TexasCHLforum.com

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 6:45 pm

puma guy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 6:25 pm

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 12:28 pm I still remember when this happened. I always suspected a cover up but also believed that it is an example of what not to do when carrying concealed or open. Eric's actions did not justify his death but at the same time, he did about everything wrong one could do prior to the shooting.

I read everything that was available at the time and the followup as well and I recall per witnesses the several cops on scene were giving Erik differing, simultaneous commands that he attempted to follow and at some point the cops commenced a circular firing squad with him in the middle as their target and then put a few more in him as he lay on the ground. They were fortunate they didn't wound or kill any of the many COSTCO customers who were evacuating the store with Erik among them. Of course the conveniently missing video lends itself to an easy cover up. Convenient for LV Metro and COSTCO.

Yeah, it was a bad situation. When speaking of what he may have done to bring this on himself, I was mainly talking about him causing a ruckus in the store before he was shot. I suppose I feel like it is best to remain somewhat timid when one has the ability to use deadly force with their firearm. Getting into a verbal battle can lead to bad endings.

I am not by any stretch saying he deserved it. Just that his own actions put the steps into place that lead up to it.

03Lightningrocks wrote: ↑Thu Jul 11, 2019 12:28 pm I still remember when this happened. I always suspected a cover up but also believed that it is an example of what not to do when carrying concealed or open. Eric's actions did not justify his death but at the same time, he did about everything wrong one could do prior to the shooting.

WildBill wrote:

puma guy wrote:Anyone know if any action (civil or otherwise) was taken against the guy who broke into Erik Scott's apartment and seized his property? I think he was a "Public Administrator" whatever that is. Was he included in the civil suit that has been dropped?

Maybe that was one of the initiatives that Bill Scott was referring to in his email. Since the "public administator" was not a peace officer, maybe "qualified immunity" doesn't apply.

olafpfj wrote:I have several police officers in my extended family and some who were old friends, classmates, etc...probably a dozen or more that I have known at one time or another.
They run a perfect bell curve of the good cop/bad cop chart. My wifes cousin is now a Federal Marshall and I trust him completely and he is a credit to his profession and a shining example to all. His brother also became a cop and was fired for gross misconduct, the final straw being a fist fight between himself and another officer on duty in uniform. I had a cousin who was so corrupt (we all knew it, it was obvious) that after he was arrested it is believed he was beaten to death by fellow officers to keep from implicating them. I have an old musician band mate that is now CHP in California who is also a shining example of a great cop who does his job admirably.

Like anyone else there are good ones and bad ones and most are right square in the middle doing their jobs and going about their business...just like every single profession in the world. Hats off to all who have worn a badge and tried to keep us loonies in line.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:He was banned for four reasons; 1) violation of the rule against general "COP-bashing;" 2) making a personal attack against a fellow Member; 3) responding equally inappropriately to a warning PM sent by a Moderator; and 4) then changing his email address to a bogus one with a fictitious profane domain name. Obviously, he didn't want to remain a Member.

I too am sorry about his personal attack gigag04.

Chas.

baldeagle wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Lots of experts in the room. I should excuse myself.

Gig, I see he's been banned, but I want to personally apologize for his remarks. They are clearly not representative of the community, of which you are a valued member.

alexrex20 wrote:

gigag04 wrote:This unfortunately happens a good bit...I'm sure the spin will come for a cover up...but I regularly have a messed up video system.

of course a cop would say that.

WildBill wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:

texxas guy wrote:UPDATE

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46726665/ns ... -shooting/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
........got something else up their sleeve legalwise?

Sounds like they just gave up.

It probably got too expensive and they thought it was unlikely that they would prevail.

baldeagle wrote:

puma guy wrote:This is not directly related to the Erik Scott incident but this incident happened about the same time. The family of Trevon Cole filed suit in his fatal shooting during a SWAT led "drug" bust. The victim was unarmed and kneeling in his bathroom. Las Vegas Metro's Financial Affairs is voting on a $1.7 million settlement with the family. The suit was asking for $10 million. This shooting was also ruled to be justified.

Wow! That's interesting. I would imagine that means the Scott's case will settle for a great deal more.

philip964 wrote:Here is a good link that allows you to look at the motion filed by Costco.

http://www.fox5vegas.com/news/25225475/detail.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

It you read down it accuses Erik of criminal activity inside the store. Today in Nevada they held some sort of CCW forum and a Police detective from Las Vegas said that Erik Scott committed a felony by carrying a .380 that was only similar to the one he qualified on. Apparently you must carry the same model of gun you qualified with. Obviously another capital offense.

Glad I live in Texas.