Thought that this shooting was interesting. Involved a legal CCP holder and the Vegas police. http://www.usma1994.com/classnews.aspx?newsid=16
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Shooting in Las Vegas
- Thread starter T(1)of(3)
- Start date
Obviously rediculous and for some reason it does not surprise me as it happens more often than we know.
- Joined
- May 17, 2008
- Messages
- 16,975
- Likes
- 2,820
This drives me nuts.
This is a dupe, but the original thread isn't available for some reason. The below link is to a thread that's still active which touches on this.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...Front-Sight-and-the-recent-Las-Vegas-shooting
There's something very interesting about the details presented in that paragraph. Before anyone freaks out about a coverup, ask yourself, if this shooting happened in Las Vegas Nevada, why was the video sent to a forenics lab in Los Angeles California? I have an educated guess as to why: the FBI has a forensics lab in LA that has a unit which specializes in recovering lost or damaged electronic data. Evidence was seized to preserve and restore it.
As always, they leave out certain key pieces of info to make it seem like one thing when it is in fact another to fuel controversy. Unless the FBI and the California agencies cooperating with them at the forensics lab are involved in a great conspiracy to coverup a shooting that took place 270 miles away and doesn't involve them in the slightest, then I'd imagine that it's just business as usual, and the facts will emerge just as soon as someone has them. It seems that the postponed coroners inquest was to give them time to recover the data.
There's a ton of spin in that little writeup.
http://www.northeastshooters.com/vb...Front-Sight-and-the-recent-Las-Vegas-shooting
There's something very interesting about the details presented in that paragraph. Before anyone freaks out about a coverup, ask yourself, if this shooting happened in Las Vegas Nevada, why was the video sent to a forenics lab in Los Angeles California? I have an educated guess as to why: the FBI has a forensics lab in LA that has a unit which specializes in recovering lost or damaged electronic data. Evidence was seized to preserve and restore it.
As always, they leave out certain key pieces of info to make it seem like one thing when it is in fact another to fuel controversy. Unless the FBI and the California agencies cooperating with them at the forensics lab are involved in a great conspiracy to coverup a shooting that took place 270 miles away and doesn't involve them in the slightest, then I'd imagine that it's just business as usual, and the facts will emerge just as soon as someone has them. It seems that the postponed coroners inquest was to give them time to recover the data.
There's a ton of spin in that little writeup.
OK, I am not suit happy or anti-cop, but it seems to me (1)that the store security and manager went too far. If they hadn't have called 911 this all wouldn't have happened. (2)Over use of deadly force by the Officers. I see a couple of big law suits coming. Hopefully the witnesses will come forward and stand tall.
Secondly, if I had 3 cops aiming weapons at me, the last thing I am going to do is start lowering my hands towards my belt no matter what I am shouting. Should have kept his hands on his head and dropped to his knees and then flat on the ground. But I wasn't there and it is definitely a tragedy!!
Secondly, if I had 3 cops aiming weapons at me, the last thing I am going to do is start lowering my hands towards my belt no matter what I am shouting. Should have kept his hands on his head and dropped to his knees and then flat on the ground. But I wasn't there and it is definitely a tragedy!!
Being written by his father, not exactly an unbiased source. The write up below, is also biased but (assuming the author has his facts correct) a VERY good lesson on what NOT to do when CCW:
Erik Scott was a West Point graduate, Army veteran, MBA graduate of Duke University, and a medical sales rep for Boston Scientific. He was gunned down by three Las Vegas police officers after they responded to a 911 call by Costco store employees reporting a man with a gun, possibly on narcotics, behaving erratically.
Scott was 38 years old, shopping with his girlfriend for items they needed as they moved in together. Unfortunately, those are the only details of the story on which anyone agrees.
To hear the side of the story presented by Scott’s family, friends, and some eyewitnesses, Erik Scott’s death was the result of ignorance and embellishment on the part of the Costco staff, and a combative, deterministic mindset from responding officers.
Other witnesses and the police claim that Eric Scott was armed and acting irrationally, and that his own actions led to his shooting.
What we know for certain is that Scott was in the camping section of the store taking bottles out of their packaging, attempting to determine how many of the bottles would fit in a cooler he was thinking of purchasing. At some point he bent over and his shirt rode up, exposing the pistol he had concealed at the small of his back.
A Costco employee saw the holstered sidearm and told Scott he was not allowed to have the weapon in the store. Scott replied that he had a permit and the right to carry his weapon. He then went back to shopping. The employee called over a manager, who informed a 20-something security guard, who made a 911 call to police.
[[[ MY comments: First major mistake by Scott. When asked to leave private property, YOU LEAVE. They asked first, he refused, they called the cops. His CCW was exposed, they made it clear they were not CCW friendly, you leave. Send letter to manager later telling them you will get no more business, etc, etc, but leave pronto. ]]]
We do not know precisely what was said in that important call, because the police have refused to release it. We do, however, know from police radio traffic picked up by a scanner that the guard had told police that Erik Scott was armed with a gun, was acting aggressively and erratically, and that he may have been under the influence of drugs.
It must have been a frightening tale: over a dozen police officers responded, along with a helicopter, ambulance, and competing incident command teams.
As the police began to form a massive perimeter outside, Costco managers began evacuating the entire store without apparently explaining why to anyone. As Scott and his girlfriend exited the store he was identified to police officers, who were waiting with guns drawn outside the front door.
A blog from Erik’s family described what happened next:
Erik turned to find three officers facing him, guns drawn, and all three shouting different commands: “Get on the ground!” “Drop your weapon!” “Keep your hands up!” Erik held his hands up, spoke calmly, told them he DID have a concealed firearm and a legal CCW and was an ex-Army officer. His girlfriend was screaming about Erik being a West Point grad, former Army officer, etc.
[[[ My Comments: Mistake number 2, his background is not relevant to the cops dealing with a 'man with a gun call', and her screaming would have only made it worse, added to the confusion,]]]
Erik leaned to his left, hands still up, to expose the pistol, and repeated, “I am disarming; I am disarming.”
[[[ My comments; mistake #3. Such a smart man making such a stupid move. Either stand still 'till they disarm you, or drop to the ground hands out, and wait for them to disarm you. NEVER reach your hand for that gun period. ]]]
Witnesses say he started to lower his right hand, palm OUT, perhaps intending to remove holster and gun together — but never got the hand below his shoulder, when one of the cops (believed to be William Mosher, who had committed a fatal shooting in 2006) shot Erik in the chest with a .45-caliber semi-automatic weapon. Erik dropped to his knees, clearly in shock, his face a picture of disbelief. He was shot a second time and collapsed. The rest is ugly. The three officers unloaded again, firing a total of seven hollow-point rounds. At least four, possibly five, hit Erik in the back, after he was on the ground and dying.
Two experts hired by Scott’s family examined his body. They claim that of the seven .45 ACP hollowpoint bullets fired into Scott’s body, one was fired through his armpit, suggesting his arm was raised at the time. Four remaining shots were fired into his back. There were no exit wounds, making it all but impossible for police to claim that investigators misread through-and-through wounds.
Metro Police Captain Patrick Neville claimed a different series of events, based in part on the 911 call that police have not released:
I could clearly hear the officers giving commands to the individual to get him on the ground, hear people yelling and screaming in the background. You could hear the shots being fired. When you listen to that, it definitely sends a chill down your spine.
There are no commands or communications between Erik Scott and police captured on a nine-minute audiotape during which the shooting occurred. Officers not directly in front of the store are heard over the radio establishing a perimeter and trying to block off access to the store’s parking lot. The first indication Scott and the police have made contact is when a officer breaks in to call “shots fired” after Scott is on the ground, already dying or dead.
In another interview, Captain Neville claimed Scott did not listen to police commands:
He does not comply with that order. He reaches for the weapon, pulls the weapon out … uh, at which time the weapon was out of the waistband, the officers — three officers — discharged their weapons.
Others on the scene did not see it that way. Robert Garcia directly conflicts the reports of police:
I was close enough to see this guy’s face, and to see his hands, and to see his body go down.
Walking just ten feet in front of Erik Scott, Garcia exited the Costco to see officers with guns drawn. He heard an officer yell: “Put it down! Get down!”
Then he claims four shots were fired, and he instantly turned towards the victim:
After hearing the shots I see the guy going down. I looked at — I saw his hands. His hands had no gun in it. I looked on the ground because — just, I just did that. I looked down and I didn’t see a gun. I saw what I thought were maybe sunglasses. And a pen.
This matches up with several other eyewitness claims that officers William Mosher, Joshua Stark, and Thomas Mendiola fired nearly immediately after shouting conflicting commands at Scott, giving him little or no time to respond. Four other witnesses within 20 feet of the store’s entrance all agree that Scott never brandished a weapon or made a move that could be interpreted as brandishing a weapon.
A coroner’s inquest is to be held next week, but the outcome seems foreordained. In the past 34 years, only one Metro officer has ever been found to have acted improperly out of at least 190 inquests, and that officer wasn’t charged with a crime.
For the record, the Costco did not have signs posted prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons. Scott did not violate any laws in carrying his weapon in the store. It is quite possible that Erik Scott was gunned down without having committed so much as a misdemeanor crime, and that the officers who shot him will be merely the latest exonerated in a long line from an apparently unaccountable police force.
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/gunned...eally-happened-to-erik-scott/?singlepage=true
Conclusions: a perfect storm of bad decisions on Scotts part, and cascading effects from LE on the scene, that lead to a tragic unneeded death. Again, people who CCW can either learn from this terrible event and thus potentailly avoid ever having a similar experience, or just blame it all on the evil police.
Last edited:
J
Jose
Yes, contradicting commands shouted at gunpoint and nearly simultaneously did not have a bearing on his actions.
Bull crap.
This red herring leaves the reader with the conclusion that police were blameless here and that anyone shot by the police had it coming.
I am hoping the LVMPD gets royally screwed in a civil suit.
+33 for this! I have to agree on this one point.
Edited to add: After reading more, now I don't know what to think......
Last edited:
None what so ever. Know the laws in your state, know what your response should be under such a situation, etc.
No it does not. Clearly, you are taking the latter option offered. The LEOs will probably take some blame in the events that transpired, but the mistakes that lead to it - assuming the author has his facts correct - are with Scott. I have no doubt extensive after action review will take place, with possible additional training, etc taking place for the LEOs involved but it's not TV, such situations can go down hill real fast, and unless something they did is counter to SOP, etc, that's what will happen.
Not if I was on the Jury, but I'm basing that statement on the facts as we are getting them. If some others facts revealed something else (like it was later found he was in fact leaving the store after Cosco employ told him they didnt allow CCW and lied to cover his butt that Scott refused, etc) I might very well change my mind on that.
How so? If what we have to read is true, I give the Cosco credit: they asked him to leave and he refused. Most would have seen a gun, and called the cops. Once he refused, he was trespassing leaving the manager little choice. Yes, it sucks Cosco is anti gun, anti 2A, and anti CCW, but you may pay with your life (as Scott did..) by ignoring the owner of private property wishes when a bunch of LEOs show up on a "man with a gun" call knowing nothing about you.
I never understand why people seem to have such a hard time understanding how that works, especially in major city. It's not "some nice fellow who was ex military who has a legal CCW does not feel like leaving our store could you come talk nice nice to him" call, it's going out as "man with a gun" call which means you go there having no real idea what is going on, and you go in full force, and you go with the full intent that you are going back to your family alive after the call.
No, it wouldn't have happened had Scott done what he was supposed to do when asked to leave, which is LEAVE. This aint rocket science here.
Cosco should have had signs posted (but they probably broke no laws by failing to do so), people should boycott Cosco as they are anti gun/anti 2A, and Scott died due to bad decisions that started with him. If it's found the cops broke SOP, etc, I hope they pay for it with at the very least losing their jobs, or criminal charges if criminal act took place on their end, but as the facts stand now as we have them, the buck stops with Scott.
Don't EVER depend on the LEOs who show up to read your mind, be relaxed and casual about going on a "man with a gun" call, and making all the right decisions that are in your favor under extreme pressure.
Last edited:
I think you did a great job summing this up, but especially these two points.
Your family and friends need to be educated about their behavior in an emergency situation if you are carrying, and under no circumstances should you ever make furtive movements, reach for your gun, or do anything to appear hostile, especially not when you're being held at gunpoint.
When were the commands shouted? That's a series of commands that makes perfect sense considering that they were being shouted as the situation progressed.
Get on the ground: As he exited the store and was identified as the MWAG
Drop the weapon: As he was reaching/drawing for the gun
Keep your hands up: While he was laying on the ground after being shot
Yup.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2005
- Messages
- 47,515
- Likes
- 33,526
From what I understand, he would have been breaking no law even if such signs were posted. Although NV law prohibits carry in posted "public buildings", I believe that is defined as governmentally owned or operated, not "open to the public".
What has been unanswered is if the withholding of 911 tapes, copies of the videos, etc. is typical of non-controversial shootings that are not accompanied by allegation of police misconduct.
n1oty
NES Member
I'm with Jose on this one. I followed this case since its inception. Costco did not have signs prohibiting the carrying of firearms, that state permits OPEN carry, Erik was NOT asked to leave the premises, the Costco employees only informed him that they did not permit carry in the store, Erik's G/F has stated he simply told them he was properly licensed and the Costco employees then walked away. They then continued their shopping. What part of his actions until then are inappropriate??
I swear my ancestors must be spinning in their graves with these young cops who somehow think they have to scream commands (and from multiple cops no less). When I first started in law enforcement, the first and best piece of advice my father gave me was to always go in like a lamb, you can always come out like a lion, if need be. But, it's very difficult to restrain the lion once it is unleashed.
The stupidity continued by this particular PD immediately after the shooting. Go out on youtube and look at the videos of that nit-wit Captain that they trotted out for media interviews. No, this PD has clammed up recently for a reason and I suspect it has something to do with the avalanche of witness statements that are contrary to the police version of events. That, and I am still trying to come to terms with how ALL of Costco's cameras (there were at least 5 or more) somehow developed technical difficulties. One or two, I might buy. This strains credulity.
I swear my ancestors must be spinning in their graves with these young cops who somehow think they have to scream commands (and from multiple cops no less). When I first started in law enforcement, the first and best piece of advice my father gave me was to always go in like a lamb, you can always come out like a lion, if need be. But, it's very difficult to restrain the lion once it is unleashed.
The stupidity continued by this particular PD immediately after the shooting. Go out on youtube and look at the videos of that nit-wit Captain that they trotted out for media interviews. No, this PD has clammed up recently for a reason and I suspect it has something to do with the avalanche of witness statements that are contrary to the police version of events. That, and I am still trying to come to terms with how ALL of Costco's cameras (there were at least 5 or more) somehow developed technical difficulties. One or two, I might buy. This strains credulity.
Are they under any legal obligation to do so in the state of NV? Yes, signs should have been posted.
That's not telling you you are not welcome in the store with the gun? That's mighty clear English to me. I'd say something like "sorry you feel that way, last business of mine you will ever get," and leave pronto to avoid any further issues regarding my CCW, knowing any additional attention to me and my fire arm is not going to be in my favor.
What should have the employee done, started yelling, wrestled him to the ground? He was ignored, and left to tell his manager.
Ignoring the employees clear statement is inappropriate and constitutes trespassing at that point I believe.
You respond to a 911 call by Costco store "employees reporting a man with a gun, possibly on narcotics, behaving erratically." and you are going in like a Lamb? In a big city like Vegas, Boston, LA, etc? What's SOP for that PD in such a situation?
It does not put the PD in a good light, and if it's found there was misconduct, I hope criminal charges are brought on the LEO's involved.
n1oty
NES Member
Excuse me, but one of the elements required to constitute trespass is CLEAR NOTICE of trespass. They essentially stated that they DID NOT LIKE GUNS in the store and he simply assured them that he was legally allowed to carry. How can anyone of sound mind infer that a statement detesting guns can somehow magically translate to a demand to leave the property?? Give me a break.
Bingo. Cops take guns from gang-bangers and dopers every day without killing anybody. This one stinks, and LVPD knows it. They're trying to sweep it under the rug like they've done for years. Mosher was the shooter in a very questionable killing in 2006. Those who want to justify the cops' actions in this fiasco are running the risk of making ALL cops look like trigger-happy goons.
If Erik Scott were a minority, the U.S. DOJ would be all over this. It's beginning to look like the only way the truth will come out is if Scott's family files a multi-million-dollar lawsuit against the LVPD, another against Costco, and personal wrongful death suits against the three cops. Let the chips fall where they may. And if that doesn't make things happen, there should be a "Boycott Vegas" campaign. They were very unhappy when Obama told people not to go there, and the tourist business fell way off. I for one won't be back there until this gets resolved.
So, a sign is required in the state of NV for a private property owner/business to inform a person of their stores policy? You are claiming the policy is not enforceable without signage? Can you cite that for NV?
"informed him that they did not permit carry in the store,"
You find that confusing? I don't.
And he "simply" made a major mistake which ended up costing him his life.
Now it's "detesting"? You are a working LEO for a PD? One more time, "informed him that they did not permit carry in the store,"
is not difficult to understand. CCW holders should take that as time to leave as to avoid further issues/complications to avoid potential problems.
In gun hating MA, chances are you would not get the benefit of being told the store policy (giving you a chance to leave the business...) and they would just call the police and let them deal with it, which you don't want.
Last edited:
And they often shoot them if it appears they are reaching for a gun, etc, etc. None of which has any bearing on YOU as a CCW holder, which is what we are discussing. Some times things go south not due to one major mistake, but a chain of small mistakes leading to disaster. Best to not be a link in that chain if one can avoid it. Again, regardless of what they find for the lawful or not lawful behavior of the LEOs' in this event, there's lessons to be learned for CCW holders by it, if one wants to learn them...
Good luck.
I agree with you, however, that being said "costco has a policy against guns" would seem to infer that whatever was going to happen next was not going to be any good.
It sounds like the clerk was a pansy and didn't want to tell the guy he had to leave.
(Either that, or the manager was a pansy and didn't have the balls to tell a guy with a holstered gun he had to leave the store, freaked out, then called the cops)
I would have put any merchandise down at that point and left the store, then drove home and inserted my costco card into the shredder.
This whole thing smells like a pile of elephant dung, though. If the PD isn't trying to cover something up, I would be very surprised. When the dust settles my bet is it will be shown that they made mistakes as bad as the victims. The death of the victim was likely caused by a rapid accumulation of fatal errors by 3 different sets of individuals.
-Mike
Post #6.
I worked for a place with about digital video cameras that covered a property roughly the size of a Costco. They were split up into two banks, and recorded on two different identical machines. After incidents we'd burn the footage onto a DVD as a CYA measure. Several times data was accidentally deleted because of the complexity of the process; the controls had small buttons that performed multiple tasks and the thing was kept in an office where people would fiddle with it when they got bored. When you figure that the employee running the thing probably just witnessed a shooting (which is very far out of most people's idea of normal) with the cops breathing down their neck it wouldn't surprise me at all. Keep in mind which lab the data was sent to.
![[thinking]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/010.gif "Thinking [thinking]")
n1oty
NES Member
Well, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. The inquest is now scheduled for this Wednesday and all the Vegas channels will be covering it and streaming live video on their web sites. Here is a news clip where the reporter stated that LVMPD has the video (around the 1:45 mark). The clear implication is that LVMPD has seen the video from the store. Apparently, there may be video from patrol cars as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2nUCx6Ln3w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2nUCx6Ln3w
Post #6.
I worked for a place with about digital video cameras that covered a property roughly the size of a Costco. They were split up into two banks, and recorded on two different identical machines. After incidents we'd burn the footage onto a DVD as a CYA measure. Several times data was accidentally deleted because of the complexity of the process; the controls had small buttons that performed multiple tasks and the thing was kept in an office where people would fiddle with it when they got bored. When you figure that the employee running the thing probably just witnessed a shooting (which is very far out of most people's idea of normal) with the cops breathing down their neck it wouldn't surprise me at all. Keep in mind which lab the data was sent to.
Last edited:
n1oty
NES Member
The family attorney was denied access to the evidence and will not be allowed to examine or cross-examine witnesses at the inquest. Apparently, he will be allowed to submit written questions that may or may not be asked of the witnesses. His filings with a state judge asking for access to the evidence states that the Costco surveillance system was working, had a primary hard drive and a backup hard drive. If anyone wants links, I'll post them later, but frankly, it is really easy to google this stuff. The recorded scanner traffic of the incident is still available on youtube. You know, the tapes where the dispatcher informs the officer's of the information whereby the victim indicates he is a permitted CCW holder.
Just another case of trigger happy cops. They should all be arrested for manslaughter!!!! Of course we all know this will not happen as cops are above the law and will use the lame argument that they felt their life was in danger.
This is just another reason why I will never CCW. Your chances of getting killed by a cop are much greater than being killed by a bad guy!
This is just another reason why I will never CCW. Your chances of getting killed by a cop are much greater than being killed by a bad guy!
Last edited:
If ignorance is bliss, you are one happy mother f-er. Carry on...
Ya. But I am still alive. The poor guy that got killed by the police isn't. Just a side note because you are so smart I just spoke with a friend of mine who lives in Vegas and he says this type of behavior by Metro cops in Vegas happends more that people realize.
Last edited:
