TexasCHLforum.com

The way this is going LVPD will come out of it unscathed. I hope Las Vegas loses a whole lot of their tourism business and that people think of another place to go to gamble or take a vacation. If people stop going to Vegas maybe hitting them in the pocket book will wake them up to the fact that people don't like what goes down in that town with their police force. New motto Just "What stays in Vegas means; stay away from Vegas." You appear to be right. There seems to be a big void from the aspect of any national coverage of this incident. Whether that's by design or not is unknown. I could only speculate. PS I just learned that Erik's lawyer and family requested the Judge in this inquest allow them to attend the pretrial review meeting to allow them to know what would be presented by the prosecutor. Appaently the request was denied. They sought to be able to be able to submit more meaningful questions. Also were denied access to the autopsy results and only learned of the details at the inquest. This IS America... right? Prosector plans on calling 50 witnesses. I can't determine if Mr. Goodman, Erik's lawyer, who has about 30 witnesses, will be allowed to call them. He inferred they would only be heard if it goes to trial. Prosecutor is presenting a witness whose dog bit Erik and is relaying he and the dog were threatened by Erik...

Well from the newspaper articles so far it appears the inquest is over. Erik Scott was a prescription drug abuser with lethal doses of opiates in his body making him "dazed" so that he incorrectly responded to one officer's command to "get down on the ground" and instead drew his gun and pointed it at that officer. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/sep/22/coroners-inquest-erik-scott/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; Seems to tie it all in a neat package. Or, the DA is presenting all the evidence of Erik deserving to be shot in Day 1 and the rest of the evidence showing he did not in Day 2. It would seem a logical process to present the evidence, since his addiction to pain medication and a witness who said he drew his gun cannot be swept under the carpet. I guess we will see. There are many more witnesses to be heard, to be sure. However, the first edition headlines are "Erik Scott is a drug addict to dazed to follow directions" thus deserves to die. That will remain foremost in the jurys mind. seeing the gun and little else is akin to a witness of an accident that can't remember the color of the cars, the direction,speed?- direction?- wet?- hot?- cold? "Don't remember" only that car A hit car B. "I saw it" and "Oh, yeah the driver was dazed" The fact that the Costco employee only recalls details supporting the prosecutor is simply amazing to me. The other tragedy in this process is the fact that the prosecutor can cross examine (the term used in the article) witnesses however Erik's lawyer is denied that priviledge. He must present no more than 25 questions to the judge who can decide whether or not to even ask them. That means only the prosecutor can cross examine and react to and/or challenge extemporaneuos remarks and answers. In my opinion someone should bring the inquest process to light and challenge it under equal protection laws. It has worked for the past forty years with only one unjustified shooting ruling which, I believe was never prosecuted. I think there is another shooting involving a male one his knees in a bathroom that has yet to be examined but I can't remember his name to look it up. I have a bad feeling about Erik's chances of getting a fair chance at justice...

Just ran across this. Appears a lot of shooting victims should be dead even before Metro encounters them. http://www.lvrj.com/news/fatal-shooting-by-henderson-police-ruled-justified-in-nolton-inquest-102672579.html...

I have tried to keep an open mind, but when the opening salvo is trashing a guy that was functioning fine prior to being shot dead I see diversion tactics. Use over and over in criminal cases by the DEFENSE counsel, the prosecutor seems to be using the same tactic. A lifestyle is not on trial. Tthe taking of a life and the justification for it is what we should be hearing about. Does the prosecutor beat his wife, have any of the officers had questionable behavior at any time in their life; have they ever used drugs or had a girlfriend that did? Were toxicology tests run on these three cops, blood alcohol,etc. I always use my inverse rule of logic. If it works one way it should work in reverse. In this case it really has no bearing on the shooting. Only Erik's actions and reactions and police actions and reactions are pertinent. It appears it's going to be eyewitness testimony that's relied on to determine those issues. All the rest is smoke and mirrors. Occam's Razor is always absent in legal proceedings, but were it applied here it would be easy to figure out what occurred...

[/quote]The prosecutor stated that the disc had failed two days previously but had not been replaced. I don't know if there will be expert testimony regarding the drive. I would assume that there will be.[/quote] With no collaborating testimony isn't that simply hearsay? I too would assume there would have to be a Costco employee -security -tech type to be available to cross examine. I am beginning to hear the theme to "Fantasy Island"...

A bullet entering the left buttocks, traveling to the right and ending up near the liver could be a shot almost directly from behind; either bent over or prone. I'm not a doctor, but I know the liver is a very large organ and extends right to left way past midline. I read that he fell to his knees, then while prone was shot several more times in the back. Common sense indicates an arm pit entry would indicate a raised arm. I've been watching this and was wondering what they'd bring up on the guy. From what I can determine about the inquest process it's completely one sided and not even remotely related to due process and so far it looks like the guy will be assasinated twice. IMH...

They just asked how many potential jurors in the Voir Dire how many had CWP's. There were only 2 and each stated they would not be biased one way or the other. Have they asked how many are LEO's...