CRB sides with family of Keith Scott in CMPD fatal shooting appeal

Cowboy

Cowboy

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2016
Messages
15,681
Location
North of Charlotte
Rating - 100%
18   0   0
http://m.wbtv.com/wbtv/db/330726/content/Wr6Vy8NZ
Jun 27, 2017 09:01 PM
CHARLOTTE, NC (WBTV) - Charlotte's Citizen Review Board has sided with the family of Keith Lamont Scott in their appeal of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department's finding that an officer was justified in killing Scott last September.

A lawyer for Scott's family appeared before the board Tuesday to appeal CMPD's finding. The department determined in March that Officer Brentley Vinson followed proper procedures when he fatally shot Scott during a Sept. 20 confrontation outside a University City apartment complex, and will not be disciplined.

PREVIOUS: CMPD officer won’t face internal discipline in fatal shooting of Keith Lamont Scott

Scott family attorney, Charles Monnett, III said he was pleased for the opportunity to present their case to the CRB. The presentation happened in a closed-door meeting which took nearly an hour-and-a-half. A representative from Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police made a presentation to the Board afterward.

The findings by CMPD after an internal review were sent to the wife of Keith Scott. The report says Officer Brentley Vinson "acted lawfully and in accordance with Department policy" in the deadly September shooting outside a University City apartment complex.

Scott, 43, was killed when police were serving a warrant at The Village at College Downs apartment complex on Old Concord Road.

The letter gives more detail about Vinson's actions the day Scott was killed.


The letter states Officer Vinson said, "I felt like if I didn't do anything right then at that point, it's like he... he was gonna shoot me or he's gonna shoot one of my buddies and it was gonna happen right now, so I reacted. I was the only one that had a decent backdrop."

The letter was signed by CMPD Chief Kerr Putney and Major Estella Patterson with the Internal Affairs Bureau.

DOCUMENT: Click here to read the five-page report obtained by The Charlotte Observer

CMPD’s decision means that an internal review has found that Vinson shouldn’t face termination, suspension or other severe disciplines.

The CRB sided with the family in an 8-2 vote, stating there was evidence of "potential error" regarding CMPD's decision.

An autopsy, released by the Mecklenburg County Medical Examiner, shows that Scott was killed by gunshot wounds to the posterior left chest and left abdomen.

PREVIOUS ARTICLE: Medical examiner releases official autopsy in Keith Lamont Scott shooting

"After a thorough review, it is my conclusion that Officer Vinson acted lawfully in shooting Scott on September 20, 2016," District Attorney Andrew Murray announced in November.

Monnett told WBTV the Scott family is disappointed.

"The family strongly believes that Officer Vinson's use of deadly force was in violation of the department's policy. So it's difficult for us to understand how the internal affairs review board could have come to this conclusion," he said.

The Board has considered several dozen appeals since its inception in 1997. In every case before Tuesday's Scott hearing, it has ruled in favor of police. The Board has also made recommendations in certain cases on how CMPD could improve policy on issues like body camera usage, said CRB Counsel Julian Wright.

Since 2013, Charlotte City Council has made incremental changes to Board oversight aimed at increasing accountability and providing more investigative materials to the Board.

An evidentiary hearing will be held on August 8 to dig deeper into the case.

Copyright 2017 WBTV. All rights reserved.
 
I wonder if they thought posterior left chest meant back?

For the record if the board just feels the dept. ruled wrong without stating what they did wrong in policy or law they are useless and are worse than a woman who falsely cries rape. They make having a review board a farce and only serve to do damage to real injured parties.
 
Ok so, the officer was cleared by the DA, which is the legally elected official that has jurisdiction over these things, and his employer cleared him to keep his job. So, we now have 8 or 9 citizens that say no he was wrong? What kinda crap is that!
 
Cpippen said:
Ok so, the officer was cleared by the DA, which is the legally elected official that has jurisdiction over these things, and his employer cleared him to keep his job. So, we now have 8 or 9 citizens that say no he was wrong? What kinda crap is that!
Click to expand...

it's actually 11, you know, 1 short of a full jury? kinda like your sig line in a way
 
Last edited:
Cpippen said:
Ok so, the officer was cleared by the DA, which is the legally elected official that has jurisdiction over these things, and his employer cleared him to keep his job. So, we now have 8 or 9 citizens that say no he was wrong? What kinda crap is that!
Click to expand...
I too would like to know the makeup of this board, for obvious reasons. That being said, I am going to play devils advocate here. For those who use the oxymoron "consent of the governed", is this not what is happening here. The People are telling the "government" NO, Not So Fast. I will also pick on the use of the term "legal". Legal is nothing but what the "government" says goes. Ok, so it was "elected". Elections are nothing but a ritualistic attempt legitimize "government". The People, at least as whole, should have complete and total power of their "police" and have total say in what the "police" can and can not do.
 
nbkky71 said:
So, does the CRB findings carry any legal weight? Will CMPD actually re-open the investigation now?
Click to expand...

I was wondering the same thing, if they actually had any authority at all.

Im still searching for a gun-shaped book, by the way
 
Last edited:
noway2 said:
I too would like to know the makeup of this board, for obvious reasons. That being said, I am going to play devils advocate here. For those who use the oxymoron "consent of the governed", is this not what is happening here. The People are telling the "government" NO, Not So Fast. I will also pick on the use of the term "legal". Legal is nothing but what the "government" says goes. Ok, so it was "elected". Elections are nothing but a ritualistic attempt legitimize "government". The People, at least as whole, should have complete and total power of their "police" and have total say in what the "police" can and can not do.
Click to expand...

My statement is more along the lines of he was never charged but the DA did an investigation and cleared him. That should be it unless Thry pursue civil action, which is their right. If a person hits and kills my family member and my is cleared as my family member's fault so I get a board to stand up for me or to charge them? No it's just done and over with so where does the duty and obligation to have the buck stop at? It also brings about the double jeopardy and such that comes to mind as as well.

Simply put in my opinion if a trial/ board/ public review is wanted, then charge every officer in any shooting and send it to court and let the jury decide, or let the DA & and grand jury decide to indict or not and let it be final.
 
Last edited:
Cpippen said:
Simply put in my opinion if a trial/ board/ public review is wanted, then charge every officer in clocked shooting and send it to court and let the jury decide, or let the DA & and grand jury decide to indict or not and let it be final.
Click to expand...
That works, as long as The People have faith in the system and THAT, loss of faith, is a rapidly growing problem. It is cultivated and fed by the us vs them, thin blue line crap, and it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that the court and the DA systems are biased towards the po-po and even admit it, if not for the reason that they have to work with them on a daily basis.

When that faith is lost, so will the concept of rule of law.
 
Last edited:
noway2 said:
That works, as long as The People have faith in the system and THAT, loss of faith, is a rapidly growing problem. It is cultivated and fed by the us vs them, thin blue line crap, and it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that the court and the DA systems are biased towards the po-po and even admit it, if not for the reason that they have to work with them on a daily basis.

When that faith is lost, so will the concept of rule of law.
Click to expand...

Yeah but when the review boards of the citizens start only ruling in favor of or against the officers, victims or whomever you think is correct, then we are right back at square one. I mean I agree people have lost faith in the "system" but the problem is they don't take credit and responsibility for their own actions. It's a culture we are raising and have allowed that no one is at fault, no one is their own person and able to do their own actions right or wrong. We all get a trophy, badge, medal or patch for participation. Yet when we don't listen and learn we blame it on the system.

We are responsible as a citizenry to say enough is enough if you act up and get shot you shouldn't have done the crime or action that got you shot. If a cop shoots someone wrongly they need to be punished for their actions and not have it covered up. The federal and state government is just as bad but we are blame to for that because we vote them into office.
 
Last edited:
noway2 said:
That works, as long as The People have faith in the system and THAT, loss of faith, is a rapidly growing problem. It is cultivated and fed by the us vs them, thin blue line crap, and it shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that the court and the DA systems are biased towards the po-po and even admit it, if not for the reason that they have to work with them on a daily basis.

When that faith is lost, so will the concept of rule of law.
Click to expand...


The Democrat and Republican parties are also feeding into this to allow them to split the populace to get more votes, it is all politically motivated.
 
Last edited:
I think there are things CMPD could have done better that might have ultimately changed the outcome. But if the CRB isn't focusing on that they are useless. This is a case where the officer was not wrong in the eyes of the law, but the situation was handled poorly and ended with someone dead IMO.
 
Cpippen said:
Yeah but when the review boards of the citizens start only ruling in favor of or against the officers, victims or whomever you think is correct, then we are right back at square one.
Click to expand...
True. It's the flip side of the same coin.

I mean I agree people have lost faith in the "system" but the problem is they don't take credit and responsibility for their own actions. It's a culture we are raising and have allowed that no one is at fault, no one is their own person and able to do their own actions right or wrong. We all get a trophy, badge, medal or patch for participation. Yet when we don't listen and learn we blame it on the system.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a pretty good description of the culture change that has occurred over the last 4o -50 or so years. It's a problem and the necessary cure is going to be very painful.

We are responsible as a citizenry to say enough is enough if you act up and get shot you shouldn't have done the crim or action that got you shot.
Click to expand...
To a degree I agree with you. Where I disagree is that that over time I have come to no longer support a government, and that includes the police, having "authority" which I have come to the realization that having them have such power is both illogical and unnecessary state. It is one that leads to, even if it is a slow process, to where we are now. I will also add that doing nothing wrong is no guarantee that some agent of the state will wrongfully use force, including deadly force.

If a coo shoots someone wrongly they need to be punished for their actions and not have it covered up.
Click to expand...
Agreed. They should be held to the same standards. I also have come to think that perhaps we should revert back to the systems where we didn't have government police, but that justice was more direct and privatized.

The federal and state government is just as bad but we are blame to for that because we vote them into office.
Click to expand...
I agree with you here too. The problem is government, be it at the local, state, national, or international, or galactic level. However, voting is nothing more than a popularity contest. 49.9% can "vote" for liberty and 51.1% can vote for servitude and we still get servitude; there is no "we". By extension, just because there was a vote it doesn't mean it's right or legitimate. Nor can voting prevent or solve the problem, because voting didn't create it. For that matter if the only thing you have the option to "vote" for or on is part of the problem, which it inherently is, then there is no option to avoid or fix the problem through voting. I didn't vote for those (blank-ity blank) democrats on the county commission that implemented zoning after I deliberately purchased property that was not zoned - but it doesn't change the fact that they are willing to try to use force, of course that falls to someone else which always makes it easy, to push their will upon me.

The Democrat and Republican parties are also feeding into this to allow them to split the populace to get more votes, it is all politically motivated.
Click to expand...
Absolutely true. It's all about power and those that become part of government will always seek more of it. The beast is corrupt by it's nature and no constitution, no law, no court, no vote, no nothing except raw force is going to stop it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
concepthomes1 said:
Oh, and Andrew Murray, the DA who declined to press charges against Vinson is also under consideration for US Attorney for the Western District of NC.

Seems to me if his investigation was flawed or tainted, he would be up for this position.
Click to expand...
This was a pretty clean case if you look at the facts and disregard the media spin.

I'm curious about the backgrounds of the CRB members. I can't imagine how they could objectively come to this conclusion.
 
concepthomes1 said:
Oh, and Andrew Murray, the DA who declined to press charges against Vinson is also under consideration for US Attorney for the Western District of NC.

Seems to me if his investigation was flawed or tainted, he would be up for this position.
Click to expand...

Andrew is an excellent attorney and better person according to what my wife tells me. She has worked with him in the past and was impressed with his work. I agree with what you say. If his team botched this he wouldn't be up for appointment to a federal position.
 
Ultimately this is where society arrives when there has been and continues to be serious and sustained erosion of trust between the People and those agents of the State who are employed not to keep the peace or act in the interest of safety, but to enforce the laws, regulations, edicts and whims of the State to control a population and extract wealth from into into the coffers of the political class.

Sure, we dress it up in different language and heroic imagery because you'd never get the 90% of LE that are good, decent people to actually do that job if it were described by the cold, hard truth.

But in the end - it is what it is.

Enforcement of laws promulgated by the most corrupt group of people our nation has.


chiefjason said:
This is a case where the officer was not wrong in the eyes of the law, but the situation was handled poorly and ended with someone dead IMO.
Click to expand...

Neither were the actions of the guards at Treblinka, Plaszow or Auschwitz wrong in the eyes of the laws of Germany.

Nor we're the actions of Stalin's guards in the Ukraine or the gulags wrong in the eyes of the law in Soviet Russia.

All of the communists that purged China of millions of people were within the bounds of Chinese law.

Legality and Morality are mutually exclusive, and just because an action is legal doesn't make it moral. Now I would agree that from a legal standpoint a person can only be charged within the framework of the law. But as @noway2 has stated, the People have the ultimate say in how they are governed.

Better the behaviors have the opportunity to be corrected by oversight boards than through the sights of a population that's reached the point of a hard reset.

They very well could be wrong in this case, but the lesson that should be taken out of it is that there are serious issues between the police and the communities they ostensibly serve.....and until the police recognize that and move to help bridge that divide rather than tell people "that's your problem," Citizen Review Boards second guessing the determinations of IA investigations might very well turn into the good ol days.
 
SPM said:
Ultimately this is where society arrives when there has been and continues to be serious and sustained erosion of trust between the People and those agents of the State who are employed not to keep the peace or act in the interest of safety, but to enforce the laws, regulations, edicts and whims of the State to control a population and extract wealth from into into the coffers of the political class.
(snip)
They very well could be wrong in this case, but the lesson that should be taken out of it is that there are serious issues between the police and the communities they ostensibly serve...
Click to expand...
The first (highlighted) part has nothing in common with the second (highlighted) part. Therein lies a lot of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
SPM said:
Neither were the actions of the guards at Treblinka, Plaszow or Auschwitz wrong in the eyes of the laws of Germany.

Nor we're the actions of Stalin's guards in the Ukraine or the gulags wrong in the eyes of the law in Soviet Russia.

All of the communists that purged China of millions of people were within the bounds of Chinese law.

Legality and Morality are mutually exclusive, and just because an action is legal doesn't make it moral. Now I would agree that from a legal standpoint a person can only be charged within the framework of the law. But as @noway2 has stated, the People have the ultimate say in how they are governed.

Better the behaviors have the opportunity to be corrected by oversight boards than through the sights of a population that's reached the point of a hard reset.

They very well could be wrong in this case, but the lesson that should be taken out of it is that there are serious issues between the police and the communities they ostensibly serve.....and until the police recognize that and move to help bridge that divide rather than tell people "that's your problem," Citizen Review Boards second guessing the determinations of IA investigations might very well turn into the good ol days.
Click to expand...


Apples and potatoes. Give it a rest on the commie, nazi stuff.

They made a bad call to act and it went sideways. This wasn't an execution. It was poor planning and poor action on top of an idiot with a gun. We agree on the last part. They could have likely handled this in a way that either did not end in someone dead, or gave them a lot more room to deny they made bad calls. I'm saying that if the CRB does not indicate what could have done better, it's kind of pointless.

IMO, the lesson is they should have rolled in with marked units first when you are trying to take down a completely unrelated subject to your surveillance.
 
Ikarus1 said:
part of the CRB changes involves some training, including ride alongs. Or just maybe they should quit killing people and dogs over noise ordinances and weed.
Click to expand...

What will you do when someone points a gun at you? Then after asking/telling them to drop it they don't.
 
Cowboy said:
What will you do when someone points a gun at you? Then after asking/telling them to drop it they don't.
Click to expand...
Im not in the escalating force business with 5 of my buddies and one brain injury patient. Hey but at least the one black officer had a good backstop.

BTW i think Scott was a POS. I also think he was high as a kite inside his own vehicle and had a stolen firearm. None of thar carries the death penalty in NC


Funny they could hit a football player with taser while he was rushing them but not attempt using less lethal on a fat pothead
 
Last edited:
concepthomes1 said:
Honestly, I'd like to see to demographics of the CRB.

It's sad but in this day age, hardly anyone can be trusted to act objectively.
Click to expand...

And exactly what is the criteria for membership? (appointed, elected, self-declared "community leaders"?)
 
Ikarus1 said:
Im not in the escalating force business with 5 of my buddies and one brain injury patient. Hey but at least the one black officer had a good backstop.

BTW i think Scott was a POS. I also think he was high as a kite inside his own vehicle and had a stolen firearm. None of thar carries the death penalty in NC


Funny they could hit a football player with taser while he was rushing them but not attempt using less lethal on a fat pothead
Click to expand...

That's not what I asked you is it. Your not a cop so your not in the position to enforce the law. This wasn't a who pulled first situation this was another person not listening to an officer. If you have your gun trained on an officer, or anyone, and they tell you to put it down multiple times and you don't there is only two out comes You or him.
 
chiefjason said:
Apples and potatoes. Give it a rest on the commie, nazi stuff.
Click to expand...

I'll be happy to once the "they did nothing illegal" defense is dropped when the morality of the acts themselves is dubious. Once the parallel no longer exists, it no longer exists.

chiefjason said:
They made a bad call to act and it went sideways. This wasn't an execution. It was poor planning and poor action on top of an idiot with a gun. We agree on the last part. They could have likely handled this in a way that either did not end in someone dead, or gave them a lot more room to deny they made bad calls. I'm saying that if the CRB does not indicate what could have done better, it's kind of pointless.

IMO, the lesson is they should have rolled in with marked units first when you are trying to take down a completely unrelated subject to your surveillance.
Click to expand...

If we can just quit the War on Drugs, almost all of these types of situations will go away. Whether it's the incarceration rate, the taking of Property without due process, or sharp increase in violent interactions between the People and law enforcement, the root cause is the War on Drugs.

Portugal did it nearly 15 years ago, with all drugs - addiction rates are down, overdoses are down, use is down, violence is down..... there's no reason short of the money and power government bodies receive and exercise as a result of it that it should be the policy in this country, without the extra-constitutional arguments that must be made to defend its existence.
 
Cowboy said:
That's not what I asked you is it. Your not a cop so your not in the position to enforce the law. This wasn't a who pulled first situation this was another person not listening to an officer. If you have your gun trained on an officer, or anyone, and they tell you to put it down multiple times and you don't there is only two out comes You or him.
Click to expand...

74838ba5bd1f619795605eec09f89d72.jpg


:p
 
Jerzsubbie said:
This was a pretty clean case if you look at the facts and disregard the media spin.

I'm curious about the backgrounds of the CRB members. I can't imagine how they could objectively come to this conclusion.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the CRB doesn't get all the info in their first round, that this finding now gives them access to all of the evidence including depositions and maybe live testimony so they can consider the case more thoroughly. I'm not sure what happens if they disagree with the chief and the da at the end of their complete process. I also think that they are focused on how the investigation was handled more than on the specific event that sparked the investigation, but I'm no expert.
 
Ok looking at this more, I agree that Scott had a right to screw around with Pot or what ever drug he was on. The cops also had a right and duty to enforce the law even if they don't agree with the war on drugs or whatever. I don't think the Cop needs the citizens on patrol board of review to critique his actions. That must has already been done by the DA and IAB. Now, if the citizens in patrol wants to advise on how they can educate people in the future so it won't happen the best that may be beneficial.
 
Cpippen said:
Ok looking at this more, I agree that Scott had a right to screw around with Pot or what ever drug he was on. The cops also had a right and duty to enforce the law even if they don't agree with the war on drugs or whatever. I don't think the Cop needs the citizens on patrol board of review to critique his actions. That must has already been done by the DA and IAB. Now, if the citizens in patrol wants to advise on how they can educate people in the future so it won't happen the best that may be beneficial.
Click to expand...
Agreed. However, the Scott supporters seem to believe that CMPD=DA=IAB therefore there is no true check or balance, it's all one sided.
 
CRB makes recommendations to the city manager and chief of police. Thats the extent of their power. This is just a preliminary finding, and they will need to have a full hearing like a trial.
 
SPM said:
I'll be happy to once the "they did nothing illegal" defense is dropped when the morality of the acts themselves is dubious. Once the parallel no longer exists, it no longer exists.
Click to expand...

You do realize there is a good chance that any one of us here could get out of that shooting not prosecuted as well, correct? Take away the law enforcement aspect of it for a second. Guy with gun in hand, you are addressing him to drop it, he doesn't. Is it a legal grey area? Yes. Moral grey area? Yes. But there is a good chance a CC'er that got into a similar situation may not be charged. So like I said, drop the hyperbole and ad hominem nonsense. Which is exactly what the nazi and commie stuff is. This one is far more messy, unless you can point me to a supreme leader of the national security forces that is giving his people cart blanche orders to execute certain parts of the population at will and executing his own for not following orders. Then we might be able to draw a parallel, but not until then.

I take each issue as it comes, or try too. This one is a dang mess on both ends, there is not a clean end to pick up. But not because there are nazis or commies involved. Because the tactics sucked and the guy they went after was an idiot.
 
chiefjason said:
You do realize there is a good chance that any one of us here could get out of that shooting not prosecuted as well, correct? Take away the law enforcement aspect of it for a second. Guy with gun in hand, you are addressing him to drop it, he doesn't. Is it a legal grey area? Yes. Moral grey area? Yes. But there is a good chance a CC'er that got into a similar situation may not be charged. So like I said, drop the hyperbole and ad hominem nonsense. Which is exactly what the nazi and commie stuff is. This one is far more messy, unless you can point me to a supreme leader of the national security forces that is giving his people cart blanche orders to execute certain parts of the population at will and executing his own for not following orders. Then we might be able to draw a parallel, but not until then.

I take each issue as it comes, or try too. This one is a dang mess on both ends, there is not a clean end to pick up. But not because there are nazis or commies involved. Because the tactics sucked and the guy they went after was an idiot.
Click to expand...


Agreed!!! There is an old saying about mistakes and usually a bad day is a bunch of little mistakes that lead up to one big one. Well, in this case there are several small things that had they been changed the out come most likely would have been different. Case in point if they had a marked officer start out questioning/ contacting him, he may have listened as there would be no "confusion" and if he had just dropped the "gun" or gun shaped book and showed his hands the day would have ended differently. In the grand scheme of things it is s tragedy that he got shot, but like you said it was a justified shooting. Many poor picked choices on all sides caused this out come and plenty of people are responsible for their small part in the outcome. I do not agree that there is a supreme member of the gubment telling cops to kill bystanders. I do however see the left side of the aisle try and utilize officer involved shootings such as this, Ferguson, and other ones to their advantage, i.e. Letting no tragedy go wasted for political gain or other racial injustice issues.
 
Last edited:
Cpippen said:
Case in point if they had a marked officer start out questioning/ contacting him, he may have listened as there would be no "confusion" and if he had just dropped the "gun" or gun shaped book and showed his hands the day would have ended differently.
Click to expand...
I have to wonder, how often do the cops SEE a gun when it isn't there? I'm talking about the well documented psychological mind trick where the brain fills in details and automatically makes things appear in familiar form. I mean see it to the point where they cold swear up and down and be subject to every metric and believe it because they actually saw it, even though it wasn't.
 
noway2 said:
I have to wonder, how often do the cops SEE a gun when it isn't there? I'm talking about the well documented psychological mind trick where the brain fills in details and automatically makes things appear in familiar form. I mean see it to the point where they cold swear up and down and be subject to every metric and believe it because they actually saw it, even though it wasn't.
Click to expand...

I'm sure it happens more with officers that are on their own like troopers, state police or in documented bad areas.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom