The focal point for Texas firearms information and discussions
https://www.texaschlforum.com/
Las Vegas is called Sin City for a long time. With the inquest and news report, I think Christians would call this sinning to be breaking the ninth comandment. Maybe the sixth comandment too.seamusTX wrote:Who sinned?
- Jim
State court and federal court are as different as "Looney Tunes" and "Twelve Angry Men."OldSchool wrote:Except, as of now, I'm not sure I want to hear the outcome of the civil suit, since it will also be held in LV.
But isn't this to be a civil suit? IIRC, the rules for civil suits vary from state to state, including what the judge can and cannot direct.seamusTX wrote:Federal court and state court are as different as "Looney Tunes" and "Twelve Angry Men."OldSchool wrote:Except, as of now, I'm not sure I want to hear the outcome of the civil suit, since it will also be held in LV.
- Jim
I don't know what the Scott family's legal strategy will be.OldSchool wrote:But isn't this to be a civil suit? IIRC, the rules for civil suits vary from state to state, including what the judge can and cannot direct.
Can't find any fault with your analysis. I would not be surprised to find that the employees were coached by the company and its attorneys to both coordinate their "testimony" and to eliminate any "testimony" that could incur liability for Costco. I would also not be at all surprised to discover that there was collusion between the prosecutor and Costco. It was clear from the outset that the process is designed to produce a particular outcome, not to discover the truth.baldeagle wrote:I believe very little of what Costco employees testified to. They claimed that Erik claimed he was a Green Beret. I doubt seriously that he ever made that claim. Erik's reputation was one of scrupulous honesty. They claimed that he was "agitated" and "angry", yet not one customer who observed him in the store testified to that. Their descriptions were "irked" and "irritated". (I suspect more than one member of this forum might feel the same way when challenged on the right to carry.) They testified that he was loud and upsetting other customers. Yet customers who testified that they walked right past Erik never even noticed that there was the supposed argument that he was engaged in. One customer said he heard Erik say, "Well I can do that in Texas", a fact to which not one Costco employee testified. I suspect that in the civil trial, the Costco employees will be systematically ripped to shreds by the Scott's attorney. At some point, the Loss Prevention Officer, one Shai Lairly, decided to call 911. At that point, Erik's fate was sealed. Lairly continually escalated his narrative to the point that the police had no choice but to believe that they would be confronting an agitated, gun-carrying, drugged up and completely unpredictable subject. If Costco had any sense at all, they would dismiss Lairly today. It might help to limit their liability. My sense is that Costco will defend him to the hilt, because other Costco employees have backed up his testimony on the witness stand.
I agree whole heartedly, but I don't think Costco really cares. Do you have the judge's name or any other details; possibly a link?philip964 wrote:I believe we all here treasure all the rights in the constitution. The second amendment probably being one of our favorites. However, most of us would agree that the first amendment is probably the most basic and most important. The freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are so important that no country could be considered free without them.
Today in a unexpected move. Costco's lawyers tried to ban peaceful protest and picketing on public property in front of one of its stores (you guess which one). A motion was brought before a Las Vegas judge to do just that. The motion also named one hundred people by name who were to be specifically banned. The list was not made public but was thought to be made up of facebook friends of Erik Scott's memorial page.
The judge rejected Costco's motion outright (even though again it was a one sided argument again, maybe they were feeling cocky after their apparent victory this week and thought all judges would just lay down)
So I applaud this judge in Las Vegas.
And begin to wonder about the sanity of the executive management at Costco. This sort of path, where you try and silence the American public from free expression, will eventually back fire in a big way.
God bless America
philip964 wrote:And begin to wonder about the sanity of the executive management at Costco. This sort of path, where you try and silence the American public from free expression, will eventually back fire in a big way.
God bless America
It looks like they're coming out at the upper levels of policy makers for the company now. Before, we could say it was a young, inexperienced, and rogue security guard. Now, they're actively and publicly defending him and going much further in stating that Costco does not support your constitutional rights--any of them--if they infringe on their profit. That's the ringer for me.philip964 wrote:I believe we all here treasure all the rights in the constitution. The second amendment probably being one of our favorites. However, most of us would agree that the first amendment is probably the most basic and most important. The freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are so important that no country could be considered free without them.
Today in a unexpected move. Costco's lawyers tried to ban peaceful protest and picketing on public property in front of one of its stores (you guess which one). A motion was brought before a Las Vegas judge to do just that. The motion also named one hundred people by name who were to be specifically banned. The list was not made public but was thought to be made up of facebook friends of Erik Scott's memorial page.
The judge rejected Costco's motion outright (even though again it was a one sided argument again, maybe they were feeling cocky after their apparent victory this week and thought all judges would just lay down)
So I applaud this judge in Las Vegas.
And begin to wonder about the sanity of the executive management at Costco. This sort of path, where you try and silence the American public from free expression, will eventually back fire in a big way.
God bless America
puma guy wrote:I agree whole heartedly, but I don't think Costco really cares. Do you have the judge's name or any other details; possibly a link?philip964 wrote:I believe we all here treasure all the rights in the constitution. The second amendment probably being one of our favorites. However, most of us would agree that the first amendment is probably the most basic and most important. The freedom of speech and freedom of assembly are so important that no country could be considered free without them.
Today in a unexpected move. Costco's lawyers tried to ban peaceful protest and picketing on public property in front of one of its stores (you guess which one). A motion was brought before a Las Vegas judge to do just that. The motion also named one hundred people by name who were to be specifically banned. The list was not made public but was thought to be made up of facebook friends of Erik Scott's memorial page.
The judge rejected Costco's motion outright (even though again it was a one sided argument again, maybe they were feeling cocky after their apparent victory this week and thought all judges would just lay down)
So I applaud this judge in Las Vegas.
And begin to wonder about the sanity of the executive management at Costco. This sort of path, where you try and silence the American public from free expression, will eventually back fire in a big way.
God bless America
http://www.lvrj.com/news/judge-denies-c ... 99494.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Judge denies Costco request to ban protesters
By DOUG MCMURDO
REVIEW-JOURNAL
Comments posted on the social network Website Facebook and its page in memory of Erik Scott have prompted Costco Wholesale Corp. to go to court in an unsuccessful bid to keep protesters away from one of its Las Vegas stores.