Photos and videos may be ambiguous, but if the police do have a gun from the crime scene, what has the fingerprint analysis shown? I’m no forensic expert but this seems rather important.
The video released today raises doubts about the presence of a gun on the ground near Mr. Scott, as others have noted. The stills from this video, taken by Mr. Scott’s widow, do not match up with the photo of a something (unclear, but possibly a gun) in still photos released in some media outlets. The body in those photos is also in a different position and possibly slightly different location.
I examined the video made on the cell phone of Rakeyia Scott by stopping it frequently in the time after he was shot. The version I watched was posted on NBC and had a clear area of video in the middle with sort of an unfocused “matte” area on both sides. You can see part of this matte effect in the photo above and the first photo below, and it unfortunately blocks some of what happened. I am curious about this, too, as have never seen it on phone videos that I have made. Was this effect added before the video was posted, and if so, why and by whom?
No object is on the ground near Mr. Scott at 1:40 into the video version I accessed (timing might differ depending on what length versions were posted). See above. Notice in the same photo that the officer standing near him is turning, looking and perhaps gesturing to someone behind him. In almost the next instant (shown in first photo below), a new shadow appears, and then soon after, an object is on the ground (glove? gun?) near the standing officer’s foot. It looks as if someone moved in, causing the shadow and placing or dropping something (accidentally? at the scene of a shooting?). The two photos below are both from about 1:43 into the video.
The new object, unclear on the video version I saw, is shown in the bottom image below that I clipped from a still of the video. Undoubtedly there are vastly superior technologies for analyzing this video. But in the meantime, I hope someone investigating this tragedy will answer the question about whose (if any) fingerprints were on the gun supposedly found at the scene. Yes, such fingerprints could be faked. But it seems likely that it would show up on video from some angle if someone had pressed the victim’s fingers around a gun carefully enough to make it look like he had held the gun.
Last but absolutely NOT least, even if there was a gun at the scene with Keith Scott’s fingerprints on it, was he using it to threaten the officers? If not, there was no justification for the use of deadly force.
Many questions remain, but the sudden appearance of the object in the video below needs to be explained, and any fingerprint evidence on the gun revealed. This man’s family and friends have suffered a terrible loss, and deserve answers as soon as possible.