TexasCHLforum.com

An interesting side note. The attorney that Kirk Scott's father retained, Ross Goodman, is the son of Las Vegas mayor, Oscar Goodman...

Excaliber....Or anyone here qualified to comment. Can you explain beyond what the media is reporting about the problems associated with the Coroner's Inquest process in Nevada that has the ACLU complaining? I have never served on a Texas Grand Jury, but the process sounds very similar. I have read that many people consider the Coroner's Inquest to be a "rubber stamp" and that the inquest process has only found one person accountable for a death in Las Vegas. http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/131166/whats_wrong_with_the_las_vegas_coroners.html?cat=17" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; The latest news is that the Inquest has been indefinitely delayed because of the large witness list. The LVPD has not given the information to the coroner's office so that they can subpoena the witnesses. http://www.lvrj.com/news/witness-list-delays-inquest-99448369.html?ref=369" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false...

There had been some confusion at least in my mind as to whether this particular Costco had a sign preventing concealed carry. I asked a specific question to the members of the Nevada Shooters forum whether that was indeed the case that there was no sign preventing concealed carry. The reply was that this member had checked that particular location and there was no sign preventing concealed carry at that store that he could find. I joined the very nicely prepared facebook memorial page for Erik that is on line now. I wondered the same thing. Some of the news articles eluded to the fact that businesses in Nevada could post no-gun signs, but I can't recall any post, article or statement of the police that said Costco was posted...

Friends of Erik Scott have put up messages on six electronic billboards in the Las Vegas area. They will be running messages to keep the story on people's minds and to try to find more witnesses to the shooting. http://www.fox5vegas.com/news/24377093/detail.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false...

After everything I've read about this case (which is quite a lot), I'd hazard a guess that the inquest will find the shooting excusable (there are three possibilities; justified, excusable or criminal) and Costco and the City of Las Vegas will be paying a lot of money to fund the newly established Erik Scott Foundation. Why would Costco or the City of Las Vegas pay for an "excusable" shooting...

Investigators have workloads and must balance their priorities. It simply is not like "CSI" where they have no personal life and solve every case in 50 minutes. - Jim And they don't have a girl computer geek in the backroom who can search hundreds of databases that can match a carpet fiber found at the crime scene and tell you, in less-than-a-minute, that it was bought at the Las Vegas Costco. ;-...

Contagious shooting, didn't a lot of this go on in the Army during Viet Nam? Maybe that was just in the movies. If it did, I wonder how much it still happens. Doesn't your average Soldier or Marine receive much more weapons training than the average LEO? Or is this comparison apples and oranges? It probably did happen in Viet Nam, and yes this is apples and oranges. Soldiers and Marines are trained for combat. Las Vegas is not a combat zone...

I hope the victim's dad has enough spook juice to get justice, one way or another. I am not sure exactly was "spook juice" is, but I am confident that he has plently. :tiphat...

"Contagious shooting" (some officers firing only because others did) is a mark of an agency with a drastically deficient training program. Even when shooting is justified, not every officer at a scene may be in a position to see the justification. A well trained and conscientious officer must and will hold his fire until he is both individually justified in using DPF and he believes it is necessary to do so. I am glad that you posted this. I was going to bring this up in an earlier post, but was not aware of the term "contagious shooting." I can easily visualize this happening in a tense situation when several officers are pointing their guns at a suspect." After the first shot is fired, I can imagine the volley of shots that would follow without further consideration...

Think about it. You were with your girlfriend shopping, minding your own business, thinking nothing was out of the ordinary and you walk out of the store and then ... "BAM". You see three armed men with their guns pointed at you shouting out commands. How long would it take to get over the initial surprise and shock before you could figure out what to do and react? One second, five, ten? We don't whether Mr. Scott was minding his business or already knew that he had been "made" or warned to leave the store. That is a crucial point. That said, when you find multiple armed men pointing weapons at you, you are very short on options. All I can think of is to freeze or fall to your knees and puke. The latter option seems likely in my case. - Jim If I were "made" and asked to leave a store, I would do so, but I wouldn't expect to exit to three guns aimed at my COM. At least I would have thought that a week ago...

If they felt safe enough to let him move about in a crowd freely, safe enough to approach him, then they did not think he was an immediate threat and they put him in the position in which the intensity was increased by deciding to make contact in a crowded area and deciding to give him directions related to the movement of the gun inside that crowd. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I still don't understand the tactics of the LVPD. Confronting and shooting "an armed suspect" in a crowd seems to be an awful way to handle this situation...

I was thinking about this shooting on the way home from work. What was the lapse of time between Erik Scott seeing three armed men pointing guns and him and yelling for him to "get down" and "drop it"? How many seconds between the shouting and the shots? Think about it. You were with your girlfriend shopping, minding your own business, thinking nothing was out of the ordinary and you walk out of the store and then ... "BAM". You see three armed men with their guns pointed at you shouting out commands. How long would it take to get over the initial surprise and shock before you could figure out what to do and react? One second, five, ten...

While I also find this incident very troubling and share your concerns I think we need to keep things in perspective. I will consider this a cautionary tale but it doesn't make me fear I'm going to get shot by the police for merely carrying. :iagree: Well said...

And let me point out one thing we may not have considered. IF the LVMPD officers acted in bad faith and broke the law, and IF they are convicted of murder, it WILL send a very chilling message to every officer who puts on a gun and badge to go to work in the morning. The LVMPD officers will NEVER be convicted of murder. If LEOs can shoot a guy 41 times for trying to show his wallet and not be convicted of murder, I don't think there is any question they can shoot someone who actually has a gun seven times, and not be convicted of murder. That was not my point. My point is that the shooting of Mr. Scott does not have the elements of the crime of murder. See SeamusTx's earlier post discussing the definition of murder...

(understandable while investigation goes on) Why is it understandable? I'm just curious, I'm not seeing the argument for withholding this information. In order to come to a rational decision, one should evaluate all relevant evidence. Since all of this information is not available, releasing it piecemeal can lead to faulty conclusions...