CMPD Releases Video Of Fatal Shooting Of Keith Lamont Scott

CMPD has released the body and dash cam footage in the Keith Lamont Scott shooting investigation. The video was released days after protesters demanded that the footage be made public.

Scott’s wife released cell phone footage she captured in the moments leading up to the shooting on Friday. That video can be seen HERE.

Complete coverage of the shooting death of Keith Lamont Scott and the protests following his death can be viewed HERE.

CMPD Releases Video Of Fatal Shooting Of Keith Lamont Scott

Images of the gun and two videos are in the article. It does appear the gun was in hand. They still have a few more videos, which they may release.

Edit: I'll Embed the video when YouTube gets them up.

Two plain clothes officers were sitting inside of their unmarked police vehicle preparing to serve an arrest warrant in the parking lot of The Village at College Downs, when a white SUV pulled in and parked beside of them.

The officers observed the driver, later identified as Mr. Keith Lamont Scott, rolling what they believed to be a marijuana “blunt.” Officers did not consider Mr. Scott’s drug activity to be a priority at the time and they resumed the warrant operation. A short time later, Officer Vinson observed Mr. Scott hold a gun up.

Because of that, the officers had probable cause to arrest him for the drug violation and to further investigate Mr. Scott being in possession of the gun.

source

Don't police fatally shoot at least 2 or 3 people every day of the week? I fail to see why this particular shooting is generating so much attention. I now turn the channel when one of the news networks show anything related to it. Lot's more people kill each other needlessly. (Hello Chicago)

a reply to: carewemust

This story got attention because he was claimed to be armed with nothing but a book, then the protest or riot what ever you will call it...and boom , media goes insane.

a reply to: carewemust

Obama not only knew but used Hillary's personal email. That's not what the left wants to talk about, so the Master, Soros, instructed one of the groups that he controls, Black Life Matters, to cause trouble. BLM obeyed their command and brought out if town people to cause trouble.

Now no one is talking about Obama

It does look like he had a gun in his hand.. so that at least shows the cops did not plant it.

originally posted by: Mianeye
a reply to: carewemust

This story got attention because he was claimed to be armed with nothing but a book, then the protest or riot what ever you will call it...and boom , media goes insane.

Yep, they started another "gentle giant" narrative for him like they did with Michael Brown.

Let's see . . . there is now the video that everyone demanded and it shows what . . . the police had been saying all along.

Why can't people just wait for investigations?

And for those who still want to call it murder . . . when is the last time you saw someone murder someone and then give them CPR?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Charlotte Police Chief: Video Doesn't Show "Definitive" Proof Keith Scott Pointed a Gun at Cops

What I can tell you that I saw is the video does not give me absolute, definitive, visual evidence that would confirm that a person is pointing a gun. I did not see that in the videos that I’ve reviewed.

www.slate.com...

This from the Washington Post:

Although Putney said he was certain Scott was armed, he told reporters the video was “insufficient” and would not provide solid proof that Scott had a gun.

“There is no definitive visual evidence that he had a gun in his hand and that he pointed it at an officer,” Putney said, before adding that all of the evidence collected by investigators, taken together, proves that Scott had a gun and was a threat to public safety.

www.washingtonpost.com... utm_term=.45e6c796a1d0

What is he talking about proof? Either Scott was holding a gun or he wasn't. The cops said they saw a gun? Right? He was shot? So when they approached him was there a gun lying next to Scott at the time or no? I think it's rather simple. So given the statement above, I'm going to assume there wasn't a gun.

Let me just add further, Scott is an idiot for not putting his hands up and cooperating. Gun or no gun. Not excusing the officers, I would very much like this case looked into. But Scott could have cooperated alittle more. Maybe it was the marijuana? I don't know, but for goodness sakes man you have a family.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

More like there was no definitive proof the gun was pointed directly at the cops. The gun was there.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Southern Guardian

The gun was there.

From the official Police statement, they say there was a gun. This from Putney:

Putney says Scott "absolutely" had a gun but that it's not shown in his hand in the videos.

We have no further evidence to date aside from the initial statement from police claiming there was one. Now we can put our faith in the police and assume they are being truthful. But given the distrust with police and government officials nowadays, I would not blame those out there asking for further evidence.

Putney then made this statement after the video footage was released:

Although Putney said he was certain Scott was armed, he told reporters the video was “insufficient” and would not provide solid proof that Scott had a gun.

Why the uncertainty all of a sudden? Putney himself said so, what's going on? Or maybe Putney is talking about insufficient evidence proving their official statement?

Are you personally privy to further information many of us may not be aware of Ketsuko?

All I see is contradictory reports. He said she said.

I'll be the first to admit I've only starting looking into this story since this video was released. But from what I can tell, we have the official Police statement and that's it.

a reply to: ketsuko

Yea but when you say it like that MSM won't boost ratings before the debate and build a decisive platform for the debate.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

It was reported by CNN via Yahoo last night that there was fingerprint, blood and DNA evidence on the gun.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Southern Guardian

It was reported by CNN via Yahoo last night that there was fingerprint, blood and DNA evidence on the gun.

Come on you've seen the movies. they get their throw down gun out and then wrap the person's hand around it
putting his prints and dna on the gun!!

Oh that's right, the guys wife was yelling 'don't do it Scott' and recorded the whole incident so
i'm sure if that happen the wife would not have missed it..

the guy had a gun come people come on, his shirt on the right side even appears to be stuck up
being held in place by a gun holster.

a reply to: ketsuko

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Southern Guardian

It was reported by CNN via Yahoo last night that there was fingerprint, blood and DNA evidence on the gun.

This is what I get from CNN Ketsuko:

Police have said they never found a book at the scene but did find a gun. A lawyer for Scott's family told reporters Thursday that Scott did not own a gun or regularly carry one.

"We still don't know if there was or was not a gun even there," attorney Justin Bamberg said.

edition.cnn.com...

So again, statements contradicting each other.

You seem to have your mind made up already Ketsuko. Personally as a skeptic and long time ATS poster, I'd want more evidence beyond the statements from police or government officials.

Where is the damm video of the shooter? This is some shady BS if these are the only 2 videos they are releasing.

I am not trusting the cops on this sorry, too many examples of police attempt at cover up in cases like this, plus folks who knew this man is a creature of habit who always carried a book waiting for his son which makes sense read a book to kill time, carrying a gun in his lap makes absolutely no freaking sense if all he is doing is waiting for his kid, and he wasn't the intended target in the first place, they chanced up on him, but I guess many are now digging through his records to see if he had criminal pass or social media pg to look for compromising pics of gang signs or drug use.

I may add two separate eye witness said the shooter cop was not the black cop, so now we have that to contend with klik vid.
Couldn't find a raw vid without commentary.

a reply to: imsoconfused

The shooter was in plain cloths and unmarked car. They were serving a warrant and observed Keith smoking a joint. They didn't see that as a priority until a gun was seen. They asked for backup who also brought police marked vests so that is why the shooter did not have a camera.

More videos may be released based on progress of the investigation.

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Isn't it a lawyers job to try and prove their client innocent? I'm just as skeptical of lawyers as I am the government, two lopsided agendas. This seems like an unfortunate event, but even if you don't have a gun, when the police think you do and have guns drawn yelling drop the gun, you should put your empty hands up and comply.

This may have been a mistake, but if so, it looks like it would be on both parties.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: imsoconfused

The shooter was in plain cloths and unmarked car. They were serving a warrant and observed Keith smoking a joint. They didn't see that as a priority until a gun was seen. They asked for backup who also brought police marked vests so that is why the shooter did not have a camera.

More videos may be released based on progress of the investigation.

So they killed a guy over an effing joint?

Right so now we have even more inconclusive evidence.....the police are lying plain and simple, if they had anything solid to prove their side we would have seen it by now...all they have is speculation......as we can though speculation is enough for some to buy the bull#....sad....