killed, the PA’s office called my other son, Kevin, within two hours, frantically trying to get “someone from the family” to give the PA permission to enter Erik’s condominium unit. Ostensibly, they were to (lawfully) secure valuables and any “weapons” prior to a family member arriving on-scene. Kevin spoke to the PA official once, explaining that he was in Dallas, Texas, and would be in Las Vegas the next morning, but would be airborne the next few hours, returning to Southern California.
While Kevin was in the air, unable to use his cell phone, the same PA official called again and again, leaving multiple voice-mails about the importance of obtaining family permission to break into Erik’s residence. A final message was to the effect that he really didn’t need permission to break the lock and go in, so he was doing so. No worries, though. He would be accompanied by a Metro police officer. That’s not unheard of, but it’s not typical for Metro to go with a PA, when entering the residence of a homicide victim, before a family member can be onsite. However, it’s also a convenient, quasi-legal way for police to paw through a victim’s belongings, without the inconvenience of obtaining a legal search warrant.
We’re not accusing the PA or Metro of taking anything, but these are the facts: Two items that we believe were in Erik’s condo are missing, but did not appear on the list of items the PA removed. One of those items is very important, and there’s currently no explanation for it “going missing” If it shows up as “evidence,” then we’ll know how Metro and the DA plan to virtually guarantee a “justified” verdict this week. That little gambit will never fly, though, if and when an unobstructed federal investigation into Erik’s death is conducted.
According to the father, they apparently didn't need one. BTW, did either of the two mystery objects show up at the inquest?
Since Scott was at the tail end of the people evacuated, that means there was a crowd outside that had been standing there for a while watching the police and wondering what this was about, for quite a while. The police had time to set up a command post. Yet no one had a cell phone camera and used it. Even with the traffic on the police scanner, and the parking lot full of police cars and ambulances, no one from the MEDIA was there, or they had no cameras????????????????
Again, what are the odds?
I said no such thing...... as a former deputy sheriff I agree with all your points shy of implied comments.
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.