NC - Keith Scott, 43, killed by LEO, Charlotte, 20 Sept 2016 #1

[CARIIS]

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/so...-at-charlotte-police-shooting-scene/449405173

CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Tests revealed Keith Scott's fingerprints, DNA and blood were on a gun recovered at Tuesday’s officer-involved shooting scene, police sources told Channel 9 reporter Mark Becker.

That is huge as long as it was not planted! Hey they all have family to take care of. Putting a gun in dead dudes hand and smearing some blood in that setting is not hard

12 seconds

is that why no release of their video

that code of blue is pretty ................

just my first reaction

releae the video

 

[popsicle]

Oh good lord , your gonna wreck your car not to steal anything -- maybe medical or drugs - that just sounds STUPID

Was this in FL HA!

Pop is this today??

2:30 in the morning. Possible weapons were locked up tight or a fast response by LE/security. idk

ANd..........if he was right handed it does seem like that is where the gun would end up = but oh oh oh photoshop!

iirc this photo actually came from a witness not LE

 

[Kimberlyd125]

You hear the cops shout "drop the gun" multiple times.

Then, right before the shots, you can hear his wife shout "don't do it Keith" several times.

I think that backs LE's version of events.

JMO

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I still want to hear why these officers were approaching this man sitting in his truck in the first place. The wife had just been in the truck and went inside to get her phone charger and the attorney says she was gone about 3 minutes and came out to this. If he was sitting in a parked truck and they were there for someone else, why were they even speaking to him?????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They say because he got out of his vehicle with a gun then got back in his vehicle. They ordered him out and he refused for a while, then exited the vehicle with the gun and refused to drop it.

It's not like they just saw a man sitting peacefully in his vehicle and decided to approach him.

 

[drjones]

The other thread was the original thread by the way, and it contains a lot of good information. Don't threads usually get merged when there are duplicates?

 

[CARIIS]

I still want to hear why these officers were approaching this man sitting in his truck in the first place. The wife had just been in the truck and went inside to get her phone charger and the attorney says she was gone about 3 minutes and came out to this. If he was sitting in a parked truck and they were there for someone else, why were they even speaking to him?????


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ding ding ding you have won a free trip to CHarlotte!

This is the first dept that has acted out with police video -- we MUST remain cognizant at that at all times

all behavior has meaning

to site a law that is not in effect yet is ludicrious IMO

 

[Tawny]

There is a difference between "not complying" and threatening with a weapon. That's actually a real charge: Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon.

Nobody seems to be saying THAT'S what he was doing. All I'm seeing is he was "not complying".

ETA: I'm ONLY speaking to the apparent belief that "not complying" seems to be justification for deadly force.

 

[K_Z]

KZ - "What will be interesting is the forensic report on the gun, which will take several weeks."

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/local/so...-at-charlotte-police-shooting-scene/449405173

"CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Tests revealed Keith Scott's fingerprints, DNA and blood were on a gun recovered at Tuesday’s officer-involved shooting scene, police sources told Channel 9 reporter Mark Becker."

Wow-- that was lightning fast. As I said above, I'm sure they also tested/ are testing the INSIDE of the gun, the magazine and ammunition, for both fingerprints and DNA. That is very compelling evidence, because it would not be possible to "plant" a gun at the scene with that kind of evidence on the inside. This was not "a book", though many of us know by now that the "book" story put out so assertively in the beginning is/ was necessary to deflect any attention from family members who knew about, or provided him with the gun.

But IMO, no amount of objective evidence is ever "enough" to persuade those in denial, and those that protest peacefully, and those that riot opportunistically. Their misguided subjective ideas (and violence, rioting, and looting by opportunists and the perpetually aggreived) persist despite objective truth and evidence.

When you watch the video from the wife, it's apparent to me that she knows KS is about to "do" something very serious. She shouts and pleads, "Don't do it, Keith! Don't do it!"

She heard them shouting over and over and over to "drop the gun" before she said that. She definitely knows he has a long and violent criminal history that includes gun convictions. I think she knew he had a gun. JMO, others will vary, and probably do!

 

[drjones]

There is a difference between "not complying" and threatening with a weapon. That's actually a real charge: Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon.

Nobody seems to be saying THAT'S what he was doing. All I'm seeing is he was "not complying".

ETA: I'm ONLY speaking to the apparent belief that "not complying" seems to be justification for deadly force.

if what police claim is true then - having his gun unholstered without good cause and not reholstering it or dropping it when instructed to by police IS displaying it in a threatening manner, if had lived he would have been charged for it.

 

[popsicle]

There is a difference between "not complying" and threatening with a weapon. That's actually a real charge: Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon.

Nobody seems to be saying THAT'S what he was doing. All I'm seeing is he was "not complying".

ETA: I'm ONLY speaking to the apparent belief that "not complying" seems to be justification for deadly force.

It is also illegal to display or brandish a gun in a manner that either causes or can reasonably be expected to cause fear or panic. This is called “Going Armed to the Terror of the People.”

http://www.ncdoj.gov/getdoc/32344299...-gun-Laws.aspx

 

[K_Z]

I think it is becasue as a nation, with cell phones, we have unearthed , finally, the degree to which this people abuse their arrest powers, based on skin color, who you like to get naked with, etc.

The reality here, is that with all that, endlessly on the news, and noone ever , if they wear a badge, ever get charged and thrown in prison, like anyone else would, its a double whammy.

From personal exp - what the world is seeing is only the tip of the iceberg -- why has none of these people been put in jail?

In many of them it is clear that the cops were in danger at all -

Check it out

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=cop+blockers

IMO there is no reason for this link to get removed, all it is is citizans who are sick of this recording - everyone of us can come to our own conclusion by watching - it not MSM media - its better - its live!!

not ok

moo

All this love for cops - is from white, educated, people, that have the capacity to obtain legal council moo

BBM for focus.

Cariis, I reject that statement wholeheartedly. And respectfully, that is pretty offensive to every non-white person who supports police officers in their incredibly difficult job.

And every family in these high profile cases, no matter how poor, has an attorney within minutes to hours of the incident-- the activist groups make sure of that. The attorneys are paid by the acticist groups, or volunteer their services (like the right to life attorneys for the families in denial of brain death of their loved ones.)

 

[Caffeine]

I just started following this...perhaps I'm missing something. He was given commands by police...didn't follow them...had a gun, that appears to be visible in pictures and has his DNA on it...etc

Sure, maybe he was in the wrong place at the wrong time but there seems to be some bad decision making on his part at first glance here.

 

[Jax49]

I just started following this...perhaps I'm missing something. He was given commands by police...didn't follow them...had a gun, that appears to be visible in pictures and has his DNA on it...etc

Sure, maybe he was in the wrong place at the wrong time but there seems to be some bad decision making on his part at first glance here.

There is still a question IF he had a gun. It isn't visible in the video that was released today (by his widow's attorneys). I'm not saying he did or didn't, since I don't know.

Also, he had a TBI which would explain poor decision making on his part.

 

[Caffeine]

There is still a question IF he had a gun. It isn't visible in the video that was released today (by his widow's attorneys). I'm not saying he did or didn't, since I don't know.

Also, he had a TBI which would explain poor decision making on his part.

Yeah, it seems early to really draw any conclusion, but certainly having a gun in his hand will make or break this.

Hopefully the things remain safe in Charlotte in the meantime.

 

[Tawny]

You know who else had bad decision making? James Holmes. Or the guy who bombed Manhattan. Both were highly violent and murdered people. They're alive.

No more excuses, y'all. If cops can take down Robert Dear (the planned parenthood shooter) they can handle one black man who may or may not have a gun, may or may not be on drugs, may or may not have a criminal record.

 

[cady]

I guess a gun must be involved, but why all the mystery? I thought that DNA took a lot more time for results? And why were they throwing or kicking a loaded gun? Chain of custody issue. How was their attention drawn to Scott in the first place? Perplexing. JMO

 

[drjones]

There is still a question IF he had a gun. It isn't visible in the video that was released today (by his widow's attorneys). I'm not saying he did or didn't, since I don't know.

Also, he had a TBI which would explain poor decision making on his part.

in the first view you get of the scene after the shooting (her camera is turned away for a bit) you can see what is alleged to be the gun, the LEO in the red shirt then immediately stands over it, it is between his legs right next to his left foot, you get a few more glimpses of it but not enough to determine that is in fact a gun. but it makes sense that an officer would stand over it like that, if you notice he never moves his left foot after he goes and stands there, even when he leans forward to pick something up.

 

[bluesneakers]

I guess a gun must be involved, but why all the mystery? I thought that DNA took a lot more time for results? And why were they throwing or kicking a loaded gun? Chain of custody issue. How was their attention drawn to Scott in the first place? Perplexing. JMO

It really sounds like if they would have just let him be he wouldn't be dead right now. If he wasn't who they were looking for, what happened?

 

[drjones]

I guess a gun must be involved, but why all the mystery? I thought that DNA took a lot more time for results? And why were they throwing or kicking a loaded gun? Chain of custody issue. How was their attention drawn to Scott in the first place? Perplexing. JMO

yeah i have never been able to get a good answer on DNA testing times, in some famous cases in which time is of the essence you will hear that it is going to take weeks, other times it appears it can be done in just days.

i would guess it depends on the exact type of testing being done, what type of material has been recovered etc.

i also wouldnt be surprised if a DNA test has not yet been completed and the information is inaccurate.

 

[drjones]

It really sounds like if they would have just let him be he wouldn't be dead right now. If he wasn't who they were looking for, what happened?

im surprised they havent made this point clear by now, its not something that you need to corroborate with multiple witnesses or physical evidence...