By Ava Schwartzapfel
Riverside, CA— An ongoing murder trial escalated heavily in Riverside court on Jan. 25. The defendant, representing himself, Thomas Ryan Scott, called himself to the stand as one of the defense’s witnesses.
The alleged incident took place on Aug. 28, 2021, when defendant Thomas Ryan Scott is said to have shot the 17-year-old victim at close range.
Christopher Pavan, a computer forensics investigator, was called to examine various photographs and videos pertaining to the case, specifically surveillance system footage.
Pavan was given footage from a nearby fire station to the incident and was told to extract each frame of the given video and produce still photographs. 
Pavan explained that he could recover four or five frames in which the individual in question was visible from the surveillance footage.
“It’s an individual which appears to have something swung across their back…looks like they’re wearing a hat, a blueish colored shirt it’s a little difficult to tell because of the quality of the camera,” Pavan stated.
The remaining portion of this witnesses’ questioning consisted of specifying the individual seen in the video’s specific movements, mannerisms, and body language.
During yesterday’s court proceedings, occurring on June 24, Scott had called himself to the witness as a stand.
In the interest of time, his questioning was moved until today’s proceedings.
Since Scott is both the defendant and the defense, only cross-examination must be completed for this specific witness.
D.A. Kevin Beecham began with the People’s questioning of this witness.
He began by drawing Scott’s attention to his direct examination at the start of the proceedings regarding this case.
Beecham asks if everything Scott told the police before his confession, which he referred to as denial, was 100% the truth.
Scott replied, explaining that 99% of the information is the truth but that he was under the influence of the drug PCP, so he does “second guess” himself.
Beecham asked if he had told the police questioning him at this time that he was under the influence, to which Scott stated that he had not.
“Being on that drug, it’s kind of hard to distinguish reality versus fantasy. So, I wouldn’t be able to understand my state of mind… I would have a hard time distinguishing that,” he explained, regarding his drug experience.
Beecham then delved into Scott’s theory that “Riverside Police Department (RPD) is out to get him.”
This theory is what allegedly drove Scott to confess to this crime falsely.
Beecham clarifies questioning that “the best way to get back at RPD is to provide them a confession?”
To which Scott replied, “A misleading one, yes.”
Beecham then rehashed Scott’s previous cases within the Riverside Police Department, attempting to figure out where this relationship would have turned sour.
The DA put his effort into proving that the negative effects of Scott’s interactions with the Riverside Police Department were the result of his actions.
Scott then explained this is his opinion, and this case would not be considered self-defense.
Beecham asked Scott why he cares about the result of this case if it is something that he was uninvolved in.
Scott stated, “I am being charged with a crime that doesn’t even fit the circumstances. So, if I’m being convicted of a crime, I should be convicted of the crime on what evidence would show. That’s why I would say that.
“Whoever was involved in the crime, in my opinion, that’s what it would resort to,” Scott stated.
Beecham asked, “So all these questions over here, you’re really defending somebody else about self-defense?”
Scott explained that this is not the case, and he is just trying to get the facts of what happened.
“So far what we heard, someone says, ‘back up back up’ and gives a warning shot… that doesn’t sound like murder to me,” Scott says.
In talking further about the incident, Beecham repeated Scott’s description of the three kids involved, including that he could “beat the sh*t out of them.”
“I most definitely will still stick to that,” Scott says.
The questioning ended shortly after this revelation, and this case will resume in Riverside County Court at 9 am tomorrow, Jan. 26.
