WP grad killed at Costco in NV because he was carrying CCW

[CoLawman]

The dispatch logs certainly are confusing. I can only imagine how confusing the information was to the officers on the perimeter with all the additional information/misinformation they were receiving from lay persons on scene. The actions of this young man sure do not seem to square with the father's description of his son, nor the young man's resume. Tragic.

[Leozinho]

I didn't see this story until today. (See below.) I'm posting it because I was still under the impression that media was reporting they couldn't find a witness that said Scott drew his pistol. Now the paper has spoken to a few who said he did. Still tragic.


http://www.lvrj.com/news/man-killed-...-98695649.html


Police said they have spoken to 40 witnesses, and more than a dozen said they saw Scott pull out a handgun. The Review-Journal has interviewed seven witnesses. Three said Scott drew a gun, but none said they saw him point it at police officers.

Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie on Friday urged the public to remain patient while his department investigates the Costco incident and other recent police shootings.

"In policing, one thing I've learned over the years is don't rush the processes," he said. "Let the processes work because they are there for a reason.

[nmap]

Ongoing development, FYI.

LINK

LAS VEGAS -- Friends and family of Erik Scott, the man shot to death at a Costco store by Las Vegas police, are taking their message to roadside billboards.

The 38-year-old was shot and killed by three Metro officers on July 10th. Although the Coroner's Inquest on the case isn't until September 3rd, Scott's friends and family don't want the public to forget what happened. They are also hoping more people who may have witnessed the event will come forward.

"Our sadness has turned to focus at this point," said Scott's close friend Mike Pusateri. He says he is a man on a mission to make people remember what happened.

"Other families have gone through this inquest process and the story falls away. Until September 3rd, we're going to make sure that doesn't happen," he said.

Seven digital billboards with Erik Scott's picture are being put up around the valley. Scott's friends and family have collected the $3,200 from supporters on Facebook and an Internet site in his honor.

The billboards will be prominently displayed in high traffic areas of town. Organizers say the focus of the billboards is to show that while Erik Scott is gone, what happened to him is not forgotten. The billboards carry the message "Let the truth be known."

"People are engaged in this story, they want to understand what happened , they want to understand why he was shot seven times," said Pusateri.

Sheriff Doug Gillespie says the details of Scott's death, including the 911 call, will come out in due time.

"It's very important in cases like this where an officer uses deadly force and there is a death -- and we do have an inquest process -- that we stick to that process," said Sheriff Gillespie.

The hard drives containing Costco's surveillance video were sent to a lab in California for forensic work. Police say there is a glitch in the surveillance system that hasn't allowed them to view the video. Police say it could take weeks for the video to be seen if the incident was even captured on camera.

Pusateri hopes drivers will see the signs, and divulge key details of Scott's death, clearing his name. "They shot the wrong guy, his friends are committed and they're not going to stop."

The digital signs will be up for the next four weeks. Scott's friends say they're using other donations to start a foundation in his honor. One thing they want to fight for is legislation that would have a neutral party included in Metro's investigations.

[Penn]

Five-0, with all do respect; being a Inf/Cpt and a LEO, I am a bit surprised by your inconsiderate sarcastic tone. We have members here who knew him. Until such time that the investigation is concluded, please refrain from expressing your unsympathetic view-point.

[Leozinho]

Originally Posted by Five-O

Wait a minute. You mean the police did not murder a WP graduate for no reason other than their hatred for CCW?...and then conspire to destroy video evidence and engage in a massive cover up with COSTCO? You mean... Mr Scott was seen by a dozen witnesses who stated they observed him pull out a weapon when being told to prone out? So the police are not blood thirsty, homicidal, jack booted thugs out to suppress CCW folks? Geeze....Imagine that.

After all, everyone knows that on Jan 20, 2009 all LEOs became jackbooted thugs again overnight. (sarcasm off)

Edited to add:

Penn, I posted the above before I saw your comment. I think Five-0's comment is relevant, because the police were instantly vilified and convicted by the CCW crowd on the internet. Most voices here have called to wait until the facts are out, but there's still a tone in some of the posts that there's no way a West Point grad with a CCW permit could have done anything that led to the shooting. (Look at the first two sentences of the original post.)

You may, of course, delete my post if you think it's insensitive.

[fng13]

question for the LEO's reading this.

Does him "drawing" his weapon automatically clear you to fire?

Because drawing a weapon could mean more than pulling in an attempt to fire.

For example if he pulled his weapon out in order to surrender it. For sure that is not a good idea, but if that is the case does that change anything?

(I mean drawing it in such a way as it is clear his intention is to surrender it. I.e. weak hand up, hand on the gun held by finger tips etc...)

[busa]

Originally Posted by fng13

question for the LEO's reading this.

Does him "drawing" his weapon automatically clear you to fire?

Because drawing a weapon could mean more than pulling in an attempt to fire.

For example if he pulled his weapon out in order to surrender it. For sure that is not a good idea, but if that is the case does that change anything?

(I mean drawing it in such a way as it is clear his intention is to surrender it. I.e. weak hand up, hand on the gun held by finger tips etc...)

What was he told? Was he told to lift his shirt and show the weapon, was he told to keep his hands clear of any weapon he may have on him? Was he giving conflicting commands, I've seen that happen before.

I was not there and will not prejudge either the "suspect" or officers.

[Leozinho]

Originally Posted by fng13

question for the LEO's reading this.

Does him "drawing" his weapon automatically clear you to fire?

Because drawing a weapon could mean more than pulling in an attempt to fire.

For example if he pulled his weapon out in order to surrender it. For sure that is not a good idea, but if that is the case does that change anything?

(I mean drawing it in such a way as it is clear his intention is to surrender it. I.e. weak hand up, hand on the gun held by finger tips etc...)

I'm not a use of force expert. Please, anyone, correct me if I am wrong.

I'll respond to this, only because based on your previous posts in this thread I believe you are trying to get a handle on how to interact with the police, rather than discuss the Costco incident.

No, "drawing" a weapon in a way that was clear that you intended to surrender your weapon wouldn't automatically clear one to fire. The question is whether the officers will correctly interpret your actions. When courts look at use of force, they don't expect officers to be perfect. They do expect them to be objectively reasonable. If police repeatedly and clearly tell you to keep you hands above your head, and instead you lower your hands and remove your weapon with your thumb and forefinger, then a reasonable person might still conclude that you intended to use that weapon, given the totality of the circumstances. One might say that it wasn't clear that the person was gripping the pistol in a way that rendered it 'safe.'


Or to take the argument further and to muddy the waters even more -- is the "thumb and forefinger fingertips" grip 'safe?' I say it isn't. I just experimented. I can draw my pistol with my thumb and forefinger, hold it at arms length in front of my chest as if to turn it over to someone, and I bet I can get a shot off before the average person that is pointing a gun at me can react. (The thumb and forefinger grip I used is nothing more than my regular grip, with my middle, ring and pinkie fingers extended, and action is quicker than reaction.) Knowing that, it might be reasonable to use force even if you saw the' 'fingertip' grip.

Incidentally, at some (most?) academies, officers are taught to disarm a subject prior to an arrest by placing the subject in a position of disadvantage (prone or on knees, facing away from the officer) and then an officer removes the weapon. I think it's safer than having the subject remove his weapon and place it on the ground, although there might be a circumstance when that's the proper thing to do.

Also remember that the courts won't look at hindsight when determining whether use of force was justified. So your educational background and CCW permit will be irrelevant, unless the officers knew about them at the time of the incident.

[Pete]

Originally Posted by Five-O

......... I know stuff about this shooting. If the officers involved end up going to jail for murder...I'll be the first to eat my hat. Posts in this thread indicate the belief that Mr Scott was murdered.............

So are you going to wait until all the facts are in?

So where are the videos from inside the store? Not working? Mighty convenient for Costco and the manager.

Seems the manager is the big question mark in this story. The story was he was rowdy inside, throwing stuff around. Anybody witness to the "crazy man inside"?

And both sides seem to be stacking up outside witnesses that support their side.

But there are a few things that trouble me. The store was asked to clear everybody out while the cops are outside. The individual is coming out with the other cutomers, peaceful like it would seem, since nobody was running and screaming, so he is with a group of people and the cops are the ones who start the ruckus.

Three guys screaming instructions in a crowd - seems it might take everybody a few seconds to react. WTF is going on.

[18C4V]

Like others stated, I'll wait for the investigation and what people don't realize that these take time.

So I'm sure there will be alot of Monday night quarterbacking but that's expected.

[Penn]

There is an interesting dynamic occurring as a result of this thread, and it has to do with loyalties.

Service members and LE have much in common; some who have responded to this thread are both. In that regard, it is of some interest to note a level of base support for the LVPD by fellow LE officers, while at the same time most active, retired, and prior military seem to be questioning the circumstance of the shooting. Supporting if you will, the discipline training one would receive first at the Academy, and second as a line officer on active duty, logically concluding the impossibility of blatant disregard for Law Enforcement. The equation doesn't compute.

This taking of sides is to be expected, if this were a civilian forum, which it is not, I think the divide may be reflecting the disconnect between the LE community and the general populace, which includes service members, who are also reflecting the same separate characteristics of ringing the wagons around one of their own.

If this is a possibility, and with the damage done, we need to wait this one out.

[DinDinA-2]

Penn,

My observations as well. I just reread all posts, to confirm why I was so troubled by many posters, from the beginning. A rapid indictment of the police (before ANY facts had come in), an unreasonable expectation that all details of the investigation would be immediately presented to the media & public, and more theories about what may have occurred than I would expect from some members of this forum.

QPs-waiting for the facts
LEs-waiting for the facts, with loyalty
QPs with LE experience-waiting for the facts with loyalty
None of the above-sorry, you guys are all over the place-I would not want you judging my actions.

This event was indeed a tragedy, no question. Empathy and analyitical thought should be had by all.

[lksteve]

Originally Posted by Shar

I went to my local Costco the other day and spent a good amount of time looking outside the store, at the entrance of the store and anywhere remotely logical - and I didn't see posted anywhere a requirement that no weapons be on the premises. How does one know whether their weapon is "welcome" or not if it isn't posted? I faintly remember reading somewhere on this board about there being a requirement that when malls or the like do not allow weapons inside they must provide a location to check the weapons. True?

The Nevada Statute for concealed weapons is NRS 202.363 through .369.

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-202.html

The instructors at the CCW class I attended in Carson City told us that any property owner or manager has the right to ask you to leave the property for which they are responsible for carrying a firearm. That is not specified in the statute. The same instructors also informed us that Clark County was difficult to get a permit in and that carrying concealed in Clark County was problematic. Lastly, Nevada is an open carry state, except that for open carry, Clark County requires a permit.

I am sorry for your loss. I trust the truth will prevail.

[Detonics]

Originally Posted by lksteve

The same instructors also informed us that Clark County was difficult to get a permit in and that carrying concealed in Clark County was problematic. Lastly, Nevada is an open carry state, except that for open carry, Clark County requires a permit.

Generally there is no real problem to carrying concealed in Clark County. Commons sense procedures being the key.

For the last 10 or so years, obtaining the permit has been easy -provided your background is clear. In the late '80's and before there were generally only about a thousand permits issued annually and people without demonstrated need or good "contacts" were routinely denied.

[Pete]

As has been noted in a number of posts on this thread there are a number of opinions on this shooting.

But why the difference of opinion? Could it be the Police nationwide have a PR problem?

Could the PR problem have been made by the Police Force itself?

The anti's like to say "Waco- Ruby Ridge" all the time but does it go deeper? Does the individual on a force covering for a bad apple allow it to rot the whole force?

We have a number of threads here about SWAT Teams and no knock entry "mistakes". And for the most part the Police force involved is down right rude to the citizens once the "mistake" is known - if Joe Civilian is still alive that is. Busting in a door of the wrong home or trashing it and then stonewalling about fixing it or cleaning the home up? Shooting dogs and then "Hey man, it's just a dog."

Remember the bridge shooting during Katrina? That was ruled a good shoot also. Evil gang of crazed thugs coming over a bridge assaulting the good guy cops - until the real story came - a bunch of crazed cops having a mad minute lighting up some unarmed civilians - and then getting help from superiors to help cover it up. Or the CA cops using no knock raids to cover their life of crime?

Maybe the divide starts with the Police Force. Maybe the cure starts there.

Not everybody is a perp. Most people in the country obey the law and instructions from the police. But having individuals on the force who treat everybody as a perp only deepens the divide.