officer vinson did not know mr. scott, had not seen him. so unbeknownst to him, mr. scott was aware that he was a convicted felon with a gun, an illegal gun, and that he had warrants out for him in gaston county, and that he had police officers in tactical gear, weapons drawn, vournding his vehicle. it s at this point that officer vinson fired his weapon four times, striking mr. scott in the wrist, abdomen and rear shoulder. despite officer s and medical personnel s taiattempts to rend aid, mr. scott unfortunately passed away. i m going to show you a medical examiner what the medical examiner did for us, and that is a what s a correct term, silhouette. a mannequin.
put the bombs in chelsea neighborhood in manhattan, he gets into a gun battle if you will with officers right after that incident and is not killed. he s injured. critically. but he is not killed. while surrounded. here in this situation that clearly escalated fast, you have several other officers around, maybe not so close to this individual who don t fire. and an officer here who feels that he has to use lethal force. right. a lot of this goes to what is the noncriminal piece of it. which is this could be terrible police work. this could be a fireable offense. this could be a matter for disciplinary review. even if the d.a. doesn t find it was a crime. that it was an unlawful killing. that it was a second degree murder. and so part of the defense in this comes through, you know, at many times to my ear what you heard the d.a. saying was this is one sided. here was this quote/unquote, you
none of the officers knew about the medical. so it s the scene and what occurs. it s that split second. and everything surrounding that decision. the officer said he saw marijuana and that seems to have been one of the reasons they approached him in the first place. why was there no test in the toxicology report for marijuana? first of all, the blunt was tested. it was marijuana. the bottle that the prescription bottle or the empty yellow bottle had residue that was marijuana. and later a test was done and mr. scott did test positive for recent consumption of marijuana where it that information? it s not in the toxicology it was not in the toxicology report. sbi asked for it late and it cape after the toxicology report. can you tell us more about the conversation this morning with the family and how they reacted? the family was extremely gracious. we were there with their attorneys. they wanted us to go through the facts of the case.
all saw the gun in mr. scott s hand after exiting the vehicle. however, as everyone here is aware, none of the video recordings, the dash cam, the body worn camera or mrs. scott s cell phone video, clearly captured mr. scott s hands. what is clearly captured on video is mr. scott s right ankle. when he exits the suv, you can see that his right pant leg is pulled up above the ankle. this is the same spot where you can see a bulge in his pant leg in the convenience store surveillance footage. and the same place on his ankle where police recovered a holster following the shooting. here, the bulge. here, the ankle.
this past year in charlotte, north carolina. a very detailed list of information laid out as to why the district attorney reached this or how he reached this conclusion. msnbc chief legal correspondent ari melber joins me. we ve been taking notes on this. starting out with the district attorney saying that mr. scott was armed. that in the video, what is shown at a convenience store, this dark circle, if you will, at the bottom of his leg, and what we were told happened at the crime scene itself, indicated there was a gun with a holster. they ve traced back the purchase history they say of this particular weapon that was apparently stolen from someone s home and sold eventually to mr. scott. the d.a. says this was the weapon. the officer who fired saw and felt his life was in danger. as he put it, tie at best if someone is armed and facing a