CCW Holder shot by LVMPD - Justified????? - Page 31
Page 31 of 52 FirstFirst ... 21293031323341 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 310 of 519

Thread: CCW Holder shot by LVMPD - Justified?????

  1. #301
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    I have questions on two items in some of the last replies. 1) BigHouse indicated that only favorable prosecution testimony was heard without ability to cross examine---this is NOT a trial, it is an inquest. What are the rules for an inquest? My first thought is that an inquest is to accumulate all facts from witnesses etc and it is not subject to cross-examination.2) Buddy indicated that the family's attorney indicates he has 20-25 witnesses but will not allow them to testify lest they be ridiculed by prosecution. Sure sounds like a strange statement, given the fact that everyone feels the prosecution is railroading the inquest. Personally, I think he is lying and this has more to do with the family's civil case than it has to do with a legal proceeding to determine possible criminality on the part of the officers. The civil case can be based literally on NO criminal evidence but can come down to "the poor guy should not have been shot 7 times", where jurors can do whatever they want. Put Bo and billyboy on that jury and Christ himself could tell you the guy was totally wrong and the LEOs were totally right and they would still vote to bankrupt LV.

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by kelcarry View Post
    From what I get out of the testimony so far is that everyone is right and everyone is wrong although testimony seems to indicate Mr. Scott definitely had a problem and his actions in the store and outside the store, particularly since he had one (or two) firearms, was a recipe for an unfortunate outcome. It does seem suspicious that the Costco tape, which would have shown all, apparently did not work during the critical time frame in question. I wonder if they have ever had such problems with the tapings during the time the store has been in operation. If such failures have happened in the past, it would make this failure believable. If there have never been such failures before and this happened this one time, the coincidence would be improbable at best and essentially implausable. It would and is a shame that conflicting testimony is all that is available when a picture would have been worth the proverbial thousand words.
    AS you know from living here and visiting Costco, there is no sign preventing concealed carry in the store. That part about the manager saying you can't have a gun in here is not right. Costco is a Corporate entity, and as such, has policies that cover the entire company. That means that the store in Las Vegas didn't prevent concealed carry. Now maybe the State does. I'd have to look that up.

  4. #303
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    central Nevada
    Posts
    44
    I just went to the costco store in north las vegas and they have a no firearms sign up, I dont know how long it has been there though.

  5. #304
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by GOV5 View Post
    AS you know from living here and visiting Costco, there is no sign preventing concealed carry in the store.
    Regardless, it's private property and that is an issue for Costco mgt. Even if the manager was in error about his own corporate policies, it is still his call on the the scene and the subject is obliged to comply.

    Why was Scott carrying under the influence??

  6. #305
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Everything I have researched confirms to me that the inquest GATHERS FACTS, period/end of story. It is NOT A TRIAL, it is not for attorney or prosecutor cross examination. I may still be wrong--I am not an attorney-- but all of the discussion relating to one-sided testimony and family's witnesses not testifying because of cross examination appears, IMO, to be a lot of baloney and public posturing--FOR ONE REASON ONLY----AN EVENTUAL CIVIL TRIAL. I have come down on the LEO side of things but 5 shots to the back NEEDS A LOT OF EXPLAINING. I still think, however, that this guy was a walking, talking time bomb and something bad, sometime, somewhere, was going to happen to him. Over the final 10 or so years of his life, it seems that this West Point graduate was not the perfect person his family is making him out to be.

  7. #306
    Remember that this is an inquest, not a trial. The definition from wiki for inquest is below:

    Inquest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    An inquest is a judicial investigation in common law jurisdictions, conducted by a judge, jury, or government official. The most common kind of inquest is an inquiry including a medical examination by a coroner into the cause of a death that was sudden, violent, suspicious, or occurred in prison.[citation needed] A coroner's jury may be convened to assist in this type of proceeding. Inquest can also mean such a jury and the result of such an investigation. In general usage, inquest is also used to mean any investigation or inquiry
    As a coroner's inquest is to determine cause and manner of death there is nothing to defend here and no one is actually on trial. In this case there was little reason to actually have a coroner's inquest as the manner and cause of deathis not really in question. Even if the jury were to find the LEO justified they could still face criminal charges and there is no doubt about a civil suit. The one "advantage" of having an inquest here is that if the jury were to find the LEO not justified the DA could go ahead with the prosecution without having to convene a grand jury or that is my understanding. Already his girlfriend has refused to testify along with those other 20-25 witnesses. The whole deal behind that is to get the criminal charges thrown out so they can get on with the civil case without having to wait on a criminal trial. It is starting to appear that we can tell who the son got his personality from.

  8. #307
    Shoppers recount police shooting outside Costco - Las Vegas Sun

    Here is some more information from the inquest, for those who could not watch it live.

    There does not appear to be much positive coming out that is helping Mr. Scott One person actually testified he fell down in the store and said he was really "%$#$ up"

    Why is it that his strongest defenders are those who were not there?

    I am not an atty but I have no respect for the Scott family atty who will not call witnesses that he claims would support Scott because he does not want them beat up by the prosecutor.

    Apparently one of the better witnesses (from a friend I know who saw the proceedings" was the ccw holder in this article who took the cops side.

  9. #308
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Quote Originally Posted by buddy View Post
    Why is it that his strongest defenders are those who were not there?
    Because this is a site where your typical "gun nuts," "2A extremeists," "conspiracy theorists" and other assorted whackos along those lines tend to congregagte.

    And I do not use the term "congregate" loosely.

  10. #309
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South Carolina/Charleston
    Posts
    2,388
    Leaving aside the case, this tragedy should reconfirm in all of us the responsibility each of us have when we are CC. If you drink in excess or do drugs and are CC, you are kidding yourself and we will be reading about you in a similar thread in this forum. If you think you have constitutional rights that allow you to behave recklessly and ignore LEO commands, you are kidding yourself and we will be reading about you in a similar thread in this forum. Even if you are in the right and ignore LEO commands while CC, you may not only be right but you can also be dead right, and guess what--we will be reading about you in a similar thread in this forum.

  11. Doesn't it seem obvious that Mr. Scott was trying to disarm? Wasn't the gun still in the holster on the ground? Was there a thumbstop on the holster and if so, was it released.

    What kind of gun was used in the shooting? Was it one of those that some PD's use that have no manual safety?

    As a CCW holder and concealed carry person, I can say that I feel my life is as important as any cop. We as CCW holders cannot draw, point or even reach for a weapon without just cause. That means; if we are concerned for our safety we need to retreat or otherwise de-escalate the situation. De-escalating would include disarming when ordered to by a LEO. If ordered to disarm then you should be allowed sufficient opportunity to do so. I'm thinking it's obvious what happened here.

Page 31 of 52 FirstFirst ... 21293031323341 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Nevada: CCW Holder Call To Action!
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-17-2010, 12:52 PM
  2. CCW Holder Fired By Pizza Hut
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 100
    Last Post: 10-07-2008, 12:29 PM
  3. Gunman killed in robbery by CCW Holder
    By {TEX}Hawaii(( in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-01-2008, 03:30 AM
  4. Bomber/Robber vs. CCW Holder
    By Bohemian in forum Politics and News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-22-2008, 01:28 PM
  5. CCW and crime rates in urban areas
    By tattedupboy in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-16-2008, 12:45 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast