Posted on 10/05/2010 6:01:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
Seriously,though, my guess is that he stumbled and scraped his knuckles reaching for something to keep from falling.
I’m not on drugs, and I stumble while walking (due to a back injury). When I get that ‘kink’ (caused by vertebrae grinding against swollen nerves), the pain is overwhelming. Good thing it only lasts a few seconds or I’d carry a gun just so I could shoot myself.
No,a cop isn't justified to kill someone *simply* because one is under the influence of something.But I can assure that in my 20 years of work in an inner city ER I saw many,many,many,many....MANY....cases where a person high on alcohol,heroin,coke,amphetamines,etc did things that were *very* harmful (and all too often,fatal) to themselves and/or others.If you'd like details Freepmail me your phone number and I'll regale you for a few days with my stories (including the ones about murder victims and of ER staff be attacked and threatened by such people).
Of course I don't expect you to give me your phone number but you gotta trust me on this.
Actually his knuckles could have been hurt in numerous ways as he worked out everyday.
Your post is exactly what this inquest was looking to do, smear Scott as an addict. Did they bring out that he was a healthfood nut and exercised everyday? No.
Thanks, UCANSEE2, but my point was not that holding these officers accountable is an assault on police, my point was that there is an anti-police faction on FR that views all police as a gestapo and anyone who respects law enforcement as some kind of bootlicker. It sure does seem these guys screwed up in the worst way.
I hope you didn't get that idea based on my comments. It sure isn't what I mean to convey.
Most of this info I had the day after he was killed.
I'm not convinced that Mr. Scott was 'impaired' in his ability to go shopping and act like a responsible, gun carrying citizen.
IF he was as bad as the INQUEST implies, then I would question why anyone allowed him to go to the store, or why anyone allowed him to stay once he entered.
In other words, I am trying to be as open-minded about the possibilities as I can.
Unfortunately the KEY pieces of evidence are being withheld from the public. I can accept that if the evidence is only withheld pending a court case.
BUT, that is not the case.
I agree with the 'hindsight' issue. Calling the play from a computer screen, and being faced with an 'unknown' and possibly 'under the influence' citizen who is reportedly armed are two different things.
That still doesn't explain the last bullet in the back, while he was laying on the ground.
That last phrase, ‘last bullet in the back’ is figurative.
IIRC, the bullet went in through his posterior and up towards his lungs.
If his knuckles were bleeding to the point others noticed it, it is more likely that whatever caused it happened very recently.
Going from the gym to the store would mean still raw knuckles. And I wouldn’t buy into every word they utter because they effectively speak in half sentences such as “Johnny broke into the old ladies house”. What you didn’t hear was that the house was on fire and the old lady trapped inside.
My point was I haven't seen any of 'those' Freepers on this thread.
It sure does seem these guys screwed up in the worst way.
Good thing their Chief Of Police and the Prosecutor and AG in LV are used to covering up these messes, or these guys would be screwed.
Yes the evidence is being withheld and that is a problem. I think the impared story is just a way to smear him and is just a story and is not based upon facts. The way Costco, the police, DA and Coroner have handled this raised many questions in my mind. I do not trust the government in this case.
That is not to say that I totally believe the family either, but the family does not have the power of the gun, like the goevernment does, to force what they want to happen.
I agree. The alleged ‘raw knuckles’ could be from anything.
And prove nothing.
They may still be. Truth has a way of coming out.
I think the 'chart' at the inquest was a way to smear him.
BUT, I think that anyone who is on long-term medications such as muscle-relaxants, sedatives, or pain-killers is impaired in some way.
Since police claim Mr. Scott didn't INSTANTLY respond to their commands to GET DOWN, and seemed 'confused', it is possible he was slightly 'impaired'.
Since his gun was in a zippered pouch, he would have been slow at getting it out of the pouch and cocking the hammer, had police actually allowed time for that to even happen. Instead, the first officer started firing because Mr. Scott 'moved' (or didn't, depending on which officer you ask).
The police shooting Mr. Scott SEVEN TIMES had nothing to do with any drugs.
Since the first officer TAPPED Mr. Scott on the shoulder and told him to TURN AROUND, it means they COULD HAVE just TACKLED HIM instead of SHOOTING, given there was a CROWD of INNOCENT BYSTANDERS who could get hit by the gunfire.
That is why this is ALL WRONG. The police 'on scene' rushed to judgment and decided to endanger the crowd, rather than themselves.
After all those involved are dead, or safe from prosecution.
You would think that by now, we would know who killed JFK.
We do. Lee Harvey Oswald. The JFK conspiracy theory cottage industry is just that, an industry. People are still claiming there were shots from the grassy knoll when analysis of the Zapbruder film proves that the supposed shot from the grassy knoll would have had to magically pass through the first lady's head.
It's easy. You remove the gun from the holster, lay the gun back down, and put the holster in your pocket. Then you start yelling, "he pointed a gun at me".
(there were people who stated to reporters that the gun was in his waistband in a holster, and that he threw it on the ground as he was being shot, and that the holster just 'disappeared' in the excitement.)
“That is why this is ALL WRONG. The police ‘on scene’ rushed to judgment and decided to endanger the crowd, rather than themselves.”
Yes that is right, all we are seeing now is the coverup. In the words of O the police acted stupidly. In the words of most sane people the police commited a crime.
“That still doesn’t explain the last bullet in the back, while he was laying on the ground.”
Even if everything else was exactly as the cops say, this is beyond my understanding. Do modern LEO academies have instruction in administering kill shots? Incidents like this are why I will never willingly interact with a cop. Nothing good and much bad can come from it. I am cognizant of the fact that any interaction with a cop can end up ruining my life so I stay as far away from them as practical. I don’t do anything illegal as a matter of course but the way some cops act these days is uncomforting.
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.