3 Officers Involved in Shooting at Summerlin Costco

[my-rifle]

Done with it? We still have 12 pages to go!

 

[my-rifle]

Oops! 11 pages.

 

[posse comatosis]

unless there is VIDEO evidence

this thread is like beating on a

 

[posse comatosis]

unless there is VIDEO evidence

this thread is like beating on a

 

[swifttal]

Nice pic, haven't seen that one yet

 

[posse comatosis]

A fresh take on the inquest testimony raises some pressing questions that ring alarm bells in the shooting of Erik Scott:

http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/lie-face-down-and-let-yourself-be-cuffed--104659499.html?ref=499

 

[VincentBuckles]

you guys are amazing. You have no idea what happened, and even less idea what you are talking about. Have you ever dealt with someone who had a gun or you thought had a gun? No, so you have no idea what it looks like from that perspective. You read a news article and suddenly have an opinion.

i have been in those officers place more times than I could ever count. many times, the guy did have a gun and we would have been 100% justified in shooting, but that is not how it played out.

How nice it must be to pass judgment when you are completely ignorant of the facts in an incident or even the academic concepts surrounding one of it's same nature.


Unlike many of you, i am not saying the cops were right or wrong. However, i find it hard to believ that three cops woke up that morning and conspired to kill an innocent person. I find it much more believeable based on my personal experience, that the guy made a move or had something in his hands, and the officers acted in self-defense.

They probably received a call that he had a gun, and then he did not immediately comply, and made a move that made the officers fear for their lives.

that seems much more plausible.

It never ceases to amaze me the stupidity some people will stoop to. I mean really, don't you think cops will do everything in their power not to kill someone, if for no other reason than they know they will get sued whether they are right or wrong?

my answer to this is yes. i have been a a victim of a home invasion. on the corner of carlotta and state streets in baton rouge in march of 2006. it was me or him and i fired three shots from my glock 17 into center mass. it was in fact a very tramatic experience particularly because i was just laying down for bed on a sunday night when it happened. i made a textbook three for three hits to center mass and the intruder fell down and began to convulse. i called 9-11 immediately and did not contaminate the scene or even unload my weapon. i wanted the physical evidence to be clean for the crime scene guys...... and five minutes later my house was full of cops talking about how awesome the shooting was and asking stuff like " why didnt you shoot him in the head?" they were high fiving and saying stuff like "man, i wish something like this would happen to me".... they were totally jacked up on the fact that in a moment of truth i put down a methed out home invader with nothing more than muscle memory, a surefire flashlight and a 9mm pistol. they acted like it was a snuff film that they got the first viewing of. some even told me how jealous they were that i got to shoot someone and they didn't.

i'm not anti police. most of my friends outside of work are law enforcement of some kind. but those that havent been in a gun fight tend to glorify and hope for a moment that none of us should ever wish for.

 

[posse comatosis]

those that haven't been in a gun fight tend to glorify and hope for a moment that none of us should ever wish for.

Very well put, Mr. Buckles.

I myself have been in the position of a justified shoot that was resolved after I held off firing momentarily. But I know that point of no return of which you speak to avoid.

Here's another take on the shooting of Erik Scott. This one by a cop, no less. And he is not kind to the Las Vegas PD/Sheriff's joint operation in his analysis of the event.

 

[rebelray84]

my answer to this is yes. i have been a a victim of a home invasion. on the corner of carlotta and state streets in baton rouge in march of 2006. it was me or him and i fired three shots from my glock 17 into center mass. it was in fact a very tramatic experience particularly because i was just laying down for bed on a sunday night when it happened. i made a textbook three for three hits to center mass and the intruder fell down and began to convulse. i called 9-11 immediately and did not contaminate the scene or even unload my weapon. i wanted the physical evidence to be clean for the crime scene guys...... and five minutes later my house was full of cops talking about how awesome the shooting was and asking stuff like " why didnt you shoot him in the head?" they were high fiving and saying stuff like "man, i wish something like this would happen to me".... they were totally jacked up on the fact that in a moment of truth i put down a methed out home invader with nothing more than muscle memory, a surefire flashlight and a 9mm pistol. they acted like it was a snuff film that they got the first viewing of. some even told me how jealous they were that i got to shoot someone and they didn't.

i'm not anti police. most of my friends outside of work are law enforcement of some kind. but those that havent been in a gun fight tend to glorify and hope for a moment that none of us should ever wish for.

I have been wearing a uniform of one type or another for 21 years. I have been to on the scene of both police and civilan justified shootings,this with police from numerous different departments. I have NEVER seen or heard of anything even remotely like what you just described.

This what you are talking about?

http://importgundefense.wordpress.com/category/altercation/page/19/

 

[VincentBuckles]

yes thats the advocate release of the shooting. i have a full copy of the police report and it does not use the term " knocking" and is not vague at all. the police report also mentions the large hunting/utility knife the man had and the papers never spoke about. although i was never detained or charged and the home invader was charged with aggravated bulglary... the newspapers never bothered to print a real story on it. never do they mention the guy was high as a kite, holding a knife, and that i had never seen him before he tried to run up in my home. his famous words before i shot him as he came at me were " what are you gonna do? shoot me?'

 

[Nolacopusmc]

my answer to this is yes. i have been a a victim of a home invasion. on the corner of carlotta and state streets in baton rouge in march of 2006. it was me or him and i fired three shots from my glock 17 into center mass. it was in fact a very tramatic experience particularly because i was just laying down for bed on a sunday night when it happened. i made a textbook three for three hits to center mass and the intruder fell down and began to convulse. i called 9-11 immediately and did not contaminate the scene or even unload my weapon. i wanted the physical evidence to be clean for the crime scene guys...... and five minutes later my house was full of cops talking about how awesome the shooting was and asking stuff like " why didnt you shoot him in the head?" they were high fiving and saying stuff like "man, i wish something like this would happen to me".... they were totally jacked up on the fact that in a moment of truth i put down a methed out home invader with nothing more than muscle memory, a surefire flashlight and a 9mm pistol. they acted like it was a snuff film that they got the first viewing of. some even told me how jealous they were that i got to shoot someone and they didn't.

i'm not anti police. most of my friends outside of work are law enforcement of some kind. but those that havent been in a gun fight tend to glorify and hope for a moment that none of us should ever wish for.

********. ********. and ********!

This is how it really went down.

You called 911 and every SWAT team from the tri-parish area responded since you just confessed to being " A MAN WITH A GUN", which everyone here knows is a felony.

When the JBT's arrived, they shot your dog and your neighbor's dog, for officer safety of course.

Then you were beat with a phone book while they searched your home without a warrant after lying to you about whether that was legal the existence of Bigfoot, Santa Clause, and who killed JFK.

When they were done raping your cats and shitting on your bedsheets, they broke every window of your house... because they could.

When it was all said and done, they left ruts in your yard, seized your guns, ripped all your sofa cushions, and drove to your mama's house to slap her.

it is high time you stopped covering for these statist thugs and FIGHT THE POWER!











JJ

 

[my-rifle]

********. ********. and ********!

This is how it really went down.

You called 911 and every SWAT team from the tri-parish area responded since you just confessed to being " A MAN WITH A GUN", which everyone here knows is a felony.

When the JBT's arrived, they shot your dog and your neighbor's dog, for officer safety of course.

Then you were beat with a phone book while they searched your home without a warrant after lying to you about whether that was legal the existence of Bigfoot, Santa Clause, and who killed JFK.

When they were done raping your cats and shitting on your bedsheets, they broke every window of your house... because they could.

When it was all said and done, they left ruts in your yard, seized your guns, ripped all your sofa cushions, and drove to your mama's house to slap her.

it is high time you stopped covering for these statist thugs and FIGHT THE POWER!

So where does this Costco thing sit right now? All we've seen so far is the Coronor's Inquest, right? It ended with multiple witnesses corroborating the police's version of events, right?

 

[posse comatosis]

The way it sits right now is the cops are off the meat hook for criminal charges and the civil suit is pending. Strip away all the ******** and basically the cops shot a guy for doing what they told him to. The civil suit is not going to go well for the cops or the city or for COSTCO, who made a false report to the police which was subsequently embellished by a police dispatcher.

Meanwhile, an examination of the inquest procedure is underway:
http://www.ktnv.com/Global/story.asp?S=13346574

 

[Hitman]

Strip away all the ******** and basically the cops shot a guy for doing what they told him to.

Sure ....

 

[posse comatosis]

It will be different in civil court. Out of three possible commands, drop your weapon was the most prominent. Scott's weapon was not initially in his hand, so he was compelled to reach for his gun, grasp it and remove it in order to comply. Somewhere in the sequence of events Scott was shot to death by the police.

Detrimental reliance is a civil law thing. Somebody acts on your bad faith advice and gets torted, you must compensate him for his damages.

It's going to get even dicier if that homicide detective's testimony at the inquest proves out. He claims to have removed Scott's gun and holster, the gun still intact in the holster, from his waistband after Scott was immobile on the floor. Go figure the implications of that.

 

[my-rifle]

It will be different in civil court. Out of three possible commands, drop your weapon was the most prominent. Scott's weapon was not initially in his hand, so he was compelled to reach for his gun, grasp it and remove it in order to comply. Somewhere in the sequence of events Scott was shot to death by the police.

Detrimental reliance is a civil law thing. Somebody acts on your bad faith advice and gets torted, you must compensate him for his damages.

It's going to get even dicier if that homicide detective's testimony at the inquest proves out. He claims to have removed Scott's gun and holster, the gun still intact in the holster, from his waistband after Scott was immobile on the floor. Go figure the implications of that.

But I got from this thread that the police were cleared?

 

[Nolacopusmc]

It will be different in civil court. Out of three possible commands, drop your weapon was the most prominent. Scott's weapon was not initially in his hand, so he was compelled to reach for his gun, grasp it and remove it in order to comply. Somewhere in the sequence of events Scott was shot to death by the police.

Detrimental reliance is a civil law thing. Somebody acts on your bad faith advice and gets torted, you must compensate him for his damages.

It's going to get even dicier if that homicide detective's testimony at the inquest proves out. He claims to have removed Scott's gun and holster, the gun still intact in the holster, from his waistband after Scott was immobile on the floor. Go figure the implications of that.

How do you know all this? What if the commands to drop the gun came immediately after his dumbass pulled it from his waistband?

FUnny how you know everything that happened...oh sorry, the media told you.

 

[Hitman]

How do you know all this?

I really think, he thinks we are sheep and believe everything we read without further thought. Kind of like the Liberal Media that will twist things to push their agenda. Which is why he wrote his post as if speaking from authority with 100% Eye Witness, unbiased fact.

When I read his post yesterday, my first thought was, 'Who the Frack is this guy?' then I thought, "he sounds just like the Liberal MSM" just saying things as if their true hoping the public will give NO FURTHER thought and just believe it and spread it.

my .02 ...

 

[Nolacopusmc]

I really think, he thinks we are sheep and believe everything we read without further thought. Kind of like the Liberal Media that will twist things to push their agenda. Which is why he wrote his post as if speaking from authority with 100% Eye Witness, unbiased fact.

When I read his post yesterday, my first thought was, 'Who the Frack is this guy?' then I thought, "he sounds just like the Liberal MSM" just saying things as if their true hoping the public will give NO FURTHER thought and just believe it and spread it.

my .02 ...

I wonder if he is the same guy who "has testified as a court recognized expert in several hundred cases over the past several hundred years" who is still applying the law as he learned it in the back of his pappy's squad car while riding with him when he was a kid in 1905.

The guy who thinks you can be charged with a crime for ignoring a "no guns sign."

The guy who has no clue how the CHP process has worked since 1978.

The guy who is a little past his prime in knowledge when it comes to contemporary law.

 

[Hitman]

At any rate I've read all the same material involving this case and I've stated my opinion on this case about 4 times in the last 300 posts. Here’s a 5th;

My bottom line is that Scott kicked this whole thing off when he decided to carry two firearms while under the severe influence of Px Drugs then refused to leave private property immediately when asked to do so. Scott put everyone around him in harms way and forced LEO’s into a Horrible position.

The only GUILTY person in this trial IMHO is Erik Scott.