Las Vegas Sun

April 18, 2015

Currently: 81° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Police officers found justified in Erik Scott shooting; family plans lawsuit

Father says coroner’s inquest system ‘failed miserably’


Steve Marcus

Bill Scott, center, father of Erik Scott, speaks to reporters after a coroner’s inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Tuesday, September 28, 2010. With Bill Scott are his wife Linda and attorney Ross Goodman. The jury found that the shooting of Erik Scott was justified.

Erik Scott Coroner's Inquest - Day 6

Bill Scott, center, father of Erik Scott, speaks to reporters after a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Tuesday, September 28, 2010. With Bill Scott are his wife Linda and attorney Ross Goodman. The jury found that the shooting of Erik Scott was justified. Launch slideshow »

Erik Scott Coroner's Inquest - Day 5

Metro Police Detective Peter Calos holds a .38 caliber handgun owned by Erik Scott during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Monday, September 27, 2010. The gun was said to be found in Scott's pocket by medical workers in the ambulance. Launch slideshow »

Erik Scott Coroner's Inquest - Day 4

Costco customer Karen Passarelli-Krause wipes away a tear while testifying during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Saturday, September 25, 2010. Launch slideshow »

Erik Scott Coroner's Inquest - Day 3

Costco shopper Barbara Fee demonstrates how she saw Erik Scott raise his right arm toward a Metro Police officer as she testifies during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Friday, September 24, 2010. Launch slideshow »

Erik Scott Coroner's Inquest - Day 2

Metro Police Officer William Mosher testifies about shooting Erik Scott during a coroner's inquest at the Regional Justice Center Thursday, September 23, 2010. Launch slideshow »

Erik Scott Coroner's Inquest - Day 1

Bill Scott, Erik Scott's father, listens to testimony during a coroner's inquest at the Regional Justice Center Wednesday, September 22, 2010. Launch slideshow »

Audio Clip

  • Unidentified caller from within Costco talking to dispatchers
  • You need to upgrade your Flash Player

Audio Clip

  • Shai Lierley on the phone with dispatchers
  • You need to upgrade your Flash Player

Audio Clip

  • Metro Police radio traffic during the July 10 officer-involved shooting that left Erik Scott dead
  • You need to upgrade your Flash Player

The coroner’s inquest that on Tuesday found the Metro Police shooting death of Erik Scott justified “failed miserably,” Scott’s father said.

Bill Scott told reporters that the next step for the family would be to file a lawsuit in federal court “so finally we all will have the truth.”

The family plans to file a civil rights lawsuit alleging the officers used excessive force. Defendants will be Metro, Clark County, the sheriff’s office and Costco, where the July 10 shooting took place in Summerlin.

Up to this point, the focus of the coroner’s inquest has been on Metro, Bill Scott said.

“Metro pulled the trigger,” Scott said. “But Costco was the primary guilty party. Costco killed Erik.”

Ross Goodman, the Scott family’s attorney, said the lawsuit could be filed as early as two weeks from now.

Goodman and Bill Scott talked to reporters outside the Regional Justice Center about 20 minutes after a seven-member Clark County coroner’s inquest jury ruled the death of Erik Scott as a justifiable homicide.

Bill Scott called the six-day inquest a “horrific nightmare.”

“We gave the system a chance to work as it’s supposed to work. They had the chance to present the truth. They also had the chance to present the facts at the coroner’s inquest hearing. As we see it, the system failed miserably,” he said.

The jury of seven announced the unanimous decision at 5:29 p.m. after deliberating for about 90 minutes.

Jurors were instructed to determine whether the shooting was justifiable, excusable or criminal. Coroner’s juries do not have to be unanimous in reaching their verdict.

Sheriff Doug Gillespie did not release any comment on the verdict Tuesday. A Metro spokesman said Gillespie would not be available until a press conference set for 10 a.m. Wednesday.

Police responded to the Costco store after dispatchers received a 911 call indicating that a man with a gun was at the store acting erratically and destroying merchandise, testimony showed.

Police confronted Scott — who was armed but had a concealed weapons permit — as he exited the store with other patrons who were being evacuated.

Two of the three officers who shot Scott testified Tuesday that they felt Scott was an “imminent” threat before they fired.

Officer Thomas Mendiola testified that he heard officer William Mosher yell, “Hands, let me see your hands.”

Scott reached both hands under his shirt and pulled out a gun, which Scott pointed directly at Mosher, Mendiola said.

It was later determined that the gun was still in its holster.

“I immediately went to center mass, took aim and discharged my weapon,” Mendiola said.

Scott was a threat, Mendiola said. “I felt that my fellow officer was in immediate and imminent danger,” he said.

Mendiola said he remembered shooting three times, but was later told he fired four times.

“I just fired until I felt that the suspect wasn’t a threat. I perceived him as a threat every time I fired,” he said.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent asked Mendiola would have done anything differently in retrospect.

“Absolutely not,” Mendiola said. “We don’t pick what’s going to happen, we react to the situation, and that’s what the situation presented at that time.”

An interested party asked what Mendiola thought when he found out Scott’s gun was in a holster the whole time.

“It was still a threat, whether it was holstered or not. I did what I had to do,” Mendiola said.

Officer Joshua Stark also said Scott failed to comply with Mosher’s orders.

Scott reached to his back, exactly where Costco security had told police the gun was located, Stark said.

“He pulls out the gun and it comes forward,” then shots were fired, Stark said.

“I wasn’t sure who had been shot. I just knew shots had been fired,” he said, explaining that he was focused on Scott’s hands.

“I fired my handgun because I thought my partner officer Mosher and everybody behind him was in the threat of imminent death,” he said.

Mosher testified Thursday and Friday. A fourth officer who was also at Costco at the time of the shooting testified Tuesday.

Officer Dustin Bundy was at the Costco but did not see the shooting because he was behind a pillar when Scott came out of the store, he said.

Bundy said he heard shots fired, but when he was able to see what was happening Scott was already on the ground.

Detective Barry Jensen was Thursday’s other witness. Jensen is a homicide detective assigned to investigate the shooting.

Jensen said he has investigated about 70 police use-of-force incidents in the last 10 years but doesn’t recall any having as many witnesses as this one.

Jensen testified that Scott didn’t have a permit to carry the gun that was in his pocket when he was shot.

Scott carried a Ruger .380 semi-automatic handgun and a .45-caliber Kimber single-action pistol. The Kimber was found in its holster not far from where Scott’s body landed after he was shot. The Ruger was found in Scott’s clothing as he was being taken to the hospital.

Scott had a concealed carry permit and seven gun registrations in his wallet, but the permit didn’t include the Ruger.

“That’s a felony crime in Nevada,” Jensen said.

The permit did list a .380 Kel Tec, which is similar.

Jensen also testified that Scott was not a Green Beret and had not served overseas in the military.

Costco employee Shai Lierley previously testified that Scott said he was a Green Beret when he was told his gun was not allowed in the store.

Jensen said when he interviewed Scott’s girlfriend, he asked if Scott was a Green Beret. She told him he had done some stuff “they don’t talk about.”

Jensen said he checked out Scott’s DD-214 separation papers from the military.

“We found he had no special forces training and wasn’t a Green Beret,” Jensen said. Jensen said they also found Scott was honorably discharged in 1996.

The final witness Tuesday was Coroner Mike Murphy, who testified that the family was told more than once how to provide the names of witnesses to bring to the inquest but had not done so.

Goodman previously indicated that the family was withholding its witnesses until there was a fair hearing into the shooting. More than 60 witnesses testified during the six days of the inquest.

Goodman indicated that the family would be seeking punitive damages in the federal lawsuit.

“Part of the statute is punitive damages, if a jury finds that they acted excessively,” Goodman said.

Click to enlarge photo

Metro Police Officer Thomas Mendiola testifies during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center Tuesday, September 28, 2010.

Goodman and Bill Scott complained that, unlike a regular jury trial, where a prosecutor presents a case and a defense attorney presents a rebuttal, only the district attorney is allowed to present a case in the coroner’s inquest. And the district attorney was defending the police, they said.

“So you’ve got the police’s version and that’s it,” Goodman said. “Now we’re going to be able to get the actual information, the actual evidence, and we’re going to file a case in the next few weeks in federal court. And we’ll present the real case and the real truth.”

The truth, Goodman said, was “Erik Scott was walking to the parking lot with his gun in his holster and he was ambushed by these three officers who gave him about three seconds from the initial commands to respond.

“And as he was turning around, you heard witnesses testify that he was frozen in time, looked like a deer caught in the headlights, and he responded within a few seconds with the best that he could do by handing over the holstered gun, at which point they shot him two times in the front and five times in the back.”

Goodman said the family still has not seen the final police report, still has not seen written statements from witnesses and still has not seen any of the evidence.

That’s the reason the family did not provide any witnesses that would be favorable to their version of the events, he said.

“When a real jury gets to hear both sides of the facts, I think you’re going to find a much different verdict,” Goodman said.

Bill Scott indicated that the family would also have its own independent autopsy performed

Goodman said the family didn’t believe police reports and Costco reports that there was no actual video of the events. Testimony from store employees was that the video recorder was not properly working at the time of the shooting.

“I don’t believe at all there was anything wrong with the video that day,” Bill Scott said. “If there had been a slip and fall accident at noon that day, they would have had it all on video. I guaran-damn-tee you.”

However, Scott said, he wasn’t alleging that the video was destroyed.

He said the real message of the jury’s verdict is that “this circus, this cop-clearing circus that they call a coroner’s inquest process, is now making Las Vegas the laughingstock of the nation.”

Goodman said there was no point in having the coroner’s inquest hearing because the evidence was presented by police and by the district attorney’s office, which works hand-in-hand with police.

“There’s an institutional bias; there’s a vested interest in making sure there’s a justifiable finding here, and you got exactly that,” Goodman said. “The prosecutors spun the evidence to ensure that the police were found to be justifiable.”

Click to enlarge photo

Metro Police Officer Dustin Bundy testifies during a coroner's inquest for Erik Scott at the Regional Justice Center on Tuesday, Sept. 28, 2010.

Goodman said that the presiding officer, Justice of the Peace Tony Abbatangelo, wouldn’t allow the family to file a motion to address the flaws of the system.

Maggie McLetchie, an attorney for the ACLU of Nevada, said the verdict was expected, but the process was flawed.

“We’re not surprised with this verdict because no matter what the evidence is, no matter what the case is, officer-involved shootings are almost always found to be justified,” she said.

The one good thing to come out of the inquest is the heightened awareness in the community, she said.

“The time for change is now,” she said. “I think people were able to observe some of the things that we’ve been complaining about.”

McLetchie said she can’t take a position on whether the verdict was right or wrong, but the inquest showed many of the flaws of the system, such as no cross-examination of witnesses or checks on district attorney.

“It’s really too bad that we don’t have a system that lets the truth come to light,” she said.

In coroner’s inquests, witnesses are not cross-examined, but interested parties may submit questions to the judge, who can ask them of the witnesses. More than 1,500 questions were submitted during inquest, but many were not asked because they were not appropriate, irrelevant or already had been asked, Justice of the Peace Tony Abbatangelo said.

Questions submitted but not asked were read onto the record by Abbatangelo outside the presence of the jury.

Members of the jury were also allowed to ask questions of witnesses and frequently did so. The jury included four men and three women. Four alternates also participated in the proceedings, however one was excused Saturday when he became ill. The other three, two women and a man, were excused before deliberations began.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 47 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. What a joke. Now Metro can give the jurors their paychecks and send them home.

    A 'Frame' well done!

  2. Bill Scott is rationalizing and in denial as are the conspiracy minded posters. Thank you jurors for seeing clearly what the family denies, that their son was at fault and needed help that his family failed to provide.

  3. Is there anyone here that doubts the verdict would have been the same if there had been 100 witnesses that said Scott did nothing wrong and only one cop who said Scott was a threat?

    This is no longer about the tragic event that took place that July day. It is about the lack of respect and trust that a large portion of we, the public, no longer have in those we elect or hire to protect us.

    Our elected officials and public servants MUST understand what is happening and take immediate steps to correct this situation.

  4. I was personally involved in one of these "kangaroo court" scenarios.

    They happen.

  5. Every police department has good and bad cops. Having watched the inquest, its clear that Mendiola and Mosher are rogue cops who believe they are above the law. Just like Chris Yant, they will be back on the streets soon and someday they will get trigger happy and shoot and kill somebody else. Even if Erik Scott did not reach for his gun, Mosher was most likely going to shoot him anyways just because he saw him having it. In time there will be justice for the Scott family.

  6. I also hope I never get pulled over by any of these police officers. I am sure they will be reading these comments and will remember the names of everybody who is not on their side on here. I believe they would be inclined to take retribution against ANYBODY who did not support them.

  7. Las Vegas, welcome to New Orleans.

    The most murderous COP city in the United States. Now since Metro is second best, watch them try harder...

  8. .....and we STILL don't know where that video machine is and its recording components are.

    Don't you just love a cover-up!

  9. Three COPs and not a single COP had a TASER. And for all of you weasels out there whose constant refrain is: 'You don't bring a TASER to a gunfight', what's wrong with just having two trigger happy murderous cops with guns pointed at the suspect while the third (behind him) has a TASER?

    What they're really saying is:We really like the gratuitous violence!

    Murder first, ask questions later.

  10. It is easy for Attorney Goodman to say that Scott's intention was to reach for his weapon to hand it over to police. But three Metro officers had a fraction of a second to decide what Scott's intention was. Their lives and the lives of customers in the area were at stake if they made the wrong choice. In the meantime they believed, from Scott's own words, that they were facing an individual with special forces training.

  11. As I said before, Mendiola and Moser are clearly rogue cops.

  12. That there was no video available (just as with Jim Gibbons in the parking garage) is very troubling. The fact that the family never saw the final report or witness statements was also not right; they will have to file a suit just to see those. Finally, why so many shots fired after he went down with a weapon still in its holster?
    Back to the first point, WHERE'S THE VIDEO? Whether or not Metro was justified, I won't buy the justification without the video that was so conveniently lost.
    Trevon Cole and Erik Scott are bookends to a problem.

  13. Time for a new Sheriff.

  14. "There's an institutional bias; there's a vested interest in making sure there's a justifiable finding here, and you got exactly that," Goodman said. "The prosecutors spun the evidence to ensure that the police were found to be justifiable."

    That's a fact. Undeniable fact.

    The Eric Scott case has been a good Civics lesson for us.
    And, it has exposed a process that is absolutely FARSICLE...
    and lends itself to a further EROSION of Metro's public image.

    That is the BURNING QUESTION, and a festering boil with the public... it stretches credulity that ON THAT DAY, a 4-hour block of video is missing, while OTHER CAMERAS, with video that does not impune Metro's version of events, is READILY AVAILABLE.

    LVMPD should not be the investigating agency on their own shootings. It goes to the issue of being "fair & impartial", and exacerbates the notion that Metro has a "public trust" issue...

    Civilian Revue Board & outside agency investigations of lethal police actions would go A LONG WAY in restoring public trust in Metro.

    Protect & Serve.
    It's not just a "concept"...
    It's a directive and a pledge.
    Is it being practiced with uniformity here in County Clark?

    As a whole, you do outstanding work in a city that makes that very, very difficult.

  15. There is clearly corruption and cover ups going on in LVMPD. Let's hope the Justice Department and The FBI start a major investigation soon just like they did with the LAPD in the 90s.

  16. I'm amazed at some of the comments. LasVegas9 - did you actually read the blog on this inquest? Where do you NOT understand that basically, Erik Scott "killed" himself by touching his holster with a gun in it? You do NOT touch your weapon while the police are pointing a gun at you. YOU DO AS THEY SAY! Now that we know he was not a Green Beret as he indicated, his judgment was way off. But ANYONE with a brain would know not to touch your weapon.

    pmmart: I wonder if the Scott family will "find" the girlfriend (there is something "fishy" about her alleged disappearance).

    I figured the Scott family would sue. My guess is some of the witnesses they allegedly have now will not testify because by the time this goes to trial, things change. People may just figure it's not worth it. Also WHY did they not submit the witness list for this inquest? Why would they not want these witnesses to testify at the inquest? These witnesses could have made a difference. Now the taxpayers have to pay for a most likely long and controversial trial with the outcome the same as the inquest.

    I said this before and will say it one more time: MANY of you have no idea what it is like to be a cop. You sit there and arm chair quarterback on something you know nothing about. Cops make life altering decisions in split seconds. They make those decisions to protect you. Sometimes things go wrong. It happens. But most of you think it is so damn easy. It's not. Again, if it was some typical bad guy that lives in the valley, some gang banger illegal and/or ghetto inhabitant drug dealer - you'd all be applauding the actions of Metro. But this person was a white guy, educated, military background, had a good job. He had a permit to carry his guns (into a store which prohibited firearms being carried inside). You all assume the drugs he had in his system were okay and did not impair his judgment because...yeah, the white guy thing again. He could do no wrong in your eyes so Metro must have been wrong. Well, I guess he did do wrong, he wasn't as smart as you all think he was. And Metro was just doing their jobs.

  17. Just a question to ponder....

    Why did Erik Scott go against all his military and CCW training when confronted by the police by not following orders and reaching for his gun?

    Did it have something to do with all the drugs in his system or were there other reasons?

    I know you all just want to hate on the police but answering those two questions plays into some common sense thoughts.

  18. It is easy for Attorney Goodman to say that Scott's intention was to reach for his weapon to hand it over to police. But three Metro officers had a fraction of a second to decide what Scott's intention was. Their lives and the lives of customers in the area were at stake if they made the wrong choice. In the meantime they believed, from Scott's own words, that they were facing an individual with special forces training.


    Exactly, ' let's kill him before he can kill us! Dollars to Donuts that was the fat Cop's thought process was.' ( i.e. Rambo..) With a weapon trained special forces person you can expect he would react to a weapons confrontation differently in military style- it's the COPS who couldn't react properly -- not the deceased!

    By the way, he had his hand on his holster, NOT ON THE GUN and was holding the HOLSTER IN SUCH A WAY it could have never presented a threat to the COPS.

    This was just murder by COP - plain and simple..they are simply rationalizing their murderous conduct.

    Clear Criminal Civil Rights Violation.

  19. Certainly this ruling is no surprise to anyone who cares and has followed police action in this city for the past forty years. In my opinion what we have is a justified police murder under color that is fully sanctioned by the state. As evidence that these murders can be claimed to be sanctioned by the state, we have an inquest process designed to clear the officer of any wrong doing, and laws that make it impossible to charge a police officer for murder.

  20. Justified! It was a given. And in less time than it takes to eat lunch. I hope that Steve Sisolak follows through and changes this incredibly PRO METRO procedure. I also hope all you voters DON"T vote for David Roger, Doug Gillespie and any other "homies". All this taxpayer waste of money was horrible to watch. As for Mosher, God help any of us who get pulled over by this fat assed, trigger happy, run amuck lowlife scumbag.
    To the Scott family, I'm so sorry for your loss. I'm so sorry that your son was vilified in the coroner's inquest and I'm so sorry that our elected court reps heartlessly "killed" your son again...on television! All I can say is that Metro best keep away from me because I have nothing nice to say about you or to you. Better get new tapes for your waistbelt recorders, we'll see if mine matches yours should you decide to stop me for any trumped up, made up reason. The entire inquest made me sick to my stomach. The DA's office thoroughly enjoyed this and it showed. Pathetic, sad and disgusting!

  21. Wow! All I see in many of the comments is there are a lot of you who must have gotten speeding tickets or were pulled over for DUI and hate police officers for doing their duty. Having driven a cab in Clark County for 9 years, I was stopped by Metro & NHP patrol officers on more than 1 occasion. In every case, they were respectful, courteous and in no way threatening. Of course, I also was repectful, courteous and non-threatening. Sometimes I received a citation, sometimes they let me off with a warning. In any case, I appreciated the fact that I was at fault and they were just doing their job. So, I suggest to all you cop-haters: next time you are burglarized, vandalized, mugged, raped, assaulted or otherwise taken advantage of by the criminal class, don't dial 911. Call the ACLU and have Allen Lichtenstein come out and help you. I'm sure you'll be glad you did.

  22. <To the Scott family, I'm so sorry for your loss. I'm so sorry that your son was vilified in the coroner's inquest and I'm so sorry that our elected court reps heartlessly "killed" your son again...on television!>

    To add to lvelegante's post:
    To the Scott Family : Sorry for your loss, but you would NOT have had this loss if your beloved son used common sense. First mistake being addicted to prescription drugs; second - having a girlfriend who helped support his addiction/problem knowing full well it wasn't such a good idea; third you family not telling the authorities on the whereabouts of said girlfriend (your family knows damn well where she is - afraid of what she might have said?); third - your son being sooooo paranoid that he had to have on his person TWO WEAPONS while just going to Costco - in Summerlin no less; and lastly - NOT following police orders. Maybe somewhere in the State of Nevada you will be able to find a jury who will consider YOUR side.

    <All I can say is that Metro best keep away from me because I have nothing nice to say about you>

    Golly gee - I'm sure Metro is heartbroken by your feelings, lvelegante. I hope you never need Metro's services in any way. Remember: They know your real name.

  23. It is a little late in the day but, for what it's worth - the DEFINITION for a "CORONER'S INQUEST" per Black's Law Dictonary is: "An inquisition or examination into the causes and circumstances of any death hanppening by violence or under suspicious conditions, held by the coroner with the assistance of a jury."

    I submit that it SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE the JURY could make ANY legitimate finding if they only hear HALF OF THE "STORY." Without the "OTHER SIDE" of the story to consider - and measure against the DA's version - this finding of "justifiable homicide" is nothing more than a ONE-SIDED agreement, by the jury, with what the officers said.

    It's good our Courts of Law don't run this way. We wouldn't need Defense Attorneys, and biased convictions or absolutions would rule.

    The poster comments herein, and daily LV SUN summaries of the Inquest, clearly demonstrate CONFLICTING TESTIMONY - as given by the officers, and some witnesses. So what now. Does the Inquest Judge just say: "good job, well done. Case dismissed!" How is Justice served?

    For instance, Officer Thomas Mendiola testified that he heard officer William Mosher yell, "Hands, let me see your hands." BUT THAT IS NOT ALL Officer Mosher said. MENDIOLA WAS NOT LISTENING. It appears that Mendiola's apparent inexperience, and the heat of the moment, caused Mendiola to draw and fire his weapon - ONLY AFTER SCOTT WAS IN THE PROCESS of OBEYING MOSHER"S second command: "DROP YOUR WEAPON." NEXT, MOSHER immediately told SCOTT TO GET ON THE GROUND (according to HIS testimony.)

    How do drop a weapon if you don't reach for it?

    Officer Mosher says HE shot FIRST. But Officer Mendiola also says HE fired FIRST. Then we have Officer Stark WHO DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON - SO HE SHOT TOO. Stark says: "I WASN'T SURE who had been shot. I just knew shots had been fired." - explaining that he was focused on Scott's hands. - [NOTE: it was stated that ONE of Scotts "HANDS" was ALREADY in the AIR.] - SO, "I fired my handgun because I thought my partner officer Mosher and everybody behind him was in the threat of imminent death," he said." These contadictory stories don't match!

    Testimony given says the officers were within 8-9 feet of Scott. Is that not close enough for Stark to KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON? Also, why didn't the "experienced" COP (5 years on the force - and 2-shootings previously) Mosher, tell Scott to "reach for the sky," and then, "to get on the ground?" Or did he panic too?

    This is a "travesty of justice" because (1) the "other side of the story" was not heard, and (2) because there was no suggestion of "reasonable doubt" considered, or offered (per this article and poster's who attended the Inquest).

    The MOB in Las Vegas should have had it so good! They would all still be in Las Vegas if only (one) their side of the story was told to a jury.

  24. <...figured wrong. It's a CIVIL RIGHTS suit, which ISN'T a "civil suit"."

    Civil Rights suit, civil suit. Whatever. Bottom line: the Scott family wants monetary compensation for the death of their son. When they lose the "civil rights" suit, they will file a "wrongful death" action.

    BTW - the matter will GO TO TRIAL. That is why they are doing this. Discovery will start after the initial complaint is filed; the Metro and Costco will have 30 days to answer the complaint; then a discovery timeline will be established by the court. That means all these "witnesses" that the Scott family did NOT wish to testify at the coroner's inquest will have their depositions taken. A trial date may not be set until late next year.

  25. hermit
    Since sexual assaults are numerous in Vegas and yes Metro has their own relatively new "SVU" because of all the assaults, I cannot believe Metro didn't respond. Did your friend in fact call the police?

  26. LVFACTS_101 wrote: "All I see in many of the comments is there are a lot of you who must have gotten speeding tickets or were pulled over for DUI and hate police officers for doing their duty." We are not talking about getting a speeding ticket, we are talking about state sanctioned police murder while under color. The inquest process and laws relative to a police officer use of force guarantee that they will never be charged with murder. The use of force training insures that at some point, innocent people will be murdered by the police. The argument of LVFACTS_101 might just as well of been made by a NAZI SS officer about people complaining about the Jews and Gypsies being murdered in the street, because they resisted being rounded up and being sent off to the death camps. After all, those NAZI's were also only doing their jobs.

  27. A worthless lawsuit. The family is in denial. Erik had enough dope in him to kill an ordinary person. I bet you that the family had NO idea what Erik was truly like or why he was taking so much dope.

    Did his girlfriend know?

    A civil lawsuit will be fun watching Erik Scott remaining reputation being torned to pieces by high price wolves (lawyers).

  28. The family is suing Costco? Is it really their fault a guy armed with a handgun stumbles into the store stoned out of his mind on various pharmaceuticals?

  29. Jay Havens, who are you working for?

  30. Hello everyone. There seems to be a little bit of confusion regarding the inquest proceedings. So, I'm going to try to offer a little bit of insight for the folks that would like to see it changed.
    The inquest procedure works just like it is supposed to. The key here is the word "imminent". All officers are trained to use deadly force if they feel the individual poses an imminent threat to to anyone,including themselves. That's right, you can be shot for threatening to shoot yourself. A few people have brought up the seventeen year old murder suspect who was shot in the back while handcuffed. As stated in that inquest, the officer believed that the suspect posed an "imminent" threat to the public. The 5'1"ice cream lady with a pairing knife posed an "imminent" threat to 9 Henderson police officers resulting in her being shot.
    My point is that if you want something changed, it would be the "policy" of when Metro is to use lethal force. As long as officers are taught to use lethal force to neutralize an "imminent" threat,you can't fault them for doing as they are told. Even one of the officers that shot Mr.Scott testified he would have been in trouble with his supervisors if he had used any thing else. Just like they can change the policy of when to write a seat belt ticket, they can change the policy of when to use lethal force.

  31. Okay, now that the circus court put on by the police is over we can hopefully move this to civil court and find out what REALLY happened. Both sides must be allowed to participate in order to find out the truth. Costco had no posting by their entrance indicating CCW was not allowed. Costco's cameras were working EXCEPT the part where Mosher shot Mr. Scott dead while he was complying with police orders to drop it! Costco employee "Shai" escalated this into what it turned into, murder. The pain killers Mr. Scott was taking was from a parachute injury in the Army he suffered while serving his country. Scott's girlfriend is obviously in hiding in fear of her life, however I suspect she will show up for the real trial. How much is your son worth to you?

  32. @Det-Munch: These cops did not make this decision to protect the public, they made the decision to protect themselves. Secondly, its clear you will always take the side of the police officers no matter if they are right or wrong. Even if they were to kill somebody in cold blood and brag about it, you would think its ok. I don't know if you are a cop or not but you have clearly shown that you feel that all cops can do what they want, when they want without consequences simply because they carry a badge. I'm sure you feel if one cop testifies against a bad cop then are a sell out and traitor right?

  33. @Det_Munch: There is no need to insult the Scott family. You got you wanted and that is your fellow police were exonerated. Obviously you have a problem with what a lot people have to say on here, including me. Well, cop or no cop, I am not afraid of you. You will not bully me or intimidate me from making comments on here.

  34. Daddy is blinded to the facts by the dollars in his eyes.

  35. They lost their son when he got hooked on drugs. I too watched it on TV all week and the jury made the right choice.

  36. Come on, guys, get real, this was no circus court. Every side had plenty of opportunity to put witnesses on the stand. The PLAIN TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THAT ERIK SCOTT WAS A DOPE HEAD CARRYING GUNS. Now, all you folks out there who think that the cops were totally wrong in shooting Erik, think that this: if this had happen in some ghetto supermarket in LV would any of us still be talking about this incident. The answer is clearly no. The only reason why we are still commenting about
    Erik Scott's unfortunate death is because he was an educated upper-class guy whose parents have money and connections and who think the drug reports are flawed.

  37. @Pete Garrett: I have talked about what Chris Yant did when he shot the unarmed African American during a raid in based on false information. Yant even admitted he falsified information on the search warrant.

  38. @John Waldrip: So what does that have to do with this case?

  39. I notice that Talkingman got real quiet one it was explained that a criminal civil rights action initiated by the department of justice is completely different than a civil lawsuit brought alleging civil rights violations (which is an ordinary civil suit). You think maybe he finally realized that the only thing that Bill Scott is after is to make a buck off his son's criminal acts? (since monetary damages is the only thing he can win in a civil suit)

  40. Ah Alex2, *NOW* you want to discuss "patterns" huh? So I guess now you feel that all of Erik Scott's past history *IS* valid evidence in the case to show that he had a "pattern" of irrational violent behavior?

  41. @DevilDawg: I see I did have the first name of the officer incorrect. However, what I discussed is true. Yant admitted to submitted falsified information to a judge in order to obtain a warrant. The Trevon Cole shooting is worse than the Erik Scott incident.

  42. I take hydrocodone for chronic pain{MS} in quantities that would have staggered me just five years ago, so the supposedly lethal levels of morphine and Xanex found in Scott's body fail to impress me. And I carry a concealed weapon when I shop at my Costco,there are no signs prohibiting those of us with CWPs from being in the store. The odd fact of the who Costco thing is that when Scott paid his 50 bucks to join, the picture showed him clear-eyed and smiling; now if Scott was acting like a crazy man,or at all drugged, why did Costco let him join? If his first application was so messed up because he was so stoned, as I heard, where is that application? And why did they let him into Costco membership? I've been a Costco member for many years, there are cameras just about everywhere, both inside and outside the entrance, so there should be video of the incoherant Scott trying to make out the application; so, where is it? This may be a very expensive suit for Costco, at least it should be.

  43. Wow talkingman, your credibility just went to zero.

    The inquest over the Tanner Chamberlain shooting happened about a year ago. The shooting was found to be justified because there was video evidence showing Tanner holding a knife to his mother's throat.

    But your attempt to spin the story to support your point when you obviously had no idea of ANY of the details of the case tells us everything we needed to know about your "point".

  44. KeolaGOP - "Is it true Erik Scott had 5 bullet entries in his back?"

    Yes. It is true. But it is also irrelevant. When an armed man, already confronted by police, still pulls out his gun....he's a deadly threat that needs to be stopped. Whether the police are in front of him, behind him, or both has nothing to do with the fact that at that point, he needs to be stopped by any of them that have the opportunity to do so.

  45. Thank you Las Vegas Sun for following this tragic incident. Thank you to everyone who has followed the inquest. To the commenters, a general suggestion, please remember that we are discussing the death of a man and also the effect that death had on the officers who killed him and the Costco employees and the other witnesses. For the Scott family and friends, and all of the other parties, including the police, I'm sure this has been a nightmare of nightmares. I'm sure everyone involved wish that things had turned out differently. A suggestion, stick to the facts without disparaging or insulting the people involved. We all have different experiences. Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean that they are evil or sub-human. It is always good to remember the saying, "There, but for the grace of God, go I."

  46. What a bunch of horse patooties. So the actual complaint is that he played "Simon Says" with one of his guns, but hadn't played "Simon Says" with the other one? Or, more accurately, that he had played Simon Says with ALL of his guns (seven gun registrations in his wallet), but just hadn't played the RIGHT TYPE of Simon Says (adding it to his CCW) with one of them?

    And we are to presume that the cops were immediately aware of this (without looking in his wallet) and therefore were justified in punching him full of holes, whereas otherwise they might not have been?

    If that sort of chickenfeed paperwork "violation" is a FELONY in Nevada, Nevada needs to start tarring and feathering a whole lot of legislators.

  47. 1. Okay, there is something in law called "a reasonable man" concept. Can you honestly tell me that five rounds in the back are something that a reasonable man would do because I have to cry foul. To say that it is within the police rules of engagement is just as foul. I have lived under ROE and I have never heard of any ROE that liberal even in a combat zone.
    2. COSCO video evidence disappearing? Hello! Their insurance is not valid without backup systems. You can't tell me that a company as large as COSTCO doesn't have that redundancy built in. You know that at least one of the systems had to have been manipulated. Did I cry foul yet? FOUL!
    3. The levels of drugs in his system are irrelevant since they appear to be drugs that are not stimulants. Those drugs should have made him dopey - I question the drug test just on those grounds because the symptoms are wrong. Yeah - you know it: FOUL!
    4. I think that everyone touched on the other stuff like the validity of the DA prosecuting their own people, the background of the people involved, and differing witness statements. It is my opinion that this was a criminal act and the police are being allowed to escape appropriate punishment. Unfortunately the way that the law is presently written, there is nothing that can be done. The solution is to develop a police training system that is more like the ones in other places in the world - a system that requires 1-4 years of training instead of an eight week academy. We need a system makes sure that there is sufficient training to avoid situations like this and one that weeds out police cadets that ere potential problems. Germany requires two years of school followed by a two year internship. Think about it - if one of our soldiers did this in Iraq right now, he would fry. That is the real combat zone - not the front of COSTCO.