It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Armed man shot, killed by police outside Costco in Summerlin

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 12:42 AM

Las Vegas police said officers shot and killed a man who pulled out a handgun at the Costco in Summerlin on Saturday afternoon.

Capt. Patrick Neville said police received a call from Costco at 12:47 p.m. of a man inside the store destroying merchandise. Neville said police were later told the man had a gun.



8 News Now

LV Sun

C2C AM News

I heard the first bit about this story on C2C. As Ian read off information about witness and police statements all being conflicted, I started to wonder about whether this was a righteous shoot or the work of yet more overzealous LEOs. I have seen both sides in person and in videos and continue to read countless threads about the ills or our modern police force.

The statements in this case range from aboslute compliance to brandishing one weapon with another still concealed. Ian noted statements that were made (that I cant seem to find) about people who knew the victim and said he was a well regarded person, easy going, a soldier, licensed to carry concealed and would have never turned on the police. Others say they think they saw him reaching for "something" and still others swear he had a gun in his hand.

I will be looking for video, if the LVPD and Costco release it, to see what the true story is and why this guy was gunned down for legally carrying a registered weapon.

Oh, BTW...I know a lot of police bashing will go on, but I ask that you please dont lump every LEO in America/UK in with these three as brash and uncarrying murderers. I have friends on the force and they are very good cops and good people. So, this is not an attempt at cop bashing, just digging for the facts.

posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 01:28 AM
reply to post by wheresthetruth

The incident happened just before 1 p.m. Saturday. Police were called when Costco workers saw the suspect destroying merchandise inside the store. Someone noticed the suspect had a gun and store security evacuated customers and employees.

Police say when they approached the suspect, he drew a weapon and pointed it at officers. After refusing to drop the weapon, three officers fired multiple rounds, striking the suspect numerous times.

Neville described the weapons as semi-automatic handguns. Police didn't say whether the man had a concealed weapon's permit.

All four of your links say the same thing. Man with gun destroying store pulls gun on cops and gets shot. They did nothing wrong.

A friend of West Point Grad Erik Scott said he was there at Costco to pick up a prescription.

I guess the guy really needed his meds.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by JBA2848]

posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 01:50 AM
Thats why I put all 4 of them up there. They say the same thing. I have been hunting for the information that was apparently on given to Ian Punit from C2C that contridicts this story because he made it sound like there was a lot more to it than just an arrest gone bad.

This is just an attempt to get more than one side. Most of the news on this right now is just what the police say. What does video, customers, employees, say? As I said, its not about bashing cops, its about the truth. If they killed him in cold blood, it needs to be found out. If not, then they need to be treated as the protectors of the public that they are.

posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 08:39 PM
This just keeps getting more and more interesting.

"He did not pull a handgun," Goodman said. "All the witnesses we've heard from have said he did not make any threatening gestures, and didn't do anything that could be construed as acting in a threatening manner.

Still waiting on the video. I know its out there or will be soon.

On the heels of the verdict handed down by the BART cops in Oakland, I am just curious to see if this was another case of overzealousness or was it righteous.

posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 01:39 AM
July 25th Updates

It's been two weeks since three Las Vegas Metro cops shot and killed 38-year-old West Point graduate Erik Scott as he exited a Costco store in the upscale area of Summerlin on July 10.

So far, the incident has generated more questions than answers.

If officials lock up the evidence so you can't get the answers, print the questions.

Erik Scott had a permit; he could legally carry a firearm either open or concealed. It's a right. Mr. Scott was under no obligation to demonstrate a "need" to carry his firearms to the store (as some letter-writers have suggested), any more than you must demonstrate a "need" to go to church more than once a week.

Nor do I agree with those who would say, if police shot up a luncheon meeting of the Jaycees or the Rotary Club, that "Cops are getting edgy in this town; people are just going to have to be more cautious about how they exercise their right to assemble."

Apparently Mr. Scott, who was shopping with his girlfriend, broke the plastic wrap on a carton of bottled water so he could check to see if the bottles would fit in his backpack. He shouldn't have done that. But is it a capital crime?

If I go to Costco with a perfectly legal gun in a holster, either concealed or open, even though I never present my weapon or threaten anyone with it, will employees there call the police, report a "crazy man with a gun," and have me killed?

Will the 9-1-1 operator closely question such a caller, asking, "Wait a minute, this is important: Do you mean there's a man who's behaving oddly and he's brandishing a firearm, threatening people with a firearm? Or do you mean there's a man who's behaving oddly, and you've noticed he's carrying a handgun in a holster, which is perfectly legal? This is a real important distinction for me to be able to explain to the officers we're sending"?

I hope the 9-1-1 operator in the Erik Scott bottled-water killing asked that question; they ought to be trained to ask that question. The Review-Journal has tried to get the recordings of the 9-1-1 calls to find out, but the G-men won't release them.

Actually, I can't find the part of the state or U.S. Constitution that says, "You can be killed at any time for failing to obey a policeman's order," even though letter-writers keep telling me it's in there.

Will only one officer give me orders? Or will all three shout conflicting orders in order to confuse and terrify me?

Will they have their guns out and leveled at me, at that point? If I point a firearm at someone it's considered to be a crime, called "assault." If I shoot a police officer simply because he puts his hand on the butt of his sidearm while it's still in the holster, I'll go to prison (at best). How come cops don't go to prison if they shoot someone simply for touching a gun? I suppose people will say, "You're not in danger if a policeman puts his hand on his gun, because they don't go around shooting people."

Good one.

How many this year, Sheriff Gillespie? Trevor Cole, unarmed, got shot in the head with a combat rifle while kneeling on his bathroom floor with his hands up.

The charge? Selling an ounce or two of pot.

Why not arrest him on the street? Why put his nine-month-pregnant girlfriend at risk? Did some sloppy police work allow the author of that warrant to claim Cole had a violent criminal record, when he didn't? Was that work done by an officer who'd already shot and killed other suspects, and told stories that didn't match the physical evidence?

How about if we count people like Ivan Carrillo, an apparent drunken driver killed when his car was rammed by a Metro police cruiser on May 20? Isn't that a lethal use of force? How come there's been no coroner's inquest in that death?

If the police tell me to put my gun down on the ground, and I reach down to remove my holster from my belt or waistband so I can follow that order, will they shoot and kill me for following that order, later explaining they had to shoot me because I didn't follow one of their other, simultaneous orders -- to put my hands up, to lie down, to do any number of things that can't all be done at once? We don't know whether that's what happened outside the Costco, because Metro hasn't released the Costco video disc. Some of it may be shown to a coroner's jury on Sept. 3, the first day of the long Labor Day holiday weekend, in a little courtroom downtown holding about 46 people.

Maybe. If it isn't "lost or damaged."

Oh, was that gratuitous? I don't think so. After Officer George Pease killed Henry Rowe by slashing his throat, Metro said tests of both men's clothing would reveal whether Rowe grabbed the officer's gun and shot at him in the dark, like Pease said. But when they got to the coroner's inquest, Metro said it hadn't bothered to have those tests performed, since they would have been "costly and inconclusive." Yeah. Good one.

If I show up for that Sept. 3 inquest, will I find my entrance blocked by two armed bailiffs, maybe even shaved-heads K.P. Ross and Sgt. R. Wright, who will rest their hands on the butts of their Glock .40s and tell me "It's not open to the public," the way they did when I tried to attend the Henry Prendes inquest, in March of 2006?

What are they afraid of, with their carefully arranged dog-and-pony show, presenting only the evidence selected by the government, with no cross examination, so jurors end up clearing even officers they think should never be allowed back on the street, as was the case when Bruce Gentner emptied his magazine at John Perrin, armed only with a basketball?

Vin Suprynowicz is assistant editor of the Review-Journal's editorial pages. His column appears Sunday.

1st Link is to above article:
A Few Questions For METRO
Costco Victims Familt Seek Answers
Inquest set For Shooting At Costco

EDIT: To remove advertisement from article

[edit on 7/26/2010 by EyeHeartBigfoot]

posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 05:02 AM
I wonder if the police keep 'drop' weapons like the military does.

so if they shoot innocent civies they can 'claim' they were armed afterward.

Damn, i have become cynical in my old age.

Beware the cop(s) who carry trunks full of old unregistered guns around with them.

[edit on 26-7-2010 by slank]

posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 12:21 PM
reply to post by EyeHeartBigfoot

Thank you for that follow up. From the very beginning of this story, I knew something was not exactly right about it. If the comments from witnesses about him "tearing up the store" were solely based on the fact that he was tearing some water bottles out of a package to see if they would fit in a pack, then I have been guilty of this same destruction many times and I guess I should just be shot on sight.
If brandishing his weapon at the police was due to him reaching to remove it as is the normal first instruction, then they are going to be killing a lot of armed and cooperative people in the near future.

If you ever watch the show cops, you will see that they use the same confusing terror tactics even while being filmed.

"Get down"
"Put your hands up"
"Walk towards me"
"Put your hands on your head"
"Put your hands behind your back"

Its insanity to think that you can do all of that at once. Of course, if you can get down while you are supposed to be walking with your hands up behind your back on your should be a star attraction at Ringling Bros.

I just keep looking for that video to pop up, or for them to release a statement saying it was damaged or there was no video camera in that certain location.

new topics

top topics


log in