Taylor Grand Jury Decision Denounced By Legal and Media Analysts As Raw Racism or “State-Sponsored White Supremacy”

The Daily Kos and other sites are heralding the interview of Dr. Jason Johnson, MSNBC contributor and Morgan State journalism professor, who denounced the Kentucky Grand jury and prosecutors in the Brionna Taylor case as engaging in raw “state-sponsored white supremacy” in falling to indict the three police officers with murder.  Others declared the result as the product of obvious racism in the justice system and many ridiculed Kentucky Attorney General Kenneth Cameron as a traitor to the black community or “the Bull Connor” of black lawyers. These attacks ignore the legal barriers to the murder charges demanded by many.  While there are good faith reasons for many to criticize the charges or underlying decisions of the police, some of us warned that the case would present serious challenges given the shooting by Taylor’s boyfriend and the wounding of an officer.

Former officer Brett Hankison was charged with first-degree wanton endangerment due to his unloading of his service weapon. The charge is well founded since he fired wildly from outside the apartment with rounds entering another unit.  In my view, unless there is additional evidence presented, there is a strong basis for conviction.

However, the other two officers (Cameron and Mattingly) were cleared in the shooting. The investigation found that they did knock and announce, though it is not clear if Taylor or her boyfriend heard the identification. The officers were not involved in the warrant but were ordered to enforce it. (There remain considerable questions about that warrant for Taylor former boyfriend that still must be addressed).

The boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, reportedly shot first and hit one of the officers who returned fire with his partner. It would be extremely difficult to prove murder in such a circumstances and, unless the Grand Jury was given false evidence, the shooting would meet the criteria on the use of lethal force set by the Supreme Court.  It is extremely likely that a murder charge against those two officers would end up in a hung jury or acquittal.

As for Hankison, I have seen no explanation of how he would be chargeable for murder if, as found, his rounds did not hit Taylor. Indeed, they did not hit anyone.  They were wild shots that missed the apartment entirely — hence the wanton endangerment charge.

Ben Crump, who represents the Taylor family, insisted that “If Hankison’s behavior constituted wanton endangerment of the people in the apartments next to hers, then it should also be considered wanton endangerment of Breonna.” That is a legitimate point. The difficulty is tied to the threshold legal question of whether the officers were justified in returning fire in the first place.  The finding was that the officers were justified after being fired upon and one being wounded. If the shooting in the apartment was justified, it would be more difficult to distinguish the direct shoots of Cameron and Mattingly from indirect shoots of Hankison in terms of the two individuals in the apartment. Hankison was found to have fired after Walker fired on the officers.  Yet, there is a basis for Crump’s point. The other two officers were firing in a dark narrow hallway.  Mattingly was firing wildly outside.

Crump notably added “In fact, it should have been ruled wanton murder.” I do not know of such a charge but before you have anything labeled as “wanton murder” you need to prove “murder.” As noted above, I do not believe that these facts, if true, could result in a guilty verdict against Hankison for murder and indeed a court could well throw out the charges before trial.

Johnson stated

“I’m so disgusted by this. I’m so disgusted by Daniel Cameron’s performance. I am so sick and tired of Black people going on the air and performing for violence and white supremacy and state-sponsored violence against Black people and claiming their mamas and claiming because they’re a Black man, they care about it — This woman got shot in her house! When she was asleep!”

“I’m sitting right here in my house right now. If cops busted into my house right now and shot me on the air, what Daniel Cameron basically told America is that that would be legal!. If they thought that there was something wrong, I could be shot in broad daylight, on national television, in my house, because the cops can break in and shoot whoever they want if they’re concerned! That is why people are upset.”

I understand why Johnson is upset with this result. Many of us are upset over this tragedy. There is no sense of justice when an innocent person’s life is needlessly taken.  However, Cameron’s race has nothing to do with this.  If officers broke into Johnson’s house and shot him on the air, it would be murder.  The difference is that the officers in the Taylor case were fired upon and one wounded. That is a material difference even if you have legitimate objections over the need for the warrant or doubts over the knock-and-announce claim.

There are ample questions still remaining in this case but we are not going to address them if we ignore material facts or legal elements to these crimes.

 

377 thoughts on “Taylor Grand Jury Decision Denounced By Legal and Media Analysts As Raw Racism or “State-Sponsored White Supremacy””

  1. How come Walker didn’t get shot If he shot first? What did he do shoot and duck out of the hallway and have Miss Taylor take the hit. Maybe he should be charged with murder for inciting the shooting?

  2. “The investigation found that they did knock and announce, though it is not clear if Taylor or her boyfriend heard the identification.”

    If Taylor and her boyfriend didn’t hear them knock and announce, then they didn’t effectively announce themselves. The regulation needs to be changed to require that it be loud enough.

    There was no reason to use a ram on the door in the first place. There was no reason to visit Taylor’s apartment first when she was not the target and her apartment was only a secondary address. The police may have lied on the warrant application resulting in Taylor’s apartment being included on the warrant:
    https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/05/16/breonna-taylor-attorneys-say-police-supplied-false-information/5205334002/

    As for “murder,” that’s not the only charge that could have been filed. Turley doesn’t address the possibility of lesser charges for the officer(s) whose bullets killed her, like wanton endangerment or reckless homicide.

    Also keep in mind that she did not die immediately, and the police apparently made no effort to treat her:
    https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/crime/2020/07/17/breonna-taylor-lay-untouched-20-minutes-after-being-shot-records/5389881002/

    1. A drug dealer was there and the girlfriend might have been aiding him. This was a legal entry. The male had his gun close at hand so he could shoot a cop.

      You are despicable constantly siding with criminals that have killed or injured others, with little remorse to the tremendous numbers of innocents that have been hurt.

      1. Allan is despicable, siding with police who have killed or injured innocents like Taylor, with little remorse for the tremendous numbers of innocents that have been hurt.

        No drugs were found in Taylor’s apartment. Allan doesn’t name any drug dealer there that night, and no drug dealer was arrested there. Allan is a liar.

        1. That is why you are known as Anonymous the Stupid. No grasp of the facts and no intellect.

          We could show you the facts released to date but then you will Cowardly run back to the rat latrine.

          1. That is why you are known as Allan the Stupid. No grasp of the facts and no intellect.

            We could show you the facts released to date but then you will Cowardly run back to the rat latrine.

          2. “No grasp of the facts and no intellect.” Says Allan.

            This said by a guy who clearly hasn’t been able to grasp the facts of this case.

            “We could show you the facts released to date…” Said by — yep — Allan.

            Oh my. There wasn’t a drug dealer on the premises, Allan.

            Furthermore, surveillance of the area — prior to the time when police entered her home — was lacking. The police serving the warrant apparently thought that Ms. Taylor was alone.

            “Sloppy surveillance outside her apartment in the hours before the raid failed to detect that Mr. Walker was there, so the officers expected to find an unarmed woman alone. A failure to follow their own rules of engagement and a lack of routine safeguards, like stationing an ambulance outside, compounded the risks that night.”

            https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/30/us/breonna-taylor-police-killing.html

            And Allan is calling other people “stupid”…

            1. Mespo has now provided you, Anonymous the Stupid, with the details as he sees them. It really doesn’t change very much.

              The arrest had a warrant and knowledge of a dangerous fellow who was a drug dealer. The police announced themselves and were shot at. There was return fire. A woman was unfortunately killed. That is what happens when people associate with violent criminals… sometimes they end up in the crossfire. This is not blaming the woman for being killed, only her personal choices of who to associate with. (I read that she may have been involved in the drug trade herself but that is not an indication she should have been killed. It is an indication of personal choices, an example that we can use to teach our children.. This I realize is far to complex for you.)

              No one wanted the death and this had nothing to do with race or racism.

              The NYT can report as they see fit and spin it their way. The warrant was for a specific address and the police followed procedure with a warning before they entered. You are too Stupid to integrate the data and recognize that you know very little.

              Go back to the rat latrine and get reinforcements. Below Mespo writes what is probably the closest to the truth.

              1. You say that it really doesn’t change very much, but what Mespo said contradicts your claim that a drug dealer was there and the girlfriend might have been aiding him. It makes more sense that the current boyfriend had his gun close at hand so he could shoot if the former boyfriend broke in, you know, the one who was actually a drug dealer.

                It contradicts your assumption that Taylor or her current boyfriend were criminals and shows that your claim about the original poster being despicable constantly siding with criminals that have killed or injured others was baseless.

                1. All that may be true and many other scenarios might be true as well, however, the police (to my knowledge) had a legal warrant, were at the right address and were permitted to do a no knock entry. A bullet came through one of the doors and hit a policeman. Then havoc broke out.

                  How does the rational of the civilian shooter affect the way this went down?

                  My statement about a despicable poster has more to do with that posters character and statements before and after then it does with any of the potential scenarios that may have occurred. I assume you are talking about anonymous. Can you tell us which anonymous you are referring to and can you state what comments that particular anonymous made before or afterward?

                  1. I was talking about your initial comment yesterday at 12:06 PM. You were wrong to call CTHD despicable constantly siding with criminals that have killed or injured others.

                    1. Independent, but CTDHD is despicable and I am not the only one to feel that way. You are basing your comments on my response to one reply but there is history. That history demonstrates that what I said was true. You are free to disagree and if you wish we can go through her replies and the way she acts. The best scenarios to look at were the one’s where people talked to one another something that doesn’t occur in this case.

                      If you have a great desire to learn more look at the debates between her and Young.

                    2. Independent, do you expect me to go back and put her comments in manner that you find acceptable?

                      That is my opinion. As I said before you are free to disagree. Maybe you side with BLM/ Antifa maybe not. Maybe you have tremendous sympathies for defending those obstructing the police and lack respect for law and order. Maybe not. That is your choice. I personally side with those that loose loved ones, their homes, their jobs and their businesses when people obstruct the police and can talk only about people like George Floyd stating he was killed by the police when he most likely died of an overdose. I don’t believe you are one of those people. I have no gripe with you but you have to recognize that I am entitled to my opinion just like you are entitled to yours.

                2. It is my understanding that both the apartment and Breonna herself were tied into the drug dealing.

                  But that atleast some of the evidence of this came after the fact.

                  Regardless, the Grand Jury is there to decide if these specific officers were guilty of a crime.

                  They got that pretty much spot on.

                  But the Grand Jury is NOT speaking to anythinjg but were these 3 officers actions criminal.

                  The Grand Jury does not decide whether the warrant was legitimate, whether there are problems elsewhere in the police department, whether there was malfeasance by others or even these specific officers that falls short of criminal.

                  All bad results are not crimes.

        2. Anonymous:

          The warrant was issued against the decedent’s prior boyfriend (Boyfriend 1) for drug trafficking. Breonna’s apartment was listed as one of his residences and a reasonably likely spot to find him and his stock in trade. He was violent and hence no-knock was authorized but not required. The police announced themselves loud enough for neighbors to hear but the shooter said he didn’t hear them which is plausible if asleep. When the police began breaking the door down, Breonna’s current boyfriend (Boyfriend 2) who owned a lawful handgun fired through the door striking an officer in the leg. Upon breaching the door, the police returned fire killing Breonna who was standing in the hallway. Allan is mistaken about the boyfriend’s status but that doesn’t make him despicable. Boyfriend 2 was not in possession of drugs nor a dealer as best we can tell. The whole episode was a tragic mistake in which Breonna died. Her family was compensated and the matter was rightly decided by the Grand Jury given the limitations of their job. There was no cause for rioting or even protesting.

          1. exactly

            grand jury decision solid

            BLM rioters have tried to peacefully protest by shooting two cops last night

            we are entering a new phase of the insurrection, perhaps?

          2. mespo727272, you say Allan is mistaken about the boyfriend’s status but that doesn’t make him despicable.

            Allan makes excuses instead of just saying that he was wrong and confused the two boyfriends. Allan’s the one who first said You are despicable. I was only repeating his own trash talk back to him. As long as Allan continues to trash people, he deserves it.

            1. “Allan makes excuses instead of…”

              You are a liar. Many times I have thanked people for correcting me. Alternatively I have told people where the information came from. It is not unusual in cases such as this where the data isn’t all released for political reasons and what is released leaves to false impressions.

              The issue in this case is not whether one person was misnamed or not. The issue was the legality of the police entrance, why shots were fired and how the woman was killed. Anyone can add to the issues but those were the basic ones that deal with the law.

              You are a despicable person in the way you act and the things you say. Most of the times you say absolutely nothing and that is why you are known as Anonymous the Stupid. Now you can go back to your rat latrine and hide.

              Thank you Mespo for your corrections.

              1. You are a despicable person, Allan, in the way you act and the things you say. Most of the times you say absolutely nothing worthwhile, though your comments may have lots of trash talk and obvious points, and that is why you are known as Allan the Stupid. Now you can go back to your rat latrine and hide.

                1. Anonymous the Stupid, I don’t believe in being nice to scum that support rioting, looting and killing. I also don’t like people that try to make themselves relevant off of other people’s backs. I do not respond nicely to those that are like you but as everyone has seen to others I respond with content.

                  I so happen to believe that there is a point in time that people should put away their good manners and deal with situations in a more aggressive manner. The good politicians have always been reluctant to fight so now we are left with a lot of garbage polluting DC and out of that garbage came Anonymous the Stupid and others like you. Go back to the rat latrine. I for one will no longer tolerate you and I wish others would feel the same.

              2. Mespo simply confirmed Allan’s mistake, after it was pointed out by another anonymous person @ 12:24 pm, in response to Allan’s comment to CTHD. (I doubt that mespo would have called attention to it had it not already been highlighted.)

                Typically, Allan doesn’t own these sorts of errors until he’s backed into a corner.

                But enough about Allan who doesn’t merit more than a few seconds of anyone’s time.

                1. The entire thing is an Anonymous the Stupid event. My error (if an error, I think it was) was quite minor and not that relevant to the important issues. I am sure that in the future when information is released we might find other errors. It was an example of a Stupid person who I believe tried to copy some of my words like he usually does and that lead to a fine correction by Mespo.

                  Your comment added nothing and you lie when you say “Typically, Allan doesn’t own these sorts of errors until he’s backed into a corner.”

                  You are too much of a Coward to face another directly and say that at the time of the occurrence giving time for a correction. That cowardice is obvious because you hide yourself among others making it more difficult to point the finger directly at you. Just because another person has a different opinion doesn’t make one wrong and a different interpretation of the subject matter can lead to two different answers to the same question. Those ideas perhaps require more intellect than you have.

                  However I did deal at length with one Anonymous character about the death of Richardson and that Anonymous character didn’t get his facts straight and his citations were wrong based on the questions involved. HE was shown how some of his own citations proved him wrong and he could never deal with the time line. That Anonymous could not deal directly with facts and could only quote, frequently wrongfully, so I doubt that Anonymous ever recognized how Stupid he was. He probably is out there today trying to get even in one of many fashions that could include the present one.

                  You don’t deserve the time of day except for the fact that you represent the Brainless population out there that is rioting and looting. That is an issue that needs to be corrected. If you are upset at my characterizations, too bad. Learn to live with them.

                  1. I seriously doubt that anyone cares about or is “upset” by Allan’s “characterizations.” He’s a guy who clearly overestimates is own importance and abilities. Too funny.

                    1. Apparently you care. Isn’t that nice. Go back to the rat latrine and do whatever you do there.

                      I have no preconceived notions of what this list means, but you seem to think you are smart. Sorry to inform you but you aren’t.

                    2. @Allan

                      Apparently you care. Isn’t that nice. Go back to the rat latrine and do whatever you do there.

                      I have no preconceived notions of what this list means, but you seem to think you are smart. Sorry to inform you but you aren’t.

                      (Allan just can’t stop talking to himself.)

                    3. Anonymous the Stupid. With all your posting you are quite noticeable. You expressed such fears to me in the past regarding how many posts one makes. I think you should go back to the rat latrine and stay there for awhile where you can feel safe and comfortable.

      2. “Allan says: September 24, 2020 at 12:06 PM

        A drug dealer was there…”

        What ‘”drug dealer?” What is the name of the “drug dealer” to whom you are referring?

        1. Are you trying to make yourself relevant again? After you get the information you desire you will only go back to the rat latrine. The answer will bounce around in your head because there is nothing there.

          1. Allan, that’s not the same Anonymous as me. I’m the one who’s been repeating your trash talk back to you. How many times do I have to point out to you that a bunch of different people post anonymously with this icon?

            1. “Allan, that’s not the same Anonymous as me.”

              Anonymous the Stupid. It doesn’t matter to me. You took an identity of another, or so you say, so you now suffer with the same identity. That you hide among similar cowards and Stupid people is your problem. Go back to the rat latrine and figure out what you wish to do. I don’t waste my time figuring out who is who.

              There is at least one anonymous who when posting content I separate from the group when he is posting such content. For all I know you are he and he is Anonymous the Stupid. Get it through your head you are defined by the people you choose.

              1. Allan likes to attack people. It’s more difficult for him when the person is “Anonymous” and doesn’t have a distinct user name.

                His retorts tells us quite a lot about him.

                1. Yes, my retorts tell you that I don’t put up with the cr-p you provide, Anonymous the Stupid. When I see rats I make sure they don’t pollute my home.

                  If you feel attacked try using what little brain you have to figure out why you are attacked and how you can avoid it.

                  1. Our retorts tell you that we don’t put up with the cr-p you provide, Allan the Stupid. We see rats like you polluting the blog discussion.

                    If you feel attacked try using what little brain you have to figure out why you are attacked and how you can avoid it.

                    1. Each of us gets to determine our own “needs” and are free to meet those on our own without using force or fraud.

                    2. Allan the Stupid, do you need Viagra to keep it up?
                      Maybe trash-talking people acts as Viagra for you.
                      Time for you to return to the rat latrine.

                    3. “do you need Viagra ”

                      How easily you reveal your problems Anonymous the Stupid. You seem to be telling us that out of your two brains this one is the only one you use and it is already beyond its use date. That would explain a good deal of your Stupidity. Now go along and do what you do in rat latrine

                    4. How easily you reveal your problems, Allan the Stupid. You seem to be telling us that your brain is already beyond its use-by date. That would explain a good deal of your Stupidity. Now go along and do what you do in your rat latrine.

  3. I leave this quote to Dr. Jason Johnson, MSNBC contributor and Morgan State journalism professor, and the Liberals on this blog>…

    Marcus Tullius Cicero once said: “A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.”

  4. The Dim voters in the streets are anarchists. They pay heed to no law, no facts and no sense of decency. They are nihilists imbued with Critical Race Theory. In short, they are immune from rational debate. All they know is violence if their desires aren’t satiated. To that extent, they are like beasts. Sometimes you have to deal with beasts on their own terms if they leave you no choice — like defunding the police.

    1. Mespo, most of the anarchists on the street are little different than those of the rat latrine that live on this blog. They are cowardly unless in a pack. Their leaders frequently are comfortably hidden close by and the ones that support them are hidden in absolute comfort.

        1. Bug, are you looking for membership in the latrine club? With all the names you go and have gone by you probably don’t need to.

        2. “United States of Bug says:September 24, 2020 at 12:20 PM
          Allan seems to have truly resonated with the expression ‘rat latrine’. Shocker.”

          Yep, a real ‘shocker.’ lol

    2. At home we have discussed that if while dining at a restaurant or otherwise in public, should anyone approach us and threaten us with death, serious bodily harm, robbery or any perception of injury to our person, we will use deadly force without hestitation. We believe it is time to shoot to kill any and all persons who cause us to be fearful for our lives.

      We have watched with horror the many instances where these BLM anarchists, many dressed in all black with face coverings, endanger peoples lives while dining, and we refuse to pretend it is OK. It is not OK. Democrats, particularly Biden and Harris, have escalated the wars on Americans and police which Obama started, and as a result, every single one of us is fearful. Molotov cocktails, burning of homes, beating of women especially the elderly, surrounding people with sticks waving, threatening chants and kicking, stomping, throwing to the ground, are all elements of endangering lives

      Approach innocent patrons at an establishment in this culture of fear, and we will respond with deadly force. This includes anyone holding an item that we might perceive as a weapon (e.g. cell phone camera, umbrella, etc).

      #standyourground

  5. Personally, I think the attorney’s actions/statements violate the Code of Professional Responsibility

    CANON 1 – A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW OF AND LEGAL PROCESSES.

    ***

    Rule 1.02 – A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal system.

      1. Is this another of your empty questions to prove your relevance?

        The modus operandi appears to be meaningless questions asking for proof of something or a similar question and then running away. It doesn’t make one look smart. It makes the person asking the questions look dumb.

        I was yesterday asked for proof and I provided a link that linked to hundreds of documents if not thousands. Did you acknowledge the information was received? No. Did you utilize it? No. Did it change anything? No.

        Your attempt at relevance hinders good discussion on this blog.

        1. Are you sure that the Anonymous commenter who responded to whig98 at 12:51 PM is the same person you responded to yesterday? Lots of people use the Anonymous option to post comments on this blog. (For the record, I’m a different person. I didn’t post the 12:51 PM comment responding to whig98.)

          1. “(For the record, I’m a different person. I didn’t post the 12:51 PM comment responding to whig98.)”

            Nor did I.

            Allan has a problem with people posting anonymously.

            It’s pretty clear that Allan has issues…

            1. “It’s pretty clear that Allan has issues…”

              No, it’s pretty clear you are Stupid and if the other Anonymous wasn’t scum she wouldn’t be partaking in the rat swarm.

            2. Since you make an effort to comment on which “Anonymous” comments are NOT yours, why don’t you choose a moniker and use it? Sheesh.

          2. It doesn’t make a difference. You and he chose the same generic label. It’s not my job to separate the two of you or any of you from the rat latrine. You say you aren’t the same person but why should I believe you? The same identity lied a couple of posts back. You guys pretend to be different people and sometimes you are. So what?

            If you don’t wish to be associated with scum protect your identity. It’s easy. One alias and one icon.

            1. Not your blog (though you hang out here all the time) and clearly not your call, Allan. Get a life… Yeah, yeah…, now we’ll hear all about the wonderful life you’ve dreamed up for yourself.

              1. Anonymous the Stupid, it’s a third person open blog and you are Stupid reliant on anonymity where you hide yourself in a crowd of others. That makes you feel bigger and stronger but it actually shows you to be weak and ineffectual.

  6. Crump went all Schiff on us by laying out a ridiculously false hypothetical. He should have his license suspended. In the meantime, while the BLM/Antifa radicals continue to foment chaos around the country, the body count continues to climb in Chicago with 558, mostly black men, women and children murdered. With 3 months left in the year, they’ve already exceeded the totals of 2019 by 158.

  7. Still, a huge stretch for the only charge to be related to firing wildly into the neighbors apartment while a woman at sleep in her bed getting shot six times doesn’t warrant charges, no? How about charges for firing wildly into Taylor’s house. Seems the whole situation revolves around plainclothes police not identifying themselves properly and then firing back when someone fired at them. Given those circumstances, further charges seem indeed warranted, especially since this is not exactly an uncommon circumstance with police vs. black citizenry.

  8. Don’t shoot through the door when the package delivery person arrives

    The largest employer of Louisville, Ky is UPS

    10,000 assault weapons parts seized in Louisville’s UPS Worldport

    More than 10,000 assault weapons parts worth over $129,000 were intercepted in UPS’s Worldport Express Consignment Operations hub in Louisville, Kentucky in late May 2020, Customs and Border Protection officials recently announced.

    “The importing of any type of munitions is regulated by the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives],” said Louisville Port Director Thomas Mahn in a statement released Friday. “This smuggler was knowingly trying to avoid detection, however, our officers remain vigilant, ensuring our community is safe.”

  9. I wonder why anyone in today’s world would want to be a policeman. One policeman was shot by a criminal in a lawful police action. “The boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, reportedly shot first and hit one of the officers who returned fire with his partner.” Yet there was rioting. This is what the leftists on this blog support, rioting, mayhem, burning and looting hoping that will lead to Biden winning the election.

    We need people to group together and start protecting their own property. Yes, with shotguns if necessary. Most of the left are cowardly like our anonymous rat latrine that swarm on the blog. They will run when faced with any opposition. But the left wishes to ban guns and treats citizens protecting their lives and property as the criminals.

    Democrats in all positions must be voted out.

      1. Anonymous the Stupid, go find your friends. You need help. Alternatively respond to yourself several times so you think you are bigger.

  10. For six months the media and Crump bombarded us with the term “no knock warrant”, to the extent that Sen Rand Paul, R-Ky, had Breona’s law put before the Senate against no knock warrants. This false narrative was dispelled by the Kentucky attorney general yesterday. Crump is a disgrace to the legal profession.

  11. The $12 million civil settlement indicates that something is wrong with the way we allow ourselves to be policed. It is police practices that we need to change. Busting in doors in the middle of the night when people are sleeping is not a civilized way to protect the public, which should be the primary aim of the police.

    1. Not all jurisdictions have ‘no-knock’ warrants, but this one does, although the reports about whether it was properly executed differ. The Supreme Court has heard a number of cases related to no-knock warrants, which are well worth reading.

        1. “Correcting the misinformation about Breonna Taylor”

          by Radley Balko

          “So here are some correctives for the misinformation I’ve seen online:”

          https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/24/correcting-misinformation-about-breonna-taylor/

          “The police knocked and announced themselves, and a witness heard them.”

          In what was probably the most frustrating part of Cameron’s press event, he cited a single witness who claimed to have heard the officers identify themselves as police. I spoke with Taylor’s lawyers in June, who at that time had interviewed 11 of her neighbors. Many lived in the same apartment building as Taylor. According to the lawyers, no neighbor heard an announcement. The New York Times interviewed 12 neighbors. They found one — just one — who heard an announcement. And he only heard one announcement. He also told the paper that with all the commotion, it’s entirely possible that Walker and Taylor didn’t hear that announcement. Cameron neglected to mention any of this.

          Moreover, in a CNN interview Wednesday night, Walker’s attorney, Steven Romines, said the witness to whom Cameron was referring initially said he did not hear the police announce themselves. And he repeated that assertion in a second interview. It was only after his third interview that he finally said he heard an announcement. That’s critical context that Cameron neglected to mention.

          “Even Kenneth Walker has admitted that the police pounded on the door for 30 to 45 seconds. Therefore, by definition, this was not a ’no-knock’ raid.”

          With a few exceptions, when conducting a raid, government agents must knock and announce their presence and purpose, and give anyone inside the opportunity to let the officers in peacefully — thus avoiding violence to their person and destruction of their property. If the police simply pounded on the door for 45 seconds and never appropriately announced themselves, that’s even worse than not knocking at all. It likely made Walker even more fearful that the people outside the door were there to do harm to him and Taylor.

          “If the police say they announced themselves, and one neighbor heard it, then they probably did. So what if the other neighbors didn’t hear it? They were probably asleep.”

          The entire purpose of the knock-and-announce requirement is to provide ample notice to the people inside the home the police are trying to enter. If the police didn’t yell loudly and clearly who they were — loud enough for the people inside to hear — the knock-and-announce portion is rendered meaningless, and the entire action becomes no different than a no-knock raid. As the Times reported, the officers on this raid were trained by a man who, oddly enough, is now president of the Louisville city council. “During his 19-year career as a police officer, he had instructed recruits at the local training academy about ‘dynamic entry.‘ Especially when executing a warrant at night,” he told the paper, “he told them to yell ‘police’ at the top of their lungs, specifically so that occupants would not mistake them for an intruder.” That clearly did not happen here.

          -Radley Balko

    2. blogfen — While there are certainly reasonable changes to be made to policing, I interpreted the $12m as Louisville attempting to buy absolution from Rev. Al and other riot-inducing, race-baiting scum. Hopefully, it was just enough to avert a major CHAZ-style infection.

      Oh yeah, and maybe a good faith effort to avoid further civil litigation from Ms. Taylor’s family. But mostly to keep Big Al from landing at SDF with his Bishops of Unrest(tm) in tow.

  12. They do not want justice. They want revenge. Revenge for being black. They have been so brainwashed that they see racism in everything, and under their BLM leaders, the remedy is revolution. It will not end well for them. In the meantime, it will continue to be a toxic dumpster fire flamed by the media,

  13. I kinda feel sorry for Brionna Taylor, but she did have some hand in her own demise, just the same way a sex-worker winds up in a shallow grave after she left in a van with a serial-killer john is responsible in part. Think Green River here. She was the one who thought it spiffy (or spliffy???) to have sex with drug dealer, with a criminal record, Jamarcus Glover.

    That stupid decision came back to bite her in the rear end. I also think it suspect that her current bed-partner was close enough to a gun to fire at the police. Why? Was he expecting possible trouble from Jamarcus or his friends or enemies? I think there is a lot here we are not being told.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

      1. Kinda. Maybe. I mean what was she doing having a sexual relationship with a thuggish drug dealer, with a criminal record? How do you pile up in the sack with somebody like that, and let them run drugs out of your apartment? Then come to find out, she was having sex off and on for years with her last boyfriend, Kenneth Walker. Presumably while she was also doing Jamarcus Glover.

        The girl was not living her life right, and she invited danger to her doorstep. I guess when it comes to comparative negligence, I would rate her part at 51%. When you hang around with thugs and drug dealers you put yourself at risk. Imagine this scenario. Bobby Sue, a white chick, has a thing for bad boys, and she starts a relationship with an inmate in state prison. When he gets out, he moves in with her and ends up killing her in a meth rage. Is Bobby Sue a victim? If I blame Bobby Sue, in part, for her own demise, am I wrong???

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. I mean what was she doing having a sexual relationship with a thuggish drug dealer, with a criminal record? How do you pile up in the sack with somebody like that, and let them run drugs out of your apartment? Then come to find out, she was having sex off and on for years with her last boyfriend, Kenneth Walker. Presumably while she was also doing Jamarcus Glover.

          The criminal population has a constituency among women. Seen that up close and personal.

          I doubt her affection for rough trade is of any significance in law.

          Not sure what to make of any of this.

      1. I did find it a fascinating story. How those idiot hookers kept hopping in vehicles even after other hookers started coming up missing. Talk about some stupid chicks. Whew! I would not have wasted millions of dollars on that investigation.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. 1. That’s how they earn their living, such as it is.

          2. A lot of them are drug addicts.

          Stupid, yes, but the stupidity is embedded.

      2. Plus, you might enjoy, LustMord by Maria Tatar.

        Here is a synopsis:
        ————–
        Synopsis:

        In a book that confronts our society’s obsession with sexual violence, Maria Tatar seeks the meaning behind one of the most disturbing images of twentieth-century Western culture: the violated female corpse. This image is so prevalent in painting, literature, film, and, most recently, in mass media, that we rarely question what is at stake in its representation. Tatar, however, challenges us to consider what is taking place–both artistically and socially–in the construction and circulation of scenes depicting sexual murder. In examining images of sexual murder (Lustmord), she produces a riveting study of how art and murder have intersected in the sexual politics of culture from Weimar Germany to the present.

        Tatar focuses attention on the politically turbulent Weimar Republic, often viewed as the birthplace of a transgressive avant-garde modernism, where representations of female sexual mutilation abound. Here a revealing episode in the gender politics of cultural production unfolds as male artists and writers, working in a society consumed by fear of outside threats, envision women as enemies that can be contained and mastered through transcendent artistic expression. Not only does Tatar show that male artists openly identified with real-life sexual murderers–George Grosz posed as Jack the Ripper in a photograph where his model and future wife was the target of his knife–but she also reveals the ways in which victims were disavowed and erased.

        Tatar first analyzes actual cases of sexual murder that aroused wide public interest in Weimar Germany. She then considers how the representation of murdered women in visual and literary works functions as a strategy for managing social and sexual anxieties, and shows how violence against women can be linked to the war trauma, to urban pathologies, and to the politics of cultural production and biological reproduction.

        In exploring the complex relationship between victim and agent in cases of sexual murder, Tatar explains how the roles came to be destabilized and reversed, turning the perpetrator of criminal deeds into a defenseless victim of seductive evil. Throughout the West today, the creation of similar ideological constructions still occurs in societies that have only recently begun to validate the voices of its victims. Maria Tatar’s book opens up an important discussion for readers seeking to understand the forces behind sexual violence and its portrayal in the cultural media throughout this century.

        From the Inside Flap:

        “Taking the representation of sexually motivated murder (Lustmord) as a site where questions of gender, social order, and culture converge, Maria Tatar demonstrates the symptomatic social and cultural importance of sex crimes in pre-Hitler Germany. She successfully weaves historical facts (the murders that happened) and their artistic representations into a fascinating new story that emphasizes the dark and suppressed side of Weimar culture. This story has amazingly far-reaching consequences not only for legal and sociological discussions, but also for considerations of gender relations, social control, modernity, and urban pathology in general.”–Anton Kaes, University of California, Berkeley

        “Maria Tatar’s book on the culture of serial murder in Weimar Germany breaks new ground in interdisciplinary studies. An important book for all who are interested in the nightside of Weimar. A must book for art historians and literary and cultural historians.”–Sander Gilman, University of Chicago

        “Maria Tatar has written a compelling book about Weimar’s obsessions: sexual psychopaths, serial murder, homosocial desire, and violence toward women. We have come to understand the crisis of male identities after the lost war as a breeding ground for German fascism, but Lustmord raises fascinating new questions about the relationship between the trauma of warfare and a sexualized imaginary of violence and mutilation that haunted Weimar art, literature, and film. A major contribution to cultural studies.”–Andreas Huyssen, Columbia University

        “Maria Tatar offers a compelling illumination of Weimar culture’s fascination with sexual murder, as this produced visual and narrative representations that turn the criminal perpetrator into a cultural hero while the victim–usually feminine–is eclipsed. With an unflinching eye she astutely negotiates the duplicity of aversion and attraction that representations of violence elicit. Her stunning analysis keeps returning to the fluid boundaries between real-life murderers and their cultural renditions, forcing the reader continually to address his or her own complicity with fantasies of violence.”–Elisabeth Bronfen, University of Zurich

        https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=30512866503&cm_sp=SEARCHREC-_-WIDGET-L-_-BDP-R&searchurl=sortby%3D17%26tn%3Dlustmord
        ————-
        I have a copy laying around somewhere. If you like it, you should also get both volumes of Male Fantasies, Klaus Theweleit, I think his name is.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  14. It appears Breonna was muling drugs, hence the warrant for her. Why the bf is not charged with felony murder is beyond me.

    1. I guess the $12 million dollar payday wasn’t enough to satisfy the thugs!
      💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰
      In which Crump got his cut $1 mil I do believe
      💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰💰

      1. Wrong place, wrong time for a woman who should stay away from gun wielding drug dealers. There is evidence she took part in the drug deals.

        This is where your Stupidity is unrevealed. Stupid comment based on ignorance.

  15. The left wants to take us to “mob rule,” and public executions will be next. These are things we rid ourselves of, over many years and it was the old left who opposed these things as “savage” and “brutal,” and unconstitutional. Now, the new Marxist dominated left wants to do things that represent third world justice, in order to destroy the rule of law.

    While I am not happy about the fact that Ms. Taylor was killed, it was not “racism” by the police, but rather a terrible mistake. The AG of Kentucky and the Grand Jury, made their decisions based upon the facts and circumstances at the time the incident occurred. Trying to make this into first degree murder, is nothing but using a terrible mistake, into a crime in an effort to destroy our system of Justice.

    To take the statement of a “journalist” professor, as if it were a legally accurate statement, while ignoring and hurling racist insults at an AG who is legally and morally correct, shows how far the media and the Marxist left will go, to destroy our country.

    If one wanted to destroy America, the first thing to destroy is its system of Justice. After that, nothing will be safe or secure, and we will become just another Venezuela.

  16. The media in this country truly is the ‘enemy of the people’. 99% of the hatred in this country is caused by the media. They’re are disgusting, lying, far left activists who edit videos or don’t show the full video all in the name of hiding the the truth so it fits their disgusting narrative. (Divide Divide Divide). They have put a mark on the back of every police officer in this country. Who the hell would want to become a police officer anymore? if this election were just Trump vs Biden then Trump would win in a landslide, but it’s not, This election is about Trump versus the most corrupt media we’ve ever had in our history!

  17. What merits an indictment may turn on granular features of the fact set and the law. So, why’s KOS asking the opinion of a J-school instructor at a latrine like Morgan State?

      1. weak AI has been eating away at lawyer employment for decades through “increased productivty”

        it gets stronger but it may not replace lawyers just may make the ones who keep their jobs more productive.

        or so they tell us. I know a few retired radiologists who say nope it just replaces us alright

        we gonna see how that turns out soon enough, 5 years progress will make the last 20 look trifling by comparson

Leave a Reply