Posted on 10/05/2010 6:01:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
She was with him, only a few feet away. She was shrieking at the top of her lungs at the executioners.
I wondered for a while why she didn't just go wrap herself around Erik to protect him, but after listening to her interview with Metro (a couple of hours after the gundown), I think she herself would have gotten shot by the trigger-happy Metro boys. I think Mosher panicked & screwed up the verbal commands, as evidenced by the audio, and the other two started shooting because Mosher was shooting.
She did seem very concerned and almost hysterical once the confrontation with the cops began, as if she figured something bad would happen. Perhaps that was because she knew of his impairment.
Did he drive? (no one has bothered to ask that question yet)
I've asked myself the same question. Perhaps if Scott's girlfriend responded to the subpoena for the inquest we would know by now. The Costco employee at the membership desk said Scott had bloody knuckles. I'd like to know why. It could be relevant.
Erik Scott was already dead anyway...
I'm almost convinced that you right about that.
Mr. Scott was (from all accounts) a very good, bright young man.
But even heroes can succumb to long term usage of sedatives and tranquilizers. If no one stops them, they die. One way or another.
Someone should have been doing Scott's shopping for him, if descriptions of his difficulties in the store are true. (I see no reason to doubt them. Not even his girlfriend denies he was having problems)
Still, that final shot after he was on the ground, has nothing to do with Scott's problems.
Same reason my ex-wife could drink a 12 pack every night, and yet I get woozy after 2 beers.
How similar would the toxicology be on someone who ingested a certain drug over a long period of time, and someone who just ingested a bunch at once?
I.E. Might the level in his system be due to long term use rather than a recent deadly dose?
We fled Las Vegas in 1991 - and have not looked back.
Every day we find another reason to be happy to be ‘not there’. The last time we visited friends in town, there were 3 murders - in one day - with one body found in the area behind out our Inn.
Just crazy!
besides the obvious and watered down natural Right, protected by the 2A, its my understanding that the 'law' in nevada is open carry allowed and CC 'permitted', with I'll ASSume, a requirement for public domains to be labeled as potential kill zones when their store policy prohibits armed patronage...
sure, they can ask a customer to leave, but the request for an army to intervene on their behalf, for what amounts to 'try it before you buy it' of a backpack is nanny statism run amuck...Id imagine if he was really beligerent about the 'confrontation' that simpy asking him to buy the damaged case would be unnerving for sheep...but ratcheting up the challenge, and then callin in the calvary is waaaaay beyond my comprehension, when simply allowing him to shop and purchase, and then leave would protect the stores interest and its customers much more efficiently...
beyond that, the evac of the store, creating the chaos that results in 'officer safety' situations was negligent to the extreme, for scott, the cops and society as well...
Im simply disgusted at the state of the mentality of the People as well as their 'servants'.../rant
OK,assuming what you're saying is correct (no,I'm not calling you a liar) then,first of all,you feel bad for the guy having sustained a painful,long lasting injury in the military *but* being under medical care surely doesn't mean he wasn't an addict...as the result of long term use of narcotic drugs.It happens,trust me.Having worked for 20 years in an inner city ER I could tell you stories that would make your jaw drop.
And as for what represent lethal levels of a particular drug that is *not* open to debate.Clinical journals and textbooks have clear,unambiguous tables showing that if you have "X" amount of medication "Y" in your system then you're in serious trouble.Trust me on that too....my ER experience involved hundreds of such incidents.
Remember that the hearing only tells one side of the story.
True.But in a trial if it's established that he had huge amounts of habit forming,mind altering,drugs in his system and that he was under investigation for "doctor shopping" (a *classic* addict activity) then the reports of erratic behavior (and worse) could take on an increased level of credibility.Add a handgun (or two) to the mix and...well,I think you get the picture.
I don’t know. I only know that the body does build up an immunity that inhibits effectiveness.
The cop is/was trigger happy.
‘effe him
Too bad that NONE of the security cameras that the Security Officers were watching Mr. Scott on 'worked', or we could see for ourselves if it was true.
I have little doubt that Mr. Scott stumbled, was at times incoherent. I know people that have been in the same condition, and go shopping anyway. (though they didn't have a gun).
The bottom line is that whatever his 'impairment' may have been at the time, he did nothing to deserve being shot two times in the front, four times in the back, and one while lying dead on the ground.
The reason cops are trained to shoot 5 rounds into the back of a down suspect is so they don't live and permanently end up in a wheelchair. The payouts for wheelchair cases are 10 times a typical amout of a wrongful death payout.
Were they four messages, all with just one word? HELP
(sorry, had to play devil's advocate, just to be unbiased)
Before you totaly buy into the findings of the inquest, you should remember that this is not like a trial were both sides of the story are presented. The inquest is like a grand jury, the only evidence presented is that which the DA wishes. He can nake the outcome to be what he wants.
That was certainly the inference at the inquest because then it clears the cops of any wrongdoing. And you must know that prolonged use builds an immunity to meds and inhibits their effectiveness. That scenario also calls into question the expertise of a pain management specialist so it's quite a smear. What I read stated that surgery wasn't an option so long term management was the only alternative. And the cop that fired the first shot was VERY relieved at the news that Scott was on pain meds. If he was so "screwed up" why would there be such relief? Maybe because Scott wasn't "screwed up"?
In the last 4 years, this cop has shot 3 people, killing 2. We have a cop in the family. He's been one for 16 years. He's never shot anyone. Even when he works drug enforcement. This cop also said that he saw Scott had bloodshot eyes but he didn't see the gun was holstered? A lot of this doesn't make sense.
And as for what represent lethal levels of a particular drug that is *not* open to debate
But it does call into question the integrity of the autopsy.
and that he was under investigation for "doctor shopping"
He had a doctor. Again, this hearing is one sided and will make statements and NOT clarify them.
then the reports of erratic behavior (and worse) could take on an increased level of credibility
There were witnesses that disagree with the descriptor "Erratic" behavior. They refused to testify at the LV party but have talked to Robert Scotts attorney and will testify for them.
I agree. I think Officer Mosher had PRE-DETERMINED that this was a dangerous criminal, on drugs, who had weapons and had been 'flaying' his gun around the store. I think that is the 'story' the COSTCO employee conveyed. Senior officers were not on site, and other junior officers who happened to be near jumped at the chance to 'TAKE CHARGE'. I heard it on the AUDIO of the police scanner.
The three cops involved in the shooting had different plans. One was 'shoot him if he moves', the other was 'shoot him if he doesn't'.
Mosher fired first, and the other two cops fired in response. Mosher's bullets spun Mr. Scott around, and the other four fired shots hit Mr. Scott in the back, and knocked him to the ground.
Then, one of them shot him while he was on the ground (dead?).
Trigger happy is one thing. That final shot is another.
Thank you for that info.
With plenty of time to analyze the situation and with hindsight one can say that, but considering what the officers knew at the time and what they observed, they did what they were trained to do.
Maybe those water bottle cases are hard to tear open. : )
>>and pull all the dung in DC in on top of them.<<
That would make quite a mountain!
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.