Family of West Point Graduate Shot to Death By Las Vegas Cops Suing Costco

Erik Scott, a former army officer and Duke MBA, was shot to death by cops at a Costco on July 10, 2010 while shopping with his girlfriend. Scott was legally carrying a concealed firearm, but this was apparently against Costco policy. The family is suing Costco because they say no “no guns” policy was articulated in any signage in the store or when Erik signed up for a Costco membership, and because according to the family the 911 call placed by Costco’s Loss Prevention Officer, Shai Lierley was inaccurate and led to Scott’s death.

A Las Vegas Sun article reporting on the results of the initial coroner’s inquest (it found the shooting justified, as such inquests usually do) stated that “[p]olice confronted Scott… as he exited the store with other patrons who were being evacuated.”  Read that again. The store was apparently being evacuated because of a man with a gun, yet that man was among the patrons being evacuated.

The family initially sued the police department, but surveillance video from the store was missing footage from the time of the incident and the family dropped the federal lawsuit. Police claimed Scott pointed his gun at them, but the gun he was legally carrying was found in his holster. A second, unregistered gun, a semi-automatic Ruger, was photographed at the scene and apparently found on his clothing on the way to hospital; its provenance is hard to gather. Though cops point out carrying that gun is a felony, it wasn’t the gun Costco employees noticed or the ones cops ordered him to drop on the ground while putting his hands up. Details of the lawsuit's allegations, from the Las Vegas Sun:

The suit alleges that when Lierley talked to a police dispatcher, he mischaracterized Scott’s conduct, Scott’s intentions with his firearm and falsely accused Scott of being under the influence of illegal narcotics. Lierley testified during the inquest
Callister said transcripts of the 911 call show that Lierley stayed on the phone with the 911 dispatcher for six or seven minutes. Callister alleged that Lierley, through his statements, led police who arrived at the scene to believe that the situation was escalating.
The suit filed Friday also said that Costco breached its general duty of care to Scott by failing to follow company protocol in allowing a non-management employee to contact Metro about the situation.
The lawsuit also says that Lierley and Costco’s actions “created the situation which resulted in Erik Scott losing his life.”

Incidentally, one of the three cops cleared of the shooting of Erik Scott was relieved of duty (without pay) last year after being indicted for “disposing a firearm to a prohibited person.” He allegedly gave a felon a Ruger handgun as a gift for working on his car in the summer of 2010. He accepted a plea deal last month that knocked the charge down to a misdemeanor. He's no longer a cop.

Aaron Mathis wrote on Erik Scott’s death last week .

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Mike M.||

    I've been hearing some rumors recently that The Declaration of Independents: How Libertarian Politics Can Fix What's Wrong With America by Matt Welch and Nick Gillespie is supposed to be coming out in paperback pretty soon. Anyone know if this is true?

  • JW||

    Not sure. You could ask them about that.

  • Y||

    also some guy wrote a book about ron paul.

  • ||

    Wow. That's pretty revolutionary.

  • ||

    The family initially sued the police department, but surveillance video from the store was missing footage from the time of the incident and the family dropped the federal lawsuit. Police claimed Scott pointed his gun at them, but the gun he was legally carrying was found in his holster. A second, unregistered gun, a semi-automatic Ruger, was photographed at the scene and apparently found on his clothing on the way to hospital; its providence is hard to gather.

    Incidentally, one of the three cops cleared of the shooting of Erik Scott was relieved of duty (without pay) last year after being indicted for “disposing a firearm to a prohibited person.” He allegedly gave a felon a Ruger handgun as a gift for working on his car in the summer of 2010.

    Those are some mighty interesting coincidences...

  • ||

    And nothing else happened...

  • Randian||

    Of course, this sounds like the perfect case for the federal AG to investigate.

    But, oh wait, there's a private citizen in Florida on trial. That's much more important.

  • ||

    The Zimmerman case is a frigging farce.

  • ant1sthenes||

    It sounds like a terrible case for the current AG to investigate. Eric Holder joke: What you do you call a non-state gun owner shot in a CostCo? A good start.

  • RFID||

    but surveillance video from the store was missing footage
    . A second, unregistered gun, a semi-automatic Ruger, was photographed at the scene and apparently found on his clothing on the way to hospital;

    What? Everything about this incident stinks. Were their witnesses? What do they say?

  • R C Dean||

    Sounds like there was a whole crowd of witnesses.

    Still, it has become clear that there is no point in trying to contradict cop testimony with anything other than video. So, when the video mysteriously turned up missing, probably best to just drop that lawsuit.

  • Rasilio||

    It'll never happen but what we need is some kind of law that assumes police are lying and creating a positive obligation on them for any claim they make before it can be accepted into evidence.

    That is, if the cop says someone pointed a gun at him, it is irrelivant unless there is corroborating evidence from a non police officer source. Basically meaning that they have to videotape EVERYTHING they do and if that video is missing or contains "gaps" then it is to be legally assumed the officer(s) is/are lying.

  • ||

    What we need is to get rid of the myriad laws that attract lying bullying assholes to police work.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    Yes, there were multiple witnesses who said there was no second gun, that he never pointed a gun at the cops, and that the cops fired almost immediately after shouting conflicting commands at him.

  • Randian||

    I hate to be that kinda d-bag, but you can always tell who the sub-intelligent dipshits are when they show up to court in a 10-dollar goofily-colored dress shirt and a five-dollar tie.

  • niobiumstudio||

    He works at Costco... he looks early/mid 30's and he is working at Costco. It wasn't the goofy shirt and tie that gave it away. It was given away well before that.

  • sarcasmic||

    I hate to be that kinda d-bag

    No you don't. ;-)

  • Randian||

    You're right. I don't.

  • wareagle||

    and society always needs that kind because, sometimes, someone's gotta say it. Be that guy, randian.

  • Randian||

    I will heed my calling!

  • Sudden||

    But with his employee discount, he actually got three of those exact same ties for $5.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You mean dressing like a mafioso wannabe in court isn't a good idea?

    At least he didn't wear khakis and a polo shirt and think he was all "dressed up".

  • Randian||

    I am actually more brutal on people like this because I am but one generation away from "people who think khakis and polos are dressy". I'm sort of a self-hating workingman like that.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    There was a time when every laborer and farmer looked forward to a barn dance or some sort of celebration so they could wear their sack suits. Across all social classes, Americans standards of dress have become increasingly slovenly as time goes on. Soon, t-shirt, baseball cap and shorts/jeans/sweatpants will be considered "black tie".

  • ||

    Sounds good to me

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    You like your men to look like overgrown 5-year-olds?

    Or were you commenting on the sack suit?

  • ||

    I'm a t-shirt jeans type of gal, what can I say? Nothing 5-year-old about a man looking like he's put in a good days' physical labor.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Nothing wrong with dressing for physical labor when actually doing physical labor.

    When you are finished, then you put on clothes that are clean and flatter you.

  • ||

    You like your men to look like overgrown 5-year-olds?

    What kind of grown man gives a fuck what other people are wearing? Especially enough to whine like a bitch about it?

  • Randian||

    What kind of grown man gives a fuck what other people are wearing? Especially enough to whine like a bitch about it?

    What kind of grown man gives a fuck about what other grown men give a fuck about, especially enough to comment on it?

    Oh wait, that includes me...but if I call out people for complaining about other people, but then do so by complaining about other people complaining about other people, then I should call out myself....but if I do that, I would be complaining about other people complaining...!!!

    WELL, MY HEAD ASPLODE

  • Heroic Mewlatto||

    What kind of grown man gives a fuck about what other grown men give a fuck about, especially enough to comment on it?

    Someone reading a web board, which in no way answers the question "What kind of grown man gives a fuck what other people are wearing? Especially enough to whine like a bitch about it?"

    Oh wait, that includes me...but if I call out people for complaining about other people,

    And this illustrates why you're stupid and need to stop trying so hard. He was called out for caring about something, not commenting on it. ""What kind of grown man gives a fuck what other people are wearing?" Cares abot what people are wearing. "Especially enough to whine like a bitch about it" Cares enough to whine about it.

    So, it looks like you made a fool of yourself.

  • Randian||

    I was actually agreeing with you, HM.

  • Randian||

    Oh wait, I see we have a butthurt troll. I knew the real HM was smarter than that.

  • Heroic Mewlatto||

    Oh wait, I see we have a butthurt troll.

    Aw look who's upset about realizing he made a fool of himself and can't read worth a fuck!

  • Randian||

    Thanks for your input, Mary.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Looks like I hit too close to home, Mr. In flagrante Dunphius

  • Randian||

    a libertarian who advocates dressing down?

    Furnish your decoder ring forthwith, lady.

  • Pip||

    During the workweek I'm a hand-tailored, designer suit kind of guy. It gets one much better service pretty much everywhere. And I like having total strangers that pass by tell me I look really sharp. On the weekends, it's jeans and a tee-shirt because I tend to get dirty from performing hard labor.

  • Fatty Bolger||

    On the weekends, it's jeans and a tee-shirt because I tend to get dirty from performing hard labor.

    At least you didn't get jail time.

  • Pip||

    :0)

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Again, absolutely nothing wrong with dressing for physical work. However, a gentleman should dress for the occasion.

    Typically, those who screech "DON'T TELL ME HOW TO DRESS!" like Mr. dieinafire upthread, are those who would have no idea how to dress properly were they invited to any sort of formal event, or even to dinner at a nice restaurant.

  • ||

    Typically, those who screech "DON'T TELL ME HOW TO DRESS!" like Mr. dieinafire

    Funny, "What kind of grown man gives a fuck what other people are wearing? Especially enough to whine like a bitch about it?" doesn't look anything like "DON'T TELL ME HOW TO DRESS!".

    What kind of grown man gives a fuck what other people are wearing? Especially enough to whine like a bitch about it? Then comes back and whines and lies because he got called out for whining like a bitch?

    Jesus, grow a pair Mewlatto you're whining about people pointing out that you're whining, get some soap and clean that fucking sand out.

  • nicole||

    Since we were talking about 30 Rock earlier, one of my faves from Jack Donaghy.

  • Voros McCracken||

    There's a disadvantage and an advantage to being fat, and it's the same thing: regardless of what you wear, you're just fat. Fat guy in jeans and a t-shirt, fat guy in a suit; same-same.

    Working on solving this problem.

  • Heroic Mewlatto||

    I care about what people who aren't me wear!!! And I care enough about it to cry like a fucking bitch, then cry about anyone who points out how pathetic and stupid my caring is!!!

  • ||

    Suits and ties (and yes, even a tux) in the closet. I know how to clean up.

    But if I want to go to the local watering hole in a T, jean shorts, and crocs, I will. And anyone who objects can slob my fatty.

    Still, that is an awful shirt/tie combination.

  • RBS||

    I wear a suit and tie to work and I know how to dress for any occasion. On the weekends I wear pretty much whatever I want which is usually a t-shirt and shorts with flip flops (if I'm wearing footwear at all). It used to annoy me to see other people dress sloppily where I work or out, but then I realized I have better things to spend my time on.

  • Juice||

    What do you have against cheap clothing? I, for one, hate the fuck out of "dress shirts", ties, jackets, slacks, and "dress shoes." So when I "must" wear them, I go cheap.

  • niobiumstudio||

    Why is it that in most of these police shooting cases the person ALWAYS points his gun at police? Why would a reasonable person EVER point their gun at police? I feel like it is just accepted by juries like "Oh, he pointed his gun at police...we HAD to shoot him" and never question it... Forget that his pistol was found holstered and a RANDOM unregistered gun was found "on"... Seriously, how come in 9/10 cases like this they ALWAYS point their guns at police yet never shoot? Nobody ever questions ANYTHING and these inquests are getting to the point of comical with all the things overlooked and ignored...

  • ||

    here's a HINT. people often act unreasonably.

    and people question plenty of shit, but in case after case, i see forensics, etc. back up officers claims and i see people do unreasonable shit all the time

    this is the kind of comment that would be made by somebody with no street knowledge. spend a little time on the street and see some shit, and you wouldn't be asking this question.

    ivory tower'ism is not just a refuge of liberals

  • Pip||

    He was a fucking former army officer and Duke MBA just buying shit at Costco with his girlfriend you dipshit pig.

  • Pip||

    And you know what, shit-stain? Cops aren't street-smart for shit. Dullard, bully with a gun ain't all that bright, ass-wipe.

  • DJK||

    You clear haven't met our resident law-and-order asshole. Pip, Dunphy. Dunphy, Pip.

  • Pip||

    Oh, I've known this fuckstain for years. And I've been fucking his wife, Morgan Fairchild.

  • sloopyinca||

    Did I start the whole "Morgan Fairchild" schtick? I hope I started that a few years ago but I can't remember.

    Fuck it, I'm claiming it since he hates me the most anyway.*

    *Apologies to sarcasmic.

  • oncogenesis||

    here's a HINT. people often act unreasonably.

    Did you mean to exclude cops from the set of "people"? Either way, it doesn't bode well for the rest of us "people".

  • Fatty Bolger||

    It's like Dunphy says, people do unreasonable things. Like, sometimes they stick their head right into the path of a cop's foot or fist. Or they keep resisting even when being smothered to death under 1000 pounds of cop. Crazy, huh?

  • RFID||

    I personally have seen a man brutally assault an officer's fist with his face. The depravity of some people...

  • o3||

    how'd they know he had a concealed firearm?

  • niobiumstudio||

    They made it seems like it wasn't so concealed and he was wearing a hip-holster. So, guy with concealed carry permit open-carrying or at least semi-open-carrying. I could be wrong though.

  • sarcasmic||

    Good point. If it was properly concealed he might still be alive.

  • NoTalentAssclown||

    he probably bent over to grab a 20 lb tub of cheese balls and the dumb oaf saw the gun in his waistband

  • JW||

    ...the gun he was legally carrying was found in his holster. A second, unregistered gun, a semi-automatic Ruger, was photographed at the scene and apparently found on his clothing on the way to hospital; its providence is hard to gather.

    Oh, I think we all know where that 2nd gun came from.

  • ||

    Planted by cops. Why the fucking shit would a guy legally carrying one gun illegally carry a second gun?

  • Pip||

    Because after shopping, he was going to sell it to someone out in the parking lot?

    *ducks for cover*

  • ||

    Don't be ridiculous. That's what cops do.

  • fish||

    So they shot him to protect their market share?

  • Loki||

    No, cops give guns to convicted felons as payment for working on their cars, apparently.

  • ||

    ex-cops do that

  • sloopyinca||

    No, cops do that. Then they become ex-cops.

  • ||

    ^^this^^

  • R C Dean||

    Well, they become ex-cops if they are caught. And their union isn't up to snuff.

  • ||

    because people often act unreasonably. spend a little time on the streets. do some police ride-a-longs. it isn't rocket science.

    the other day, had a guy throw the busienss end of a shovel at me while my partner had his gun pointed at him.

    why would a person do that? it's unreasonable?

    jesus fucking christ, the level of slack jawed naivete here can be amazing

  • Tonio||

    Hi, Dunphy!

  • Pip||

    "the other day, had a guy throw the busienss end of a shovel at me while my partner had his gun pointed at him."

    The fuck that got to do with street smarts, fuckwad.

    BTW, I've fucking your wife, Morgan Fairchild. She loves being satisfied. Thought you should know.

  • Rasilio||

    Yes dumbass, people sometimes act unreasonably, however the odds that a West Point Grad with an MBA on a family trip to Costco chose to carry an illegal firearm along with his legal one and then for no particular reason whatsoever point it at police is WAY the fuck beyond unreasonable.

    If this was at the Wal*Mart and the deceased was a High School dropout with a history of Drug arrests you might have a point, but Joe whitebread upper middle class american does not typically do that shit, even when they happen to be unhinged which there is absolutely no evidence of in this case. If you click through and read the original story it is pretty clear he was cought totally off guard by three officers with guns drawn and was simply attempting to disarm himself but officers shoot first and ask questions later because they have this same dumbass opinion you do that everyone is a threat.

  • sloopyinca||

    And another anecdote from dunphy.

    Funny, the only story I can ever recall him linking to is the one he claims shows where a cop got a sentence 6x as long as a non-cop would. He painted an elaborate picture of a cop making a small mistake in a DV situation getting 23 years when a non-cop would have gotten 3-4. After following that link, it turns out the guy had multiple restraining orders and chased his girlfriend around the house and shoved her out a second-story window after she begged him for mercy. That would have likely ended in an attempted murder for a non-cop, but even so, the sentencing guidelines called for at least 15 years.

    With that in mind, I have a hard time believing anything he links to. And his anecdotes are disregarded as a matter of course, just like with any other person I know to be a liar.

  • sarcasmic||

    He painted an elaborate picture of a cop making a small mistake in a DV situation getting 23 years when a non-cop would have gotten 3-4.

    And that still doesn't answer the question of 'where are these examples of police being punished for crimes that they committed while in fucking uni-fucking-form'

  • DJK||

    Well, we have Johannes Mehserle getting 2 years on a manslaughter charge for executing an unarmed man who had already been restrained. So, that's something, I guess.

  • DJK||

    You made this bullshit statement upthread, then ignored the response that this guy was a former military officer. So the training was there. He was an officer and a West Point grad, so the respect for authority was there. If anyone is likely to point a weapon at police, it's not this guy!

  • ||

    "A second, unregistered gun ... Though cops point out carrying that gun is a felony, ..."

    First rage-inducer in this story -- gun registration. Fucking disgusting.

    "The family initially sued the police department, but surveillance video from the store was missing footage from the time of the incident and the family dropped the federal lawsuit."

    How convenient. Hoplophobic retard calls cops on a guy for carrying a gun, cops behave like cops, man dies. This shit's becoming so common, it'll cease being newsworthy soon.

    Nothing else happened.

  • niobiumstudio||

    I have noticed that most people who carry a legally registered pistol generally have a second, unregistered pistol with a filed-off serial that just happens to shake loose from their clothing. That's normal right?

  • ||

    Oh, you're not alone there, pal. I've also noticed how that's usually the case specifically with people that cross cops. Dang, dude, ain't our cops good? They always seem to get the right guys!

  • Randian||

    Oh yeah, especially Army officers who follow the rules to Stockholm Syndrome-levels.

  • ||

    He was probably some tea party libertard type out to terrorize the fragile dandelions at Costco with his high-capacity assault pistol street-sweeper. The cops were right to put his Nazi ass down.

    /Leftist cunt.

  • Tonio||

    Spot on. See below.

  • sarcasmic||

    I didn't shake loose, he pointed it at the cops!

    Didn't you RTFA?!?

  • Zeb||

    Yeah, I was a little surprised that Nevada had gun registration.

  • ||

    I assume it's just handgun registration, but that still puts it on a (shitty) par with states like New York.

  • fish||

    Nevada is middle of the pack with their concealed carry practices. Last time I checked permits were "shall issue".

    It's my understanding that within Las Vegas city limits the rules are far stricter!

  • ||

    Local ordinance. State law doesn't require it.

  • SIV||

    If the state doesn't forbid local registration it may as well be requiring it. Nevada is a shit hole.

  • R||

    Nevada as a whole has preemption and no registration, but Clark County managed to wrangle themselves an exception on their handgun registration law. Given that they have the majority of the population, it was hard to stop them without killing the entire preemption law. They're kind of like Chicago in terms of being able to dick with the rest of the state.

    Personally, I think Clark County should be split off from the rest of Nevada and be renamed "West California".

  • Brendan||

    Sort of. Clark County, Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and Henderson have handgun registration requirements that predate the 1989 preemption law. The preemption law grandfathered in existing laws that conflicted.

    Unregistered handguns are misdemeanors, not felonies.

    The felony BS comes from the requirement on that your CCW list each make/model/caliber of handgun you wish to carry (you have to qualify with each one). Technically, carrying a gun not listed on the permit would be a class C felony.

    The listing requirement has changed twice since then, once to allow all revolvers if you qualify with one, then later to do the same thing with semi-autos. As it stands now, new/renewal permits will simply say authorized or not authorized for semi auto or revolver.

    LVMPD used to take the position that the make/model/caliber listing requirement applied to guns owned by you. That is to say, you needed a blue card (registration) card for each gun you wished to carry and the form actually had a space for serial number. This meant that I couldn't quality with my brother's gun, or technically buy an identical replacement and carry it. Luckily that went away with the yes/no laws.

    On a side note, LV, Clark County, and NLV also have 72 hour waiting periods for your first handgun. Henderson, Boulder City, Mesquite do not, with the latter also not requiring registration.

  • Pip||

  • The Fatman||

    Give it up dude, that cowardly POS won't get on this thread. He only goes to non- po-po threads now. But just in case, Die in a fire with your progeny Dunphy you jack-booted, tax-feeding, cowardly piece of shit.

  • A Mathematician||

    And the "Most confusing blog title" award goes to..

    A bunch of cops (that are suing costco) shot to death an entire family of a west point graduate.

  • ||

  • ||

  • Pip||

    + EVERYTHING!

  • sarcasmic||

    I'm glad I found that when I did. Now it's blocked by the firewall at work.

    Your requested URL has been blocked by the URL Filter database module of McAfee Web Gateway. The URL is listed in categories that are not allowed by your administrator at this time.
    URL: http://blog.alaksir.com/wp-con.....signal.jpg
    URL Categories: Blogs/Wiki
    Reputation: Medium Risk
    Media Type:

    How long before Reason is blocked? Not very at this rate.

    Fuck I need a new job. One that keeps me from goofing off by actually giving me shit to do to instead of blocking websites.

  • Zeb||

    But where would we get our Daily Mail links from if you had to actually work?

  • sarcasmic||

    I dunno. I would hope someone would pick up the torch.

  • wareagle||

    hey, you should be happy just to have a job.

    Isn't that what a lot of folks seem to believe these days?

  • sarcasmic||

    hey, you should be happy just to have a job.

    I never said I wasn't. I just want a job where I actually work for the money.
    Pride and all that shit.

  • Pip||

    "I just want a job where I actually work for the money"

    What the fuck is wrong with you?

  • sarcasmic||

    I want to improve my skills so I can demand a better wage.

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    That photo of Officer Mosher... Holy shit, is that guy the picture of fitness. Theory: Fatass cops go straight to taser or gun because otherwise they would have to engage in a physical activity that might elevate their lard-encapsulated hearts to a rate that would see them explode.

  • DJK||

    I would pay to see that.

  • ||

    This is precisely why I am so fucking careful to never, ever let my gun show or even print. The cops might just fucking execute you like they did this guy after someone makes a breathless phone call to them.

  • RFID||

    This is precisely why I don't carry at all. Maybe if I were in a more gun-friendly state, but I don't trust CT. Especially after what happened to that guy at the Chili's.

  • ||

    That dude was open carrying. I've never heard of a concealed carry issue in CT, and I know a number of people who have them, including my father.

  • Chloe||

    Wow, this article is rage inducing. So, lets see: non-register gun magically appears on victim, after cops realize legal gun was still in holster. Second, all cameras that could have either proved the victims guilt or innocence just happened to not be working.

  • BBB||

    A second, unregistered gun, a semi-automatic Ruger, was photographed at the scene and apparently found on his clothing on the way to hospital; its providence is hard to gather.

    I can't attest to the providence of the second gun, but its provenance seems to be what's at issue.

  • SugarFree||

    I think they are trying to suggest that God placed the throwdown weapon.

  • BBB||

    I love how they've fixed this already, without attribution. I feel so used. *sniff*

  • SugarFree||

    Typical men.

  • DJK||

    God does love LEOs.

  • SIV||

    Nevada sucks on 2nd Amendment stuff.

    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.

  • ||

    "Nevada state law does not require the registration of firearms. However, handgun owners in Clark County must register their concealable and non-concealable firearms at a law enforcement agency within an incorporated city of Clark County (informally call the 'Blue Card').

    Nevada is a "shall issue" state for concealed carry. The county sheriff shall issue a concealed firearms permit to qualified applicants. To apply for a Concealed Firearm Permit, a person must successfully take an approved course in firearm safety and demonstrate competence (qualify) with a semiautomatic handgun or revolver or both. Once issued, the permit will read:

    Semiautomatic firearms authorized ... Yes | No
    Revolvers authorized ... Yes | No

    depending on the applicant's demonstrated competence."

    Some localities fuck with people via ordinances though, one of which is where this man resided.

  • Brendan||

    The old law would have made it a felony if the gun wasn't listed on his permit.

    The unregistered aspect was a local misdemeanor at most, no state law violation.

  • wareagle||

    I suspect that in most jurisdictions it is a crime to not have a permit for a gun that someone else puts on your person. Pretty convenient, don't you think?

  • SIV||

    Outside of this article I haven't seen any suggestion the Ruger wasn't the property of the deceased.

    falsely accused Scott of being under the influence of illegal narcotics

    Well...

    Dr. Alane Olson, a medical examiner in the Clark County Coroner’s Office, testified that Scott had a number of drugs in his system when he died. The levels of morphine and xanax found by a toxicology screen conducted after his death were very high and potentially lethal, she said.

  • ||

    So, the cops were just preventing the guy from committing suicide. Nothing to see here.

  • R C Dean||

    Somebody botched the tox screen. I'm guessing there's no way you could be juiced with "very high" levels of morphine and xanax and not have it be very apparent to people around you. Is anyone (not a cop) testifying that he looked stoned to the gills?

  • R C Dean||

    I see that somebody testified that he looked dazed during the confrontation, which is interesting, but hardly dispositive. I imagine there were a lot of people looking pretty dazed when confronted by a bunch of cops yelling and generally getting all cop-y.

  • SIV||

    Costco called 911 based on:

    1. He was armed

    2. Appeared high and was acting erratically

    3. Was tearing up their merchandise

  • DJK||

    Citation?

  • DJK||

    Huh. Read the court documents. Looks like the same guy (girl? What the fuck kinda name is Shai?) who called dispatch also testified that there was no evidence of drugs or drawing of a weapon.

  • sloopyinca||

    If that were the case, I'm sure they would have trained a video camera exclusively on him as he trolled through the store.

    Funny, there seems to be no evidence to substantiate the claim (made after the fact, btw).*

    *By "after the fact," I mean after their lawyer and the police officers instructed him in what he really saw that day.

  • DJK||

    Nah. The dispatch record seems to indicate that the security officer made claims of drugs, drawing weapons during his/her call to 911. And later testified that this wasn't the case. What an asshole.

  • Loki||

    A second, unregistered gun, a semi-automatic Ruger, was photographed at the scene and apparently found on his clothing on the way to hospital;
    ...
    one of the three cops cleared of the shooting of Erik Scott was relieved of duty (without pay) last year after being indicted for “disposing a firearm to a prohibited person.” He allegedly gave a felon a Ruger handgun as a gift

    Apparently LVPD has an affinity for Ruger handguns. Any bets on it being the same gun?

  • SIV||

    I'll bet aginst. The cop gave the felon a .22 (Mark I or II). The dead Costco customer reportedly had a Ruger LCP .380.

  • DJK||

    Holy shit! The LCP .380 was designed by Ruger specifically for backup weapons for LEOs after requests from municipal police departments. Fuck off!

  • SIV||

    “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.”

    That wasn't very smart of the deceased.

  • ||

    Wow. Another murder. Thank Christ for our heroes in blue!

  • SIV||

    Witnesses say it wasn't murder.

    Colleen Kullberg was among the last to leave the Summerlin Costco store on July 10. The store was being evacuated — it could be a bomb threat, she thought — but as she was leaving the store, she wasn’t sure why she had been ordered out.

    But after Kullberg, a part-time customer service employee, made her way from the back of the store where she was stationed to the front exit, it wasn’t a bomb that confronted her. A very different sort of explosive scene unfolded in front of her eyes, she testified on Wednesday.

    A man, later determined to be Erik Scott, was staring at a Metro Police officer. Scott was standing with his arms to his sides and appeared to be dazed, she said.

    He then reached around behind him and, with his right hand, removed a gun from his waistband and brought it forward, pointing it at the officer.

    “What did you think he was going to do?” asked Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent.

    “Shoot,” she said.

  • pmains||

    The sad part is that this behavior is plainly a routine thing. Much like the Kathryn Johnston case, the public refuses to believe that this is going on until the police murder a grandmother, nun, war hero, etc. Then some dimwit takes it too far and the sham is exposed for what it is.

    If there were appropriate institutional safeguards in place; if real investigations and legitimate trials were held following these events, we would likely see a spike of prosecutions followed by police officers actually obeying the laws they claim to be upholding.

  • ||

    file under "yawn"... btw, if the allegations about the costco stuff are true, i'd be suing them too...

    The following is heard in the 911 call: “Put your hands where I can see them now. Drop it! Get on the ground! Get on the ground!”

    “He refused to comply with those commands, to show his hands, or to get on the ground,” Mosher testified.

    Scott responded by pulling out his gun, Mosher said. Mosher saw the gun being raised in his direction.

    "He was a deadly threat with that weapon in his hand," Mosher said.

    Mosher said at that point, fearing for his own safety, fearing for the safety of the other officers and fearing for the safety of the crowd, "I fired my weapon at center body mass."

    After Mosher’s two shots hit Scott, Scott took a few steps back and the other officers fired.

    “He staggered back several more feet, turned around, then fell on his face

  • sarcasmic||

    His registered handgun was in its holster and the plant was in his clothes.

    Did he holster the registered handgun after he was shot, or did he put the plant in his clothes after he was shot?

    Doesn't pass the smell test. Smells like, well, rotten bacon.

  • DJK||

    He did it while staggering and falling to his face. Obviously.

  • Lord Humungus||

    too bad the deceased didn't get off a few shots of his own. If you're going to go down, you might as well take a few blue meanies with you.

  • sarcasmic||

    He was too busy holstering the weapon that he had previously been pointing at the police.
    His dying act was to holster his weapon (or pocket the drop gun, take your pick).

  • SIV||

    Witnesses corroborate the oficers account (see above).

  • sarcasmic||

    Did the witnesses give their statement before or after the officers coached them on what to say?

  • R C Dean||

    One says he offered the cops the holstered gun. Begging, again, the question of where the second gun came from.

    The other doesn't specify which gun it was.

    What a mess.

  • ||

    Witnesses

    I did see above, and saw a single witness who works for costco semi-corroborate the murderers statement.

    Needless to say I find it as much of a lie as the pig who placed the drop gun's claims.

    And by the way, you keep saying "witnesses" like you're unaware you only named a single witness.

    Also, first the claim is " he responded within a few seconds with the best that he could do by handing over the holstered gun "

    But your named employee witness says what happened was "He then reached around behind him and, with his right hand, removed a gun from his waistband and brought it forward, pointing it at the officer."

    Which was it? Was he shot for handing over a holstered weapon, as YOUR WITNESSES (apart from the employee with reason to lie) claim? He would have been told to drop the weapon so...

  • Rasilio||

    Eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable and I would be willing to bet you $100 that the testimony each would give would be 100% in agreement with their views of police/firearms. This who view police in a positive light or fear firearms will testify that he pointed the gun, those who do no will all testify that he offered the holstered handgun to the police.

    That said it seems pretty easy to see who was at fault here, first, the Costco employee who set up a false scenario that made the cops believe they were dealing with a dangerously unhinged individual, then the cops for having their firearms and not tasers drawn.

    Realistically they should be trained in cases like this to have 2 officers with guns drawn and 1 with a taser, the guy with the taser is authorized to fire at the first hint of danger, the ones with the guns only on positive confirmation that the suspect is dangerous AND the taser failed to bring him down.

  • DJK||

    The real issue isn't the lack of consistency between witness statements. It's the fact that there was a completely reliable witness who just happened to miss the scene but had no reason to do so. That would be the fucking video record.

  • Rasilio||

    Yes the abscence of video evidence is very curious here and while proving nothing I have a hard time believing that a store lets their video surveillance systems offline for any measurable time, more likely they conspired with the cops to erase it because they knew they would be on the hook for a pretty serious lawsuit if the shooting was judged unnecessary.

  • R C Dean||

    Well, if he pulled a gun, it certainly wasn't the gun in his holster.

    Which leads us back to the mysterious second gun.

    We are supposed to believe that a CCW holder, with extensive training, had a holstered gun AND a just a loose gun on him,. Why would he do that?

    AND that he pulled the loose gun, not the holstered gun, when he decided to get into a shootout with a bunch of cops?

    Strikes me as the sort of implausible story that I would want videotape to corroborate. Its certainly no more plausible than the story that some cop panicked, gunned him down, and left a throw-down on him.

  • sarcasmic||

    ^this^

  • R C Dean||

    One more thing: We are supposed to believe that he had a number of registered guns, but the loose gun that he supposedly took with him just happens to be the one unregistered gun he owned?

  • Loki||

    Whatever you do, don't read the comments at the Las Vegas Sun article linked to in this story.

    First Comment: Erik Scott created the situation by his own conduct and drug use. Costco was just the stage. If Costco, or any other company, has a policy that employees are not allowed to call, contact or talk to police I would think the employee would have a good case should something happen to them. Bottom line is that Scott was impaired, acting irrationally and armed with a handgun. Only Scott is at fault. Gotta love attorneys

    Yeah, let's just take it on faith that some schmuck who works at a fucking Costco can even tell whether someone is on drugs or not. While we're at it, let's just take the testimony of the Costco fuck and the cops entirely at face value. Un-fucking-believable. That asshole has to be a cop.

    RAGE, TAKING OVER!!!!11!!!!!

  • dehaul||

    I dunno... sounds like a he said she said type situation. I don't think we really know what happened.

    If what the Costco security guy is true, it seems like a reasonable response to call the cops. Once the cops showed up it seems like a reasonable response to shoot Scott if they were getting told he was acting completely irrational on the way over and he was reaching for his gun when they got there.

    I think the real take away here is if you are carrying a concealed weapon it should be exactly that - concealed.

  • Tonio||

    I suspect we're going to see more of this in the future. The anti-gun people are hysterics, and view any firearm* anywhere anytime as a threat to their "right to not be surrounded by guns." These people think that anyone with a gun is one heartbeat away from pulling a Loughner and don't care if the police overreact, as they will. This is all about intimidating gun owners.

    *Excepting police and military.

  • dehaul||

    But you must admit that the Costco store is a private enterprise where they can and should be allowed to set a rule such as "no firearms allowed in the store."

  • sarcasmic||

    I agree with you.

    FTA: The family is suing Costco because they say no “no guns” policy was articulated in any signage in the store

    However having a rule, not posting it, then calling the cops when someone breaks it?
    I don't think so.

  • dehaul||

    From here:

    http://www.lasvegassun.com/new.....gun-didnt/

    Lierley said he began watching Scott for a few minutes as he was putting steel bottles into a neoprene bag, tearing them from their cardboard containers.

    He said he eventually noticed Scott had a firearm in his waistband, so he and another employee approached Scott and told him Costco had a policy against firearms in the store and he would have to take the gun outside.

    “I’m a Green Beret. You need to read the (expletive) Constitution,’” Lierley said Scott told them. “He was angry. He snapped up real quick.”

    Lierley also said Scott said he had a constitutional right to carry the gun.

    Lierley is the security guard... He testified that he saw Scott's firearm and asked him to leave. Scott refused. The police we called. That seems perfectly reasonable to me...

  • dehaul||

    Also if the security guard really asked Scott to leave, the lawsuit is bullshit. If I ask you to leave my property, you had better leave because I'm calling the cops too.

  • Tonio||

    Uh, OK, so what, dehaul? That was totally unrelated to my post.

    But FWIW, I do agree that businesses or individuals can prohibit guns on their own property. However, there was no signage to this effect, nor does it seem to have been in his member agreement.

  • dehaul||

    Maybe I misunderstand you when you say

    The anti-gun people are hysterics, and view any firearm* anywhere anytime as a threat to their "right to not be surrounded by guns."

    This situation regards someone carrying a weapon on someone else's property so I thought it was related to that statement.

    Also see above response to sarcasmic. The security guard asked Scott to leave when he saw the firearm and Scott refused. If the security guard is being honest, I think the security guard had every right to call the cops.

  • ||

    amongst the various illogical pathwawys the reasonoids travel down, one that is outstanding (it stands out).

    people will say "how come in almost all of these shooting, the guy points his gun at ..."

    that's very illogical behavior

    but let's remmber, these are severe outlier instances

    a cop might confront scores, if not hundreds of people with gunz in similar situations and NOT shoot them. and in those cases, almost always, the guy complies and does NOT point the gun at cops

    you are by definition, looking at a statistical rarity. a police shooting.

    so, yes, you will see some bizarre commonalities. but you aren't reading the scores/hundreds of NONshooting incidents that occur, for every time the cops are actually forced to fire.

    these are not "normal" incidents, by definition, because the police were forced to fire.

    normally, the police DON'T fire, and that includes out of hundreds of arrested of armed violent felons, crazy people, etc.

    i didn't shoot the guy who threw the business end of the shovel at me.

    i would have been justified, but the point is, you won't even read the incident HAPPENED, let alone the case facts

  • ||

    if you want a balanced view of what cops (and others do), you would need to read a cross section of reports iow read the scores of events where the cops DIDn't shoot, even though in many of those cases they would have been justified and many will go out of their way to avoid shooting, even while putting themself in danger

    again, you can't look at SHOOTINGs and extrapolate about police behavior when confronted with armed individuals without ALSO reading the far far far far far more common NONshooting incidents and comparing them

    this bias is a powerful thing

  • sarcasmic||

    this bias is a powerful thing

    True. Your "law enforcement can do no wrong because we're all Noble Knights of the Templar" is impossible to hide.

  • Tonio||

    Needs moar "canard" and ALL CAPS SHOUTING.

  • DJK||

    You would have been justified for shooting someone who threw a shovel at you? You're claiming the right to use lethal force in this instance? Serve and protect, asshole.

  • Rasilio||

    Comparing the numbers of cops killed in the line of duty to the number of people killed by cops and keeping in mind the fact that the non cops typically have the more powerful firearms it is pretty obviously clear that the cops nearly always shoot first and often in cases where it is not necessary.

    If this were not true the numbers would be far more in line, not equal but far closer to 2 or 3 to 1 than the 10 or more to 1 that it currently is.

  • oncogenesis||

    i didn't shoot the guy who threw the business end of the shovel at me... [but] i would have been justified

    Seriously? Well, that puts me squrely on the side of cop haters.

  • oncogenesis||

    Squarely, even.

  • sloopyinca||

    If there are scores more of these "non-incidents" where cops defuse a situation where someone has guns drawn, I'm sure you have an ample supply of links to substantiate the claim. After all, that's just the kind of feel-good story Americans are clamoring for.

  • sloopyinca||

  • sarcasmic||

    Just last month a shooting was ruled as justified round here, as they always are.

    The man who was shot was standing still in his doorway, alone, but he refused to drop the kitchen knife that he was holding.

    The police who killed him were over twenty feet away with a cruiser between them and him.

    Yet somehow their lives were in imminent danger.

    The fact is that they had been there for a while, were tired of his disrespecting their authoritah, so they executed him.

    Fucking pigs.

  • DJK||

    Well, they could have been hit with the "business end" of that knife, after all. All of them, in fact. The perp had that great of combat skills.

  • Rasilio||

    They must have all watched V for Vendetta and realized just how common V's knife skills were.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    To be fair, they just have to fear for their lives. And since they're cops they're fucking cowards.

  • sloopyinca||

    Maybe dunphy can relate to us why Otto Zehm's murdered (uncharged in state court) has still not been sentenced even though the jury in federal court found him guilty over 7 months ago. Maybe he could also tell us why the city admitted responsibility for his death yet no charges were filed against the officer that murdered him in cold blood.

    Yeah, dunphy. Come on and tell us how fucking great your union is when the CBA is the only thing keeping cops in WA from being legitimately investigated when they commit atrocious crimes like this. Tell us, you prick, how justice is served when cops can hide evidence of their wrongdoing and cannot be compelled to disclose information when they commit acts of violence under color of authority.

    Fuck dunphy. He's a scum-sucking pig with a penchant for embellishment and outright fabrication. If anyone on here takes him seriously as a human being, then they deserve to have their ass kicked by a gang of thugs with badges. It's the only way they'll learn.

  • sarcasmic||

    He's a scum-sucking pig with a penchant for embellishment and outright fabrication.

    Isn't that a bit redundant?

  • sloopyinca||

    In his particular case, it is so egregious that it bears repeating.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Calling it a "union" is generous. Once it starts aiding and abetting murder, it seems more appropriate to call it a "mafia".

  • RPR2||

    throw down gun and missing videotape. I have no reasonable doubt what happened.

  • Chloe||

    It won't be the monkeys that unleash the rage virus on the world, but cops shooting civilians in cold blood and then getting away with it, without a proper investigation, that will turn the population into a group of Rage!Zombies! on meth.

  • James Anderson Merritt||

    "Family of West Point Graduate Shot to Death By Las Vegas Cops Suing Costco"

    Wow! Litigious cops shot a whole family to death? What does the grieving West Point graduate think?

    There is an art to arranging and punctuating a headline so that it isn't misconstrued by those who only catch a quick glimpse of it. Just sayin'.

  • Jvanleuvan||

    New to this board; First post.
    this is directed at Dunphy:
    There was a time that we (the public) took an officers word as golden; even in unlikely/unusual situations we gave them the benefit of the doubt; but that time is waning. It’s waning because we (the public) have seen video after video showing cops just plain bold face lying or worse.
    So in this case a reasonable person looks at the following facts.
    1) Erick Scott appears to be a complete upstanding member of society.
    2) He was participating in normal activities
    3) A the time the cops were called he didn’t appear to break any laws
    So he doesn’t appear to be a PCP fiend jiving for a high
    Also, as for the incident there are MANY troubling issues.
    1) He had a license to carry a gun, and had a legal gun, why would he have an illegal gun, Just to cause trouble?
    2) The video cameras, which can always seem to catch shoplifters, conveniently miss this entire incident.
    3) Witnesses Contradict the police statement on this incident, are they lying? Why?
    4) No one but the police saw this 2nd illegal gun
    5) His legal gun was found still in his holster.
    6) He supposedly pointed his illegal gun at the police, assumedly with his hand, as most people don’t point guns with their waist AND that after he was shot he somehow dropped the gun INTO his clothes so completely that it was only on the way to the hospital that it was found.
    7) The gun happens to be the same type that one of the officers illeagally gave away

  • sloopyinca||

    Welcome to the site! Post more stuff like ^^this^^.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement