CMPD Releases Video Of Fatal Shooting Of Keith Lamont Scott

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Time will tell. But I won't demand they give the public all the evidence in the same week of an incident. From the looks of it the police didn't need to shoot him, but I won't go as far to say he didn't have a gun.

originally posted by: tigertatzen

originally posted by: imsoconfused

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.

No. They killed the guy over an effing gun, because he refused to effing put it the ef down when they effing ordered him to. They didn't care about the effing joint.

Nah they killed him over a joint. Guns are legal in case you forgot. If they did not care about the effing joint then ehy not just let him sit in his truck and never confront him?

Here is why because he had a joint.

So they killed him over a joint.

edit on 25-9-2016 by imsoconfused because: (no reason given)

a reply to: imsoconfused

Possession of a gun and drugs is a felony. They didn't care about the joint until they saw he had a gun as well.

originally posted by: Moohide
a reply to: yuppa

I have to disagree with you on that, looking at the position of the cops white trainer and the red cops shadow i think they are the same in both pics and the gun is a plant.

Shadow posistion changes according to location. they arent the exact same. look at them both side by side. camera changes posistion shadow changes posistion.

a reply to: yuppa

After doing more reading/watching it turns out what the officer dropped is more than likely a glove than a gun.

originally posted by: Moohide
a reply to: yuppa

After doing more reading/watching it turns out what the officer dropped is more than likely a glove than a gun.

I can tell the difference between a glove and a gun though. Ive used the black gloves myself and they dont fall to neatly the majority of the time and not as thick as a gun.

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: LadyGreenEyes

Here are the FACTS I know.

I didn't see him with a gun.

I didn't see him with a holster.

I didn't see him act threatening.

I'm going to call BS on that.

I live 30 min from there and see the black on black killings.




I did see him get shot.



I grew up in Charlotte and have seen the police plant evidence before. I don't know if that happened this time.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: imsoconfused

Possession of a gun and drugs is a felony. They didn't care about the joint until they saw he had a gun as well.

This is rubbish, they didnt care about the joint till they saw the gun.!!!...really you believe that tripe ?

Firstly letting the guy drive around smoking joints in negligent...im all for a doobie man but not while out driving and to pick up children no less....so that is the first sign of serious incompetence from the police....

Then after all that the cops freak out and shoot the guy......ffs what a mess

How do you differentiate between a joint and a cigarette behind tinted glass?

He's smoking pot, he has a trumatic brain injury and he's holding a gun in public (not to mention, at some point, holding a gun while cops are approaching him.) I don't think he had any legal right to even own a gun. Isn't that what the left is complaining about?? They don't want to take our guns, they just want to make it harder for mentally unstable a to get them.

So Mr. Scott's wife apparently had a restraining order against him last year. In the restraining order she said he hit their 8 year old son, he carried a gun, and Mr. Scott told her he was a "killer".

Keith Scott Restraining Order

Oh... the gun was stolen too.

a reply to: Edumakated

Oh, so his cold blooded murder was justified? I guess the police knew this ahead of time, and were just doing his family a favor?

Oh... the gun was stolen too.

Of course it was! What other kind of gun do cops plant?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Edumakated

Oh, so his cold blooded murder was justified? I guess the police knew this ahead of time, and were just doing his family a favor?

Oh... the gun was stolen too.

Of course it was! What other kind of gun do cops plant?

Just further supports that Mr. Scott was not sitting in his car reading a book. Also shows that his wife is also a probable liar as well when she was screaming at the police he didn't have a gun. Go read about his criminal record. He basically served seven years FOR SHOOTING AT POLICE in Texas.

If you read the article, the police have the gun thief in custody. He admits selling the weapon to Mr. Scott.

Go ahead keep defending this guy...

a reply to: Edumakated

Just further supports that Mr. Scott was not sitting in his car reading a book

No it doesn't. A domestic dispute that occurred a year ago has nothing to do with whether or not a man was reading in his car! We know he was sitting in his car, smoking weed, so what are you going on about? Do you doubt the man could read?

You're beating a dead horse here. The fact that the man had a criminal record did not justify the officer's executing man who was non-threatening.

Man you guys get desperater and desperater!

Did anyone happen to read this lil tidbit?

Mr. Scott then exited the vehicle with the gun and then backed away from the vehicle while continuing to ignore officers' repeated loud verbal commands to drop the gun.

Case Update

Why didn't he just listen and drop the gun? Why was he backing away like that?

a reply to: windwordthe gun was a .380 and it was in an ankle holster what fool carries a gun in an ankle holster one of the hardest place to draw from . this gun is a plant some idiot cop had a throwdown gun he took of a previous perp for a rainy day and had it tucked into an ankle holster.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: TheKnightofDoom

ETA:The blond lady say's it's the guy in red that shot him. The other lady says it's a bald guy. Perhaps the driver of the squad car?

Honestly, I don't know who shot him. Watch this video, between around 45-60 seconds. The guy in red sure is jumpy. Can't tell if it's recoil or panic!

From my observation of the video, if you watch carefully, the guy in red isn't the one that shot him. His gun is pointing down a bit while the last couple shots are going off (plus I don't remember seeing any recoil). There were other officers around that we probably couldn't see in that video.

Has anyone here - personally (not I know a guy), but personally had a situation in which the police asked you to put down a gun?

Because I have, though it was a huge mistake on dispatch's part, it happened, let me tell you from experience, it would take a lot for a cop to shoot you during that confrontation.

I have video surveillance of the situation if anyone doubts me, but from experience, you really really really need to be mouthing off to a cop, refusing orders, or flashing your piece in a dangerous way.

a reply to: Cherry0

I agree with you. I looks more like he may be actually in the line of fire, and is jumping out of the way.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Cherry0

I agree with you. I looks more like he may be actually in the line of fire, and is jumping out of the way.

Yeah. Seems like he may have been startled and jumped back not expecting the sudden shots. Or perhaps to get out of the line of fire as you say.