Keith Lamont Scott's wife about Keith - "He's a killer and they should know that"

a reply to: windword

you are making the charge its your responsibility to show it.

a reply to: yuppa

I did show it. I used the Alabama cases and referred to the infamous NYPD cases.

Not enough? You need more? Okay, it's your funeral!

In 14 cases, no gun is found after Chicago police shot someone they said was armed

How Chicago tried to cover up a police execution

News From St. Louis To LA: Ten Cases Of Cops Caught Planting Evidence

Huntington Beach, California police admitted in open court to planting a loaded gun in the trunk of a DUI suspect. Officers Brain Knorr, Dave Wiederin, along with five others who were involved in the incident, faced no criminal or civil charges for their actions. When called to testify about the gun they tossed into the man’s vehicle, the cops claimed they had planted it as part of a “training exercise.”

Police in Las Vegas also claimed that planting evidence was part of a “training exercise,” after they were exposed in court.
.....
Executive Director of the Nevada chapter of the ACLU, Gary Peck, told the Las Vegas Sun:

“This case should shake public confidence in the entire criminal justice system. Here we have a case where the police planted evidence in a criminal case and then stood mutely by while it was used against someone. It should raise very serious concerns that our state’s largest law enforcement agency is one that does not believe that planting evidence is a fireable offense.”

WASHINGTON, DC — A disturbing confession by John Elliot, a former Fairfax County police officer, illustrates exactly what happens when cops try to get away with murdering American citizens. Recall all of the cases you’ve heard of officers shooting someone and moments later conveniently “finding a gun” near the dead person’s body.

In these cases, the victim’s family will typically come forward and state that their dead loved one never had a gun and, in fact, never even owned any guns or knew how to use them. But once the story of a gun being “found” on the victim is promulgated by the mainstream media, the family’s testimony gets drowned out. How is it that these guns (sometimes knives) keep showing up on people after being shot by police? The answer: throw-away weapons.
filmingcops.com...

The police shooting of a 17-year-old on a South Side street corner nearly three years ago was captured on five cameras and was unjustified, according to a former investigator who has seen the videos. Cedrick LaMont Chatman died just feet from the bus stop where his mother caught the bus to work every day. The city's Independent Police Review Authority, which investigates all police-involved shootings, concluded the shooting was justified. But Lorenzo Davis, the original IPRA supervising investigator on the case, came to the opposite conclusion and says he was fired in July when he refused to change his report.
www.cnn.com...

And, don't forget that OJ Simpson was acquitted because the jury believed that the evidence had been planted by the police. So don't act all surprised and butt hurt when riots break out and huge lawsuits are launched, and
when even politicians have talk of police reform.

I've posted all this, not to trash cops, but to justify to you willfully intelligently dishonest guys, how it is that I've come to think that the police can't always be trusted at their word or to do and say the right thing.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Cypress

Incorrect. It shows a pattern of behavior that 1) resembles the behavior mentioned in the accounts we are getting as they trickle out of the investigation and 2) counters the public narrative placed in the media by the family.

Irrelevant. The man suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury, two broken hips and and his pelvis was split in half after a motorcycle accident in November 2015. He was a different man than the man he was a year ago. His past had nothing to do with the fact that he was gunned down in cold blood, while tottering backwards with his hands limp at this side.

And he was allowed to drive?

He shot a guy and did time for it, he called himself "Killer", threatened to kill his wife and kid.

How do you know he wasn't waiting for the kid to shoot him then her?

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Ha...oh yeah...I forgot about the fact they caught the guy that stole the gun and sold it to him.

Interesting that you consider the statement of this criminal that sold the gun to be accurate and truthful.....

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Ha...oh yeah...I forgot about the fact they caught the guy that stole the gun and sold it to him.

Interesting that you consider the statement of this criminal that sold the gun to be accurate and truthful.....

I haven't heard the statement. I would assume that was not the only thing stolen from whatever residence or car he jacked it from so likely he was caught with more than just the gun from the same place. That puts him there as the robber..the only other way for Keith to have gotten the gun is to either steal it from the robber, buy it from him, or be the robber himself....

Not that hard to figure out though....just have to actually think on this stuff for maybe 10 seconds....

a reply to: Vasa Croe

What i meant was that you used the word of a criminal as "truth" to further your own story........how can you not see this ?...

In one sentence you say that a man is a criminal he cannot be trusted, in another sentence you are saying this criminal said this happened so therefor proof it did ....

So yeah not hard to figure out at all...

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What i meant was that you used the word of a criminal as "truth" to further your own story........how can you not see this ?...

In one sentence you say that a man is a criminal he cannot be trusted, in another sentence you are saying this criminal said this happened so therefor proof it did ....

So yeah not hard to figure out at all...

No...I used the word of the police that reported it. Typically they do this thing called investigating to make sure claims made are correct. Like I said...it was likely corroborated by other goods stolen at the same place the gun was that the criminal had in his possession....not hard to figure this out....really not hard at all.

So the gun, reported stolen, was part of other things, reported stolen from the same place....a criminal is arrested with goods from said place implying he had the gun as well....cops ask where is the gun...guy says he sold it to someone....gun ends up in Keith's hands at scene.....but yeah.....that can be REALLY hard to follow for some folks I guess.....

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Oh please you are speculating and trying to firm your stance with the word of a criminal, ....pathetic...

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Oh please you are speculating and trying to firm your stance with the word of a criminal, ....pathetic...

Whatever you say....but I happen to know just a touch about how these things tend to work.

Either way...he had the gun so it really doesn't matter where it came from. Unless you are another one of those that supposes he had an ankle holster on for no reason, or to hide his stash....

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

What the victim did a year ago has no bearing on whether or not the police were justified in the shooting that occurred last week.

You're justifying the cold blooded murder of a man who was of no threat to the officers, by drudging up things from his past, that I have no doubt that at least one officer on that scene has also been guilty of. In fact "Two studies have found that at least 40% of police officer families experience domestic violence"

Police Family Violence Fact Sheet

What you're forgetting, is that we all saw the video of the police gunning down a seemingly unarmed man, who was not acting in a threatening manner. The police didn't follow protocol, and it's because of their actions that the people were moved to riot.

The ensuing riots, ignorant as they were, do not justified the cold blooded murder that occurred hours before.

Yup this guy that has been convicted of many violent crimes and even says himself that he is a killer posed no threat to the police.

You believe that why? Because of some shaky vid where you can barely see anything? Why are you giving him the benefit of the doubt?

For example if he had no violent record and worked as a mental health worker I would certainly give him the benefit of the doubt and serious questions would need to be asked of the police!

But in this case no way! He was a thug and lived a thug life right up until his thug end.

a reply to: Meee32

You believe that why? Because of some shaky vid where you can barely see anything? Why are you giving him the benefit of the doubt?

No my dear. I believe it because in November of 2015 he had a motorcycle accident and he suffered a traumatic brain injuring, and now he slow minded, stutters and forgets stuff all the time. PLUS, in that accident he suffered 2 broken hips and his pelvis snapped in half. He used a cane to walk. His wife told the officers repeatedly that he was unarmed, suffered a brain injury and just taken his "medicine."

He was in no condition to beat his wife and kids or take on the police. He was minding his own business, smoking a joint in his SUV, tinted windows up, when the officers took him by surprise with their guns, shouting commands.

a reply to: burgerbuddy

And he was allowed to drive?

Did he have a valid driver's license? I know 12 year olds that can drive. Perhaps his wife let him drive from their parking stall, across the parking lot to where the school bus stops, I don't know. She was with him, and left to walk to their apartment to get a cell phone charger, when the police "attacked".

He shot a guy and did time for it, he called himself "Killer", threatened to kill his wife and kid.

I don't think that's actually true, but his past doesn't matter. The undercover cops that saw him smoking a joint certainly didn't know.

How do you know he wasn't waiting for the kid to shoot him then her?

Should we follow around all felons who have done their time, just in case they might commit a crime? Is it open season on felons?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Meee32

You believe that why? Because of some shaky vid where you can barely see anything? Why are you giving him the benefit of the doubt?

No my dear. I believe it because in November of 2015 he had a motorcycle accident and he suffered a traumatic brain injuring, and now he slow minded, stutters and forgets stuff all the time. PLUS, in that accident he suffered 2 broken hips and his pelvis snapped in half. He used a cane to walk. His wife told the officers repeatedly that he was unarmed, suffered a brain injury and just taken his "medicine."

He was in no condition to beat his wife and kids or take on the police. He was minding his own business, smoking a joint in his SUV, tinted windows up, when the officers took him by surprise with their guns, shouting commands.

I love how you make it sound like this guy was some wheel chair bound vegetable. Well..he could drive which means he had pretty good use of legs and hands, he could reach his ankle obviously from the ankle holster, he could grip and hold a cane/gun, and he was clearly able to walk/stand without use of the cane.

Actually she said he had a TBI one time....and the chances the officers heard or knew what she was talking about are nil. The officers had no idea who this woman was until after the fact...

She screamed at him "Keith, Don't do it!" on more than one occasion...don't do what Keith? Shoot at the officers?

Don't worry...it will all come out soon. Hope you will come back to this thread when proven wrong Windword, but from you history I doubt you will.

As for my theory part....just a theory but I think the wife had something to do with it....

Like I have said before...this screams set up by the wife. She made this all happen, likely to get him to go to prison but it backfired and he was killed because she knew he had a gun on him and knew the police were there.

Yeah...lets bring a car charger from the house to his car....wonder what she was using it for at the house? And let's just happen to do it while the police show up.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: burgerbuddy

And he was allowed to drive?

Did he have a valid driver's license? I know 12 year olds that can drive. Perhaps his wife let him drive from their parking stall, across the parking lot to where the school bus stops, I don't know. She was with him, and left to walk to their apartment to get a cell phone charger, when the police "attacked".

He shot a guy and did time for it, he called himself "Killer", threatened to kill his wife and kid.

I don't think that's actually true, but his past doesn't matter. The undercover cops that saw him smoking a joint certainly didn't know.

How do you know he wasn't waiting for the kid to shoot him then her?

Should we follow around all felons who have done their time, just in case they might commit a crime? Is it open season on felons?

Hopefully he had a valid license or there is another illegal action he was taking....

And no...she was apparently NOT with him as the officers observed him pulling in a parking and she was not there. She was at the house...likely knowing when to walk out because she set him up.

So you don't think the record of him posted online, actual documents about his arrest for shooting and time in jail is true?

And yes....his past does matter. As does the past of anyone whether it be job history, criminal history or family history, medical history....that is why we keep these things called "records" on people....or would you rather your doc just take a guess as to your new ailment each time you go in?

Your posts get more and more laughable every time....you just can't seem to not try to have the last post in a thread it seems.

[snip]

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Obviously he wasn't a wheel chair bound vegetable, but he probably was just a few months earlier.

The fact is, he was minding his own business, sitting in his SUV, smoking a joint, which the cops admittedly said drew their attention to him. They said he raised a gun, I don't buy it. He probably raised a lighter, made eye contact and winked, or some such thing, and that irritated cops who decided their imagination was probable cause for murder.

"Looks like a gun to me!"
Oooopsie, he didn't have gun?
"Handcuffs!" "Handcuffs!" "Handcuffs!"
Throw black gloves all over the crime scene and VIOLA A gun magically appears!

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Obviously he wasn't a wheel chair bound vegetable, but he probably was just a few months earlier.

The fact is, he was minding his own business, sitting in his SUV, smoking a joint, which the cops admittedly said drew their attention to him. They said he raised a gun, I don't buy it. He probably raised a lighter, made eye contact and winked, or some such thing, and that irritated cops who decided their imagination was probable cause for murder.

"Looks like a gun to me!"
Oooopsie, he didn't have gun?
"Handcuffs!" "Handcuffs!" "Handcuffs!"
Throw black gloves all over the crime scene and VIOLA A gun magically appears!

Yeah...the ankle holster was for the "cool" factor...no gun....

He likely was being "gangsta" as his past shows he wanted to be, saw the plain clothes officers and raised it up and cocked it to show them thinking they would be intimidated...that or he was waiting to kill the kids getting off the bus.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

In the video, which begins before shots are fired, Rakeyia Scott — who had gone inside to to get a cellphone charger while Keith sat in the car awaiting his son's school bus — approaches the area where several vehicles, including a police car, are clustered.
www.usatoday.com...

We know that mr. scott's wife left the scene to go back to get her charger.
www.dailykos.com...

Mrs. Scott was on the scene. She had been in the car with her husband waiting to pick up her son then left the car to go to her apartment to get her phone charger. When she returned she found cops surrounding her husband’s car.
www.dailykos.com...

a reply to: Vasa Croe

How could they see an ankle holster when the man was sitting inside the car? Do cops shoot people for the leather accessories they wear now? Fashion police?

Maybe, and I'm just speculating now, Mrs Scott drove the SUV, got out to go to the apartment and Keith got out of the SUV's and got into the driver's seat, and that's when the cops saw the ankle holster, and decided to say that Keith Scott he had a shown them a gun. Too bad that doesn't appear to be in their report!

Where is the video evidence of Mr Scott holding a gun? Where is the video evidence of the gun being recovered?

None existent!

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vasa Croe

In the video, which begins before shots are fired, Rakeyia Scott — who had gone inside to to get a cellphone charger while Keith sat in the car awaiting his son's school bus — approaches the area where several vehicles, including a police car, are clustered.
www.usatoday.com...

We know that mr. scott's wife left the scene to go back to get her charger.
www.dailykos.com...

Mrs. Scott was on the scene. She had been in the car with her husband waiting to pick up her son then left the car to go to her apartment to get her phone charger. When she returned she found cops surrounding her husband’s car.
www.dailykos.com...

Her attorneys were misquoted on your references. Her attorneys are the ones that stated it and she was not in the car with him when he pulled up.

There are plenty of actual references online for what her attorneys said. His wife was never in the car.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

How do you know her attorneys were misquoted? There's plenty of misinformation coming from the "brotherhood's" armchair quaterbacks too.

Citations please. Let's hear it from Mrs Scott that she wasn't at the scene prior to the shooting.