Followup on Erik Scott incident in Las Vegas

Status
Not open for further replies.

Fred Fuller

Moderator Emeritus
Joined
Mar 26, 2004
Messages
21,215
Location
AL, NC
We had at least a couple of threads on the Erik Scott/Costco shooting in Las Vegas. There's been a good bit of discussion on various issues here already, and there's no need to revisit that ground. Thread links are below:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=532849

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=546618

By way of followup to this event, the Scott family has now dropped their lawsuit over the shooting, upon advice of counsel. I first saw the story reported here - http://www.theagitator.com/2012/03/18/erik-scotts-family-drops-lawsuit/ .

The family had originally included Costco in the suit as well, but dropped the business from the suit in 2011 - http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/jan/10/erik-scott-family-drops-costco-federal-lawsuit/ .

LVRJ newspaper story on the dropped lawsuit - http://www.lvrj.com/news/costco-shooting-victim-s-family-drops-lawsuit-against-police-142560795.html .

Brief local television news report on the dropped lawsuit - http://www.ktnv.com/news/local/142563645.html .

The point to opening another thread on this story is to indicate 1) how complex and potentially expensive the legal aftermath of a shooting can be (note that the quid pro quo for the family dropping their lawsuit was an agreement from Metro PD not to seek recovery of the department's legal costs in the suit), 2) how emotionally wrenching the process can be for those involved, and 3) what a sausage factory any legal process can turn out to be.

The thread is open for discussion of the AFTERMATH of this event. The event itself has already been covered to the degree we're going to cover it here, so let's not dredge up material from the two threads linked above, please.
 
Thanks for posting this Fred. It is always nice to know how things turned out...but sometimes it is just such a drawn out process that people lose interest.

When the family offered to drop their suit "in exchange for Metro's agreement not to pursue reimbursement for the department's legal fees."...that says to me that someone finally convinced them that their suit was so poor that they stood a real chance of having legal fees awarded to the PD.

I hope all sides see this as an opportunity for closure and the end of trying to lay blame
 
Hopefully to be more timely in making a public statement about what evidence is (or is not) available for review. They likely should hire a professional media person
 
I can understand why she disappeared as her recollections from that day could only pain Scott in a worst light. I don't think we'll hear from her as long as there is any pending civil issues.
 
People say a lot of different things when they aren't under oath and subject to perjury penalties.

This is another good reason not to judge cases too soon without more know facts
 
Thanks for the follow up on this.

Sad the way this whole thing evolved and ended.

Some of the article comments are quite hateful
 
I had followed the case closely for several months and had Google Alerts notifying me whenever there was another story, but that all petered out some time ago and I cancelled the alert. So thanks for the followup!!
 
People sue for strange reasons; however it is worth noting that, at times, the only way to determine what REALLY happened is to file lawsuits. In this case, obviously, the victim was in the wrong, but sometimes the real events only come out with a lawsuit.
 
^^^agreed.

My own S&T take away from all this is that *nobody* is ever going to find out that I have a firearm unless they really need to find out.

So far as the Dad and the other family members:

"He (Scott, the father of the vic) wouldn't disclose what he is planning, but said, "The battlefield, as I see it, now moves from Vegas to Washington, California and New York."

He added, "We're not going to go away."

I sincerely wish him the best of luck.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top