How about this one?

Cherrypie's suggestion was on tack, I think they deserve the points :-)

I see the problem about speaking 'out of turn' sounding unauthorized. Perhaps it could be phrased differently like this, to show that Scott was NOT jumping the queue ! In a meetings context the Chairman will often let a participant take the floor to pick up on a previous comment.

The previous speaker mentioned him and he thought that entitled him to take his turn at speaking. I think this is a natural way of saying it.

Should work here.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2 hrs (2009-08-08 11:24:17 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In view of valid comments, perhaps simply "speaking in response" would work.

Según el diccionario Alcaraz:

Por alusiones: (GEN formula used in requesting permission to speak at a meeting, debate, etc.. by a person who wishes to reply to remarks made, or deemed to have been made, about his words or actions by another speaker) APPROX. If I may be allowed to reply to that, I stand on my right of reply.

Aludir= allude, refer, mention, remark, comment.
Alusión= allusion, comment, reference, remark.

In a meeting, someone talks about you, and even if it´s not your turn, you ask to reply to that as it refers to you/ as it mentions you.

Espero que esto te auyde, pero, espera a algún nativo que afinará mejor.

Un saludo.
http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=551346

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 9 hrs (2009-08-08 17:55:38 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Saludos :))

Quite a number of Google references on this phrase.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 days3 mins (2009-08-11 08:35:03 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------

Greetings to all.

Because I do not see that I can be allowed to use the Reference option on this page, I have to use the space allotted to my answer for clarification on an aspect of Parliamentary Procedure, or Parliamentary Law, a course I happen to have taught several years ago.

The Asker's explanation in its relevant part:
". . . since the person (in this case Scott) was referred to by somebody else in the room, he's allowed to effectively push in and speak, even though it isn't his official turn. "

Note that when a person rises to a question of privilege or to a point of order, for that matter, he is not "referred to" by somebody in the room. He simply stands up on his own volition to interrupt a speaker, - when for example, there is a situation that affects the welfare or convenience of the meeting participants, such a fire spotted nearby.

From online sources the following excerpts may be found useful.

283. Questions of Privilege.—

“Mr. Chairman, I rise to a question of privilege which affects the rights of this assembly.” Or, “Mr. Chairman, I rise to a question of personal privilege.”

The Chairman: “The gentleman will state his question of privilege.”

--
Question of Personal Privilege, Point of Order, Request for Information, and Call for a Division of the House.

These questions require immediate consideration and are always in order. Unlike regular motions, they do not require seconds and may occur at any point during the proceedings.

When the rights and privilege or the comfort and convenience of a member of the Legislature are challenged or questioned, that member may rise and say, "I rise to a question of personal privilege" or, as is usually stated in the House, "I rise on a point of personal privilege". The presiding officer then directs the member to state the question or point of personal privilege, after which the presiding officer renders a decision on the question. Once the question is settled, the proceedings continue at the point where they were interrupted.
http://hawaii.gov/lrb/hndbook/hbk9.html

===

5. Point of Order
Only on a point of order or privilege may a member interrupt the speaker. If a member feels that improper language bas been used, irrelevant argument introduced or a rule or procedure broken, the member is entitled to “rise to the point of order,” interrupting the speaker.
The point of order must be stated definitely and concisely. The
Chairperson shall decide the matter without debate, though he/she may
ask opinions. The Chair should state his/her ruling authoritatively.
His/her ruling may be appealed by the member who has risen to the point
of order. If appealed, the Chairperson states his/her decision and the
point of appeal, which is not debatable: “Shall the decision of the

Chair stand as the judgement of this meeting?” A simple majority determines the issues. This merely settles a point of procedure and is not a vote of confidence in the Chairperson.
http://www.dryden.ca/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/LIBRARY...

ber102008.pdf
==
Examples:

MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I rise to a point of order.

THE PRESIDENT--The Chair will state that the motion to reconsider is
pending for the consideration of the Convention at the time.

MR. JONES (Montgomery)--I rise to a point of order, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman will state the point of order.
http://www.legislature.state.al.us/misc/history/constitution...

eedings/1901_proceedings_vol1/day25.html

--
One may also rise to a point of inquiry.

Example:

MR. PETTUS--I rise to a point of inquiry.

THE PRESIDENT--The gentleman will state the point of inquiry.

MR. PETTUS--The question was whether or not the previous question was
ordered. Do I understand we are having an aye and no vote on the call
for the previous question?

THE PRESIDENT--That is the understanding of the Chair. In the opinion
of the Chair a delegate may call for an aye and no vote on any question, if it is called for in time.
http://www.legislature.state.al.us/misc/history/constitution...




--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 3 days3 hrs (2009-08-11 11:32:28 GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------

Response to Gwen (Asker's remark below):

Gwen, I was just trying to help enlighten readers who might be doing research and reach this page, not to gain points or make anyone guilty. I respect the Asker's prerogatives. I did not claim that I would be proven right ultimately, as there might be other readers who know better and would be able to refute what I say. We are all for excellence, I am sure, although we, including myself especially, sometimes fail to reach it. But we all try to do better each time.

Have a nice day.
11 August 2009, 1936hrs, RP time.