Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why did Keith Scotts family lie about the gun? [View all]Lil Missy
(17,865 posts)48. I don't think she lied. I think she really thought he did not have a gun.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
232 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It's an autocorrect typo which should read "holster". At one point my machine autocorrected every
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#30
An ankle holster is not a gun. He may have a gun somewhere, but a holster is not a gun.
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#32
My post only addressed the believability of having an ankle holster and no gun
Egnever
Sep 2016
#117
Absolutely not seeing he had his hand down and was backing away from the LEO he saw pointing
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#157
Are you purposely forgeting that NC is an open carry state? Or is that just for whites?
brush
Sep 2016
#84
The problem with that scenario is, HE isn't supposed to have a gun. Color didn't matter.
tonyt53
Sep 2016
#91
+1, nor did they know he was rolling a joint vs a cigarette. He was rolling a joint is a bulllshit
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#158
Totality of the circumstances. Right. A black guy sitting in his car waiting to pick up his kid . .
brush
Sep 2016
#114
He pulled up next to a police car and started rolling a joint with a gun visible waiting for his kid
Lee-Lee
Sep 2016
#169
Acordding to the LEO there was no questioning, he saw a gun and attempted to break the window with
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#159
The LEO had no evidence that what Scott had was drugs vs tabacco and in court the LEO would be
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#172
Seeing someone rolling something to smoke and a gun together is enough reasonable suspicion in NC.
Lee-Lee
Sep 2016
#178
This is false on its face, Scott could've been rolling a cigarette... its a reason to maybe question
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#179
An ankle holster is not open carry but concealed carry....requires a permit.
EX500rider
Sep 2016
#118
He was sitting in his car waiting to pick up his kid, not doing anything to anybody
brush
Sep 2016
#122
+1, the copologist are out in force right now and they give the CPD the benefit of the doubt that
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#174
Then how did the LEO see the holster seeing he was sitting in his SUV!? Again, the LEOs account is
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#173
On another call in their cars but just happened to notice what was going on in his car? O-k-a-a-a-y.
brush
Sep 2016
#133
That is exactly the kind of dumb interview that made me look so closely at this
Egnever
Sep 2016
#138
Yes, according to the Chief the LEO got out of his car and looked into Scott's window and now
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#161
So the cops get to be judge, jury, and executioner? And you're cool with that?
NightWatcher
Sep 2016
#3
We know little about this incident but you've already decided that his family lied.
NightWatcher
Sep 2016
#18
If they were lying, it's wrong and could inflame tensions leading to more violence
Democat
Sep 2016
#4
Why did people initially claim Michael Brown had his hands up and was shot in the back?
MadDAsHell
Sep 2016
#5
Yep, and only had to falsely accuse one person of shooting another in the back
MadDAsHell
Sep 2016
#21
Was that video of two white guys saying he had his hands up a fake? (Michael Brown)
Mamajami
Sep 2016
#105
+1, that was the vid for me... the utterance of the two guys who were looking at it
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#166
Scenarios like this have played out several times now, and they've turned BLM into a joke.
Marr
Sep 2016
#7
The rest of America knows blacks get treated different and some people will excuse anything
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#168
They've illuminated racist, BLM isn't the joke ... people who excuse disproportionate killings are
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#167
Innocent until indidcated guilty, there's no photo proof Scott had a gun in his hands
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#209
Of course there is a bleepin way. You are interpreting things through a filter, called your
BootinUp
Sep 2016
#45
Well, this LEO had x ray vision so they can of course see the gun through the window and Scott's leg
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#175
THey never said he smoked put, the LEO saw him rolle a blunt which rolling a cigarette isn't illegal
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#218
You ignore the fact that she may have been yelling "don't do it" at all those cops
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#29
Yes, I did watch and listen. Since all you do is insult people who disagree with you, I'm done with
uppityperson
Sep 2016
#37
Holy shit man you have been informed at least once by me and another time by another
Egnever
Sep 2016
#67
Does anyone know why they were bothering the guy in the first place?
The_Casual_Observer
Sep 2016
#51
I read a narrative...the cops were waiting to enact a warrant....ah found a version..
jmg257
Sep 2016
#52
The LEO said he was rolling a joint in his car which he had NO IDEA what it was then the LEO.....
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#155
I don't know, but I also don't know why it took so long to release the police video
still_one
Sep 2016
#104
First of all the only reason they finally realease it was because of pressure from local
still_one
Sep 2016
#129
Foul on the play. You can't use their own words against them. Tain't fair, McGee! n/t
X_Digger
Sep 2016
#108
When I watched the tape instead of just reading the transcript, it seemed clear
pnwmom
Sep 2016
#147
If everyone rolling a joint who happened to have a gun was executed, the population would
Vinca
Sep 2016
#215
There's STILL no photo evidence of a gun in Scott's hand, the OP and everyone who
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#153
The holster is on his leg, the gun was recovered, it is covered in his DNA and fingerprints
Lee-Lee
Sep 2016
#176
All still no evidence of a gun IN HIS HAND AT THE TIME THEY SHOT HIM. Even when looking at the scene
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#177
Yes there is, there has been many orange wallet shootings... ham Sandwhichs etc
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#182
This is false on its face, she said he had no weapon...there's been no evidence of a GUN IN HIS HAND
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#183
Strawman, there's no photo evidence of a weapon IN HIS HAND. The wife is right and the LEOs
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#187
She doesn't have to to be correct, I have a wallet... I don't have one in my hand at the time I'm
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#190
We agree then, onus still on the LEOs because if it wasn't in his hand he posed no threat... given
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#216
We can certainly agree that IF the gun wasn't in his hand, then he posed them no threat.
FBaggins
Sep 2016
#220
There's no photo evidence of a gun that has been shown, I need DIRECT photo evidence not conjecture
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#221
Why do you think the CPD should not get the benefit of the doubt..i.e. anything specific?
jmg257
Sep 2016
#206
Ad homs are an indicator of a weak position. THERE'S NO PHOTO EVIDENCE OF A GUN IN HIS HAND
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#202
There's no video or photo evidence of him waving anything and the LEO didn't know it was a joint vs
uponit7771
Sep 2016
#223