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. In other court news, “The president’s niece Mary Trump sued her commander-in-chief uncle and his siblings, accusing them in a blistering complaint Thursday morning of fraudulently cheating her out of her inheritance. ‘For Donald J. Trump, his sister Maryanne, and their late brother Robert, fraud was not just the family business — it was a way of life,’ the 52-page complaint states. …
    “‘My father died when I was still a teenager, and my uncles Donald and Robert and aunt Maryanne were supposed to be protecting me as my trustees and fiduciaries’” Mary Trump said in a statement. ‘Recently, I learned that rather than protecting me, they instead betrayed me by working together in secret to steal from me, by telling lie after lie about the value of what I had inherited, and by conning me into giving everything away for a fraction of its true value. I am bringing this case to hold them accountable and to recover what is rightfully mine.’
    “Mary Trump says she learned about her relatives’ alleged misconduct through a Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times investigation accusing the president of making his fortune through complicated tax schemes. … Trump’s attorney Alan Futerfas did not respond to an email requesting comment. …”

    I wonder what the outcome will be.

    1. If the allegations MS. Trump is making can be proven – then she is entitled to be made whole and probably also to damages.

      But Ms. Trump’s statements have some obvious problems. The settlement of estates is done under the supervision of courts, not “in secret”. whatever the fiduciaries might decide “in secret” they must persuade the courts to accept.

      I have been in an actual estate conflict, and actually defrauded by executors, attorney’s and it can not be done without the blessing of a judge.

      Further there are even higher standards with respect to the treatment of beneficiaries who are minor’s.

      I know that you like to beleive that any allegation made against anyone you dislike must be true – because you dislike them.

      But allegations are not facts until they are proven.

      1. This is the aunt she surreptitiously recorded, logging 15 hours worth of tapes.

        You’ll notice her brother is not a plaintiff in this suit.

    2. Harris-Biden are going to win.

      Harris-Biden are way ahead in all the polls.

      Why the dread and hysteria; the abject panic?

    3. I surely do hope President Donald J. Trump doesn’t suspend Habeas Corpus like ol’ “Crazy Abe” Lincoln.

      You aberrant antagonists might have to reconsider your perfidious and frivolous conjurings.

  2. Christ, I miss the days when we had lockdowns, Chinese virus breathing down our backs and prognostications that the world was going to end any.day.now.

    Where are those killer bees we were promised back in the 1980s?

    1. JJ:
      “Where are those killer bees we were promised back in the 1980s?“
      With Swine Flu, New Ice Age, the Mayan Calendar disaster, Year 2000 disaster, Climate Change Armageddon and Hale Bopp Annihilation — all in the imagination of our demented Leftist scum.

        1. I grasped the idiocy of all this on my own in college decades ago.

          I was studying architecture and the rage at the time was sustainable buildings – which as a choice I support even today.

          But this was int he midst of the oil crisis and we were told to design entirely self sufficient homes in cities like Philadelphia and Atlanta.

          And I quickly realised tha if we ran out of oil in 1984 as predicted, that there was no way we would transform even a tiny percent of cities like atlanta to sustainable living. That in addition to hydroponic gardens and dry toilets and passive solar heating, that my buildings would need machine gun turrets to protect their owners from those who did not “wisely” choose to convert to self sustainable living eariler.

          I determined that I could not kill dozens of people to protect my home from the starving hordes who did not foresee the apocalypse.

          That was my first and most important recognition of the fact that the left is completely insane.

          And a few years later not only had we not run out of oil but we had more than ever.

          No mathusian prediction since …. Malthus has ever come true.
          There are fundimental reasons this is true.

          Here is an excellent resource explaining with massive amounts of data why that is so.

  3. Excuse me.

    Abraham Lincoln would like to say a few words.

    Thank you.


    Go ahead, Abe.

    Lincoln’s Support for Resettlement

    Lincoln’s ideological mentor was Henry Clay, the eminent American scholar, diplomat, and statesman. Because of his skill in the US Senate and House of Representatives, Clay won national acclaim as the “Great Compromiser” and the “Great Pacificator.” A slave owner who had humane regard for Blacks, he was prominent in the campaign to resettle free Blacks outside of the United States, and served as president of the American Colonization Society. Lincoln joined Clay’s embryonic Whig party during the 1830s. In an address given in 1858, Lincoln described Clay as “my beau ideal of a statesman, the man for whom I fought all of my humble life.”14

    The depth of Lincoln’s devotion to Clay and his ideals was expressed in a moving eulogy delivered in July 1852 in Springfield, Illinois. After praising Clay’s lifelong devotion to the cause of Black resettlement, Lincoln quoted approvingly from a speech given by Clay in 1827: “There is a moral fitness in the idea of returning to Africa her children,” adding that if Africa offered no refuge, Blacks could be sent to another tropical land. Lincoln concluded:15

    If as the friends of colonization hope, the present and coming generations of our countrymen shall by any means succeed in freeing our land from the dangerous presence of slavery, and, at the same time, in restoring a captive people to their long-lost fatherland, with bright prospects for the future, and this too, so gradually, that neither races nor individuals shall have suffered by the change, it will indeed be a glorious consummation.

    In January 1855, Lincoln addressed a meeting of the Illinois branch of the Colonization Society. The surviving outline of his speech suggests that it consisted largely of a well-informed and sympathetic account of the history of the resettlement campaign.16

    In supporting “colonization” of the Blacks, a plan that might be regarded as a “final solution” to the nation’s race question, Lincoln was upholding the views of some of America’s most respected figures.

    – Robert Morgan

    1. “There is a moral fitness in the idea of returning to Africa her children,” adding that if Africa offered no refuge, Blacks could be sent to another tropical land. Lincoln concluded.’

      It’s hard to differentiate between outright racism and this racism that is shrouded in ‘moral fitness’. Which one is more disgusting? What Lincoln and Clay are saying is that the solution to the crimes and sins of having stolen millions of people out of their homes and enslaving them after slaughtering a substantial number en route, then treating them like animals, breading them, for centuries as they built the fortunes with their blood, sweat, and tears, is to simply get rid of them. That way the monstrous sins of White Americans won’t be there to torture. Somehow Lincoln and Clay come off here worse than Jefferson Davis and his mob.

      1. “You, Sir, best watch your tenor while addressing the esteemed President Abraham Lincoln; he who suspended Habeas Corpus, depriving you of your legal rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities – pretty much everything!”

        “Many a man has been right when contesting President Lincoln; dead right.”

        – Moderator

      2. So you’re saying no blacks in Africa ever rounded up their neighbors, family, and friends and sold them into slavery? You’re saying whites were never slaves?

        1. Slavery has existed everywhere in the world. And it continues to exist today.

          The western world eliminated slavery before any others. Though the US was late withing the anglosphere, it was still ahead of 90% of the world.

  4. The formula is that activists and the media provide only a few facts, or even outright misinformation, and the dutiful mob gets whipped up into a frenzy. People start repeating that the cops are all racist, that this woman was shot in her own home while just strolling in the hallway, under a no knock warrant for some other person. Breonna has been set up as a nice, law abiding person who worked as an EMT, just minding her own business.

    But those aren’t the facts.

    The officers did knock. (Therefore the Breonna Taylor law banning no-knock warrants makes no sense.) She was being investigated for having a dead body, homicide victim, in her rental car. She was also investigated for running drugs for Jamarcus Glover.
    Breonna Taylor was included in the warrant, as well as her house and vehicle. She was allegedly involved in criminal activity.
    Glover was there, and opened fire on the officers, with her standing next to him.
    Officers returned fire. Breonna, was not asleep.

    Her death is the fault of Jamarcus Glover, who opened fire on the cops right near her. I thought that if you committed a crime, and someone died, you could be charged with a homicide, even if you did not kill her yourself. Why wasn’t Glover charged with her killing?

    When are the media, activists, and politicians going to be held accountable for inciting riots, violence, and murder based on total lies? Are they ever going to be held responsible???

    What’s the moral of the story? Don’t commit crimes. Don’t shoot at cops. Don’t hang out with dudes who shoot at cops.

    Yet the family of Breonna Taylor, who was hurriedly flushing her own life down the toilet, gets millions of dollars?


    This is why at times a no knock is warranted. If you are going to a law abiding citizen or low level offender’s house, you knock and announce yourself, so they will not be started. But when you plant to arrest an individual that has a high likelihood of shooting cops, then you do not want to give him a warning. He would use that time to arm himself and find cover. Those are the people the no knocks were designed for.

    Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend was warned by the officers’ knock, got a gun, and fired at them.

    Every time you turn on the news, and see a city burning, cops ambushed, riots, looting, remember, it is based on a lie. It is based on a system that distributes lies, to people who jump to conclusions and encourages violence.

    Are people ever going to wait for an investigation? Ever? Will the masses learn how to make their way through an argument, that a police shooting is not automatically racist?

    1. According to Karen: “Glover was there, and opened fire on the officers, with her standing next to him.”

      No, he wasn’t.


      “Jamarcus Glover: Taylor’s ex-boyfriend, a convicted drug dealer. His name was on the warrant that led officers to Taylor’s apartment. Glover was taken into custody during a raid at another location just a short time before the Taylor raid.”

      Also, the surveillance prior to the raid was apparently botched.

      1. There are numerous things that were done wrong in this instance.

        That is the basis for the successful Wrongful Death tort.

        But that does not change whether the decision of the Grand Jury is correct.

        As best as I can tell this was one of about half a dozen warrants to be served simultaneously to bring done an entire drug enterprise.

        It appears that you are correct that the normal processes for a no knock warrant were not followed for this location.

        There is also confusion because Taylor’s apartment warrant was a no knock warrant. But the police absolutely knocked first, and there is some evidence that they announced prior to breaking down the door.

        Regardless proper prior surveilance would not have changed anything. Breonna was anticipated to be in the apartment at the time of the search.

        The officers in question were serving a warrant that THEY had every reason to beleive was legitimate. They were doing so at the correct address. They were fired on and one of them was hit, and they fired back.

        Issues regarding the warrant itself are the mistakes of others.

        1. “Regardless proper prior surveilance [sic] would not have changed anything. Breonna was anticipated to be in the apartment at the time of the search.”‘

          The cops conducting the raid would have known that there were two people — not just one — in the apartment. They would have also known that one of them was male.

          There were other ways that this whole mess could have been handled.

          1. “The cops conducting the raid would have known that there were two people — not just one — in the apartment. They would have also known that one of them was male.

            There were other ways that this whole mess could have been handled.”

            So ?

            Nearly any task on the planet might be done better with more preparation. ‘

            But in the end it is what we have accomplished that matters, preparation is a tool, it is not the measure of success.

            What difference would it have made had the officers known another person was in the apartment ?

            It was already their assumption that Glover was going to be found at one of the half dozen places they searched that not – one of the possibilities being Breonna’s apartment. ‘

            There is evidence that this particular warrant was thinly based, especially for a no-knock warrant. And that the police administration and the courts reviewed it cursorily. At the same time there is also evidence that had the job been done properly there was ample basis for the warrant.

            I am libertarian I want no-knock warrants banned or severely constrained.

            But that has absolutely nothing to do with whether the conduct of these 3 officers was criminal.

            The US supreme court has said no-knock warrants are constitutional. I disagree, but my disagreement does not change the fact that this is the law of the land and these officers acted within it.

            If you wish to argue the law should be changed – I am with you.

            But we do not jail two police officers who followed the law, because we do not like the law.

            1. “So ?”

              Anonymous’s problem is that she continuously voices logic and opinion by copying a snippet of information and posting it. I guess that makes her feel intelligent.

              She never or seldom combines that snippet with a point or even thinks about the other side of the argument because she has either picked the snippet up as a talking point or she lacks understanding of what she is posting. She refuses to make a direct point or explore the logic. Therefore, she feels she cannot be criticized and if she is she can deflect the criticism to the author of the snippet. That means she never learns from her mistakes creating for her a low level intellect.

  5. First, Taylor was not “an innocent bystander.” The warrant was against her. There was evidence that she had been keeping her former boyfriend’s drug money. She, not her boyfriend, was named on the warrant. A simultaneous warrant was being executed against her former boyfriend. As for Ben Crump, he’s got his $4 million. That’s all he’s after. He’s just trying to justify it to the family by shooting off his mouth.

    1. Funny I mentioned that name a few posts back and it went unnoticed. There some very dark clouds on the future of the nation. God help us.

    2. Joshua had a very effective strategy. It was definitive and conclusive. It did not prevaricate or equivocate.

      “Blaming God for ‘All-Living-Things’ Massacre in Jericho Set Hair Raising Precedent” (Excerpted)

      So I began to wonder about those worshipers and children shaking tambourines and singing “Joshua ‘Fit the Battle of Jericho!” It is hard to imagine those singing so joyously “and the wall(s) come a’ tumblen’ down,” know what happened after the wall was down (shudder), as described in chapter six of the Book of Joshua 6:20-21
      “ … and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city,
      every man straight before him, and they took the city.
      6:21 And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.”

      The Book of Joshua continues with:
      “11:11. They struck every person who was in it with the edge of the sword, utterly destroying them; there was no one left who breathed… 12 Joshua captured all the cities of these kings, and all their kings, and he struck them with the edge of the sword, and utterly destroyed them; just as Moses the servant of the Lord had commanded. 14 … They left no one who breathed. 15 Just as the Lord had commanded Moses his servant, so Moses commanded Joshua, and so Joshua did;” [from the New Standard American Bible]

      – Brattleboro

      “It’s time to stop talkin’ and start chalkin’.”

      – Chick Hearn

  6. Yet another black person killed since she/he did something all good parents warn their children against doing:
    don’t associate with drugs, drug addicts, drug dealers and by all means, when the police tell you to do something, do it

    Blacks seem to think that when they have a rap sheet as long as their bling bling hanging from their booty, and when they carry drugs, weapons and/or violate probatation, that it is incumbent upon them to fight the police

    Bang bang, you’re dead. Next!

    1. Not sure about ‘all good parents’. Lt. Joe Kenda, who was at one time chief of the homicide bureau of the Colorado Springs Police Department, offered two rules to radically reduce your risk of being the victim of a homicide:

      1. Stay out of bars at closing time. Nothing good happens after midnight.

      2. Do not have anything to do with people who use, sell, transport, distribute, manufacture, or import street drugs.

      1. In other words, exercise some basic common sense, particularly about who you hop in the sack with.

        And exactly how “nice was Ms. Taylor??? Wasn’t she an EMT??? How many dead people and overdose patients did she tote to the ER? She saw first hand what drugs do to people and she was shacking up with a ex-con drug dealer???

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

  7. Why wasn’t Taylor’s boyfriend charged with felony murder? He clearly committed a felony by firing upon the police officers. The boyfriend’s felonious armed assault on the police officers was a direct and proximate cause of their return fire, and hence, of Taylor’s death. Open and shut case of felony murder.

    1. shoot the mother f****** and spare future idiotic black women from befriending trouble. it’s just that simple.
      nothing good will come from befriending, never mind shacking up with, drug dealers. Anyone who thinks otherwise does so as the risk of losing their life.

        1. “That’s something good”

          It’s bad that Brionna was killed and I hope money helps make things better but is it good for society?

          It’s a little much and one has to be Stupid not to recognize the fiduciary duty the city has to the taxpayer.

          1. agreed. I find it disgusting. her life was not worth $12 million tax payer dollars of which much went to a scumbag lawyer, same with freddie gray, same with george floyd, same with brown, same with the rest of the thugs who got shot, got gold-plated caskets, funerals fit for a king, and now their families and scummy lawyers are wealthy as sh*t. it all pisses me off in just the opposite way the libtard narrative says we supposed to think. that’s my opinion.

            1. Does your agreement mean we should throw a party? A disagreement wouldn’t be very smart. Are you trying to separate yourself from the other Anonymous personas? How do I know who you are and whether or not you are a part of the rat latrine?

            2. As best as I can tell there are two independent matters.

              The first is the behaviour of the officers serving the warrant.

              In that case the Grand Jury appears ot have reached the proper results.

              The other issue which involves the $12m Settlement relates to other misconduct by the city involving the issuance of the warrant itself and misconduct by higher ups in the police, and city that contributed to this.

              It is possible for BOTH a justified wrongful death award AND the Grand Jury to also be justified.

          2. We are slowly finding out more facts.

            There are some complexities because some of the more damaging facts reqarding Taylor’s own responsibility were probably not known by law enforcement at the time of the raid.

            There are many strong indications that there was misconduct by law enforcement generally – in the broad sense – the city, the judges, courts, police brass and supervisors.

            There are numerous legal experts noting this warrant never should have been granted based on the thin information in the warrant.

            That we have a situation much like the Carter Page FISA warrant where there just was not enough of a basis for this particular warrant.

            But that is a failure of the courts and the police supervisors, NOT the officers that served the warrant.

            IT has been established that these officers had nothing to do with getting this warrant.

            As I understand it this particular warrant was part of about 1/2 dozen warrants that were being effected simultaneously targeting a large drug related criminal conspiracy – that the police were seeking to take down an entire operation all at once and that all the warrants were being served deliberately simultaneously.

            There appears to be plenty of evidence of that large drug conspiracy.
            There also appears to be evidence that Breona Taylor herself was in some ways an active part in that operation.
            But some – possibly all of the evidence against taylor was developed AFTER her death.

            Most of the knowledgeable legal experts I am following are indicating that the grand jury decision was correct.
            The two officers that were “exhonerated” acted in self defense. The third officer who was indicted acted recklessly but was not responsible for anyone’s death.

            I have heard some comentary by some policing experts that the 3 cops serving the warrant violated policy – ofddly in ways that appeals to the left, and made a bad outcome more likely – though there is confusion here.

            Purportedly this was a no knock warrant. BUT the officers decided to knock and probably announce before breaking the door down.

            No Knock warrants are supposed to receive the most scrutiny. For very good reason. And probably this warrant did not receive that scrutiny.

            But if the condictions for a no knock warrant are met – the police should NOT knock, but break the door down immediately – specifically to avoid situations like this.

            As best as I can tell the “FACTS” are that the police knocked – brielfy. That the MAY or MAY NOT have announced themselves.
            That it is likely that those in the apartment were roused by the knocking but were not aware that it was the police when the door was broken down. That had the police not knocked that they would have entered the apartment more quickly and NOT faced Breona’s boyfriend shooting at them.

            1. “We are slowly finding out more facts.”

              Thanks John, that is why I don’t like to draw sudden conclusions that people like CTDHD like to draw. We need all the facts. The G. Floyd fiasco should have taught us that. Some are so political they would jail people just to get political points.

              1. Every person in the country should be in agreement that we want better policing.

                That we want fewer mistakes,
                That we want less arbitrary and capriciousness.

                Anyone trying to defend all police conduct as perfect is full of $h!t.

                At the same time we should not be deluded into change at all costs.

                We have problems with our healthcare system – PPACA was NOT as great a disaster as preducted – likely because things were so bad to start. But it was no success either. Weighing the pluses and minuses PPACA was a failure.

                We have many many problems with policing.
                I would absolutely start with eliminating Qualified Immunity. It is a relatively modern invention of the judiciary.
                It is not part of the constitution. and eliminating it alone would probably result in many other issues self correcting.

                REGARDLESS, we should still proceed carefully with police reforms.

                The left completely ignores the fact that whatever the many problems with policing today – we live in the least racist moment in the least racist country in history, and that modern policing has been a tremendous success story – that by every measure – both in terms of crime reduction and misconduct policing has improved greatly in my lifetime.

                We should NOT be looking to make radical changes with unpredictable or worse predictably bad effects.
                We should be proceeding carefully.

  8. Could the officers see in the dark that Taylor was black? I think not. If she were white, would the grand-jury decision have caused protests/riots? I think not. This is a tragedy but it’s being used by Marxist BLMs and black/white racists to foment discontent and violence.

  9. While I am not completely knowledgable regarding the details of the administering of the ‘raid’, it seems that at the officers that fired the rounds that killed Breanna Taylor were put into a situation where it became unavoidable. The officer that fired into adjacent apartments should be charged and punished if only to set an example and make a statement that his level of training and competence is woefully short of what is required. The major ingredient here, that escapes a serious and necessary scrutiny, is the origin of the raid. Apparently the person sought in the warrant no longer lived there. Yet the police attacked in a manner that instigated the tragedy, a manner totally inappropriate for the searching of a residence: the middle of the night, those that would be home would most likely be sleeping, bashing down the door, in America where one would more expect gunfire in return to a middle of the night attack, etc. It would appear that the methods used by this police force should undeniably be scrutinized and those that performed in such a slipshod manner be removed. The entire structure of this facet of policing to protect and serve has strayed from its original objectives and seems to result, more and more, in innocent lives being taken by judge, jury, and executioner type policing. The Governor, Mayor, and Attorney General, to properly address this incident must address the origin of the tragedy. It is not found with Breonna Taylor.

    1. not going up going down. dont believe the hype


      here is some brutal honesty. the biggest threat to young black men being murdered is not police it is other black men

      defund the police and you are sure to get what?

      an increase in blacks killing blacks

      2020 chiraq is proof positive. that’s chicago for you guys who havent heard the term

      1. So true! It was a young black man who shot the 2 police officers in Louisville last night — including the young black man who was doing his job as a member of law enforcement.

    2. I’m sure Roger Stone appreciates your support.

      The Governor, Mayor, and Attorney General, to properly address this incident must address the origin of the tragedy. It is not found with Breonna Taylor.

      If you were diagramming the root cause of this tragedy, do you place Breonna Taylor anywhere in it? Here is a list of possible subjects for the root cause, how would you order them, with the top name being the root? I’m putting them in no particular order. And add on as you please.
      Hankison (cop outside)
      Cosgrove (cop inside)
      Mattingly (cop inside)
      Walker (boyfriend)
      Ex-boyfriend (suspect in the warrant) I can’t find his name.
      Judge who signed the warrant
      Police department
      Gun manufacturer
      Justice system
      White supremacy

      1. For the first time yesterday, someone finally reported that the man for whom the warrant was issued was an earlier “boyfriend” of the dead woman. It was well reported earlier that it was a current “boyfriend” with a gun drawn and shot who caused the 3 police officers to defend themselves in March 2020. The former “boyfriend” had provided – to the police/court system/probation/whaever – this apartment address as his; he was seen going into the apartment (at least) in January. These facts speak loudly to me about the dead woman’s choice of “boyfriends.” And … if it were not for the two of them, she might well be alive today.

        1. Maybe it’s just me, but I would think a major story about the police serving a warrant on a suspect where it’s difficult finding the name of the suspect.

        2. Thetennants1970 says: “For the first time yesterday, someone finally reported that the man for whom the warrant was issued was an earlier “boyfriend” of the dead woman.”

          Not true.

          It was mentioned in this article on August 30th.


          Facts matter.

          And there’s this:

          “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.” (from the New York Times article)

      2. Taylor’s boyfriend is clearly guilty of felony murder and should have been charged with it. His felonious action of firing upon the police officers was a direct and proximate cause of their return fire which killed Taylor. A classic case of felony murder.

          1. Enigma:
            You’re right it’s not felony murder to defend your home and that’s why the shooting by both Boyfriend 2 and the cops were justified. In my experience, cops yell “police” as they are ramming the door. The poor guy was probably sound asleep and living in a high crime neighborhood would have reacted this way. So would I. It’s a tragic mistake.

            1. I can’t make thye case that the police officers didn’t fire in self-defense after being shot at though several mistakes led up to that moment. I do have a problem with one officer being charger with wanton endangerment of the neighbors but not the woman that got killed.

              1. It is my understanding that the shots he fired came nowhere near Breonna.

                Therefore the facts support the claim he endangered others.

                  1. “Should he be rewarded for being a bad shot?”
                    In this case yes, though “reward” is an odd choice. He is likely to be convicted of a crime.
                    Just not the one you want.

                    “She could have been a victim of his wild and reckless shooting.”
                    Crimes are not determined by “could have”.

                    “It so happened other officers shot the unarmed woman first.”
                    That is correct. An unarmed woman who had an armed man in her apartment who was firing at police.

                    Are you saying the police can not fire at those who fire at them ?

                    Are you saying that you can not become a police officer unless you are an expert marksmen ?

                    Grow up. When you pass laws, you empower the police to enforce them.
                    And the police are humans – they will make malicious mistakes which should be punished severely, and innocent ones, which have lessor consequences.

                    We do not have robocop who will never miss.

                    The two officers at the door were fired on – one was hit.
                    They fired at the person firing at them.

                    The person outside fired without real knowledge of what he was firing at.

                    The Grand Jury got it right.

                    If you want the badge of the other two officers – that is a different discussion.

                    The question here is whether their acts were a crime.

                    1. You infer a lot of things I never said or implied. I’ve served on a grand jury and they mostly follow the lead of the States Attorney. We had one exception over several months where we didn’t indict someone for first degree murder who was at best a witness they wanted to flip on others.
                      I rather doubt the officer will be convicted of a crime based on a whole lot of history involving police officers that should have been convicted of crimes. I’m only speaking of those that commit crimes lest you imagine I’m saying something else.
                      The unarmed Breonna Taylor was shot not once or twice by accident but six times. You seem to think her having an armed man in her home makes her complicit in her death. The NRA would have armed people in almost every home. I will make no assumptions as to what that’s a problem in her home.
                      “Are you saying that you can not become a police officer unless you are an expert marksmen ?”
                      I’m saying hitting the wrong person six times isn’t an accident.

                    2. “You infer a lot of things I never said or implied. ”
                      I quoted you.

                      “I’ve served on a grand jury and they mostly follow the lead of the States Attorney.”
                      That may be true – but it is you that are making assumptions.

                      If 9 of 10 GJ’s do as the prosecutor wishes then 1 in 10 do not.

                      Regaerdless, you can not mind read a GJ or presume to know what they are thinking.

                      “We had one exception”
                      So you understand that exceptions occur.

                      “I rather doubt the officer will be convicted of a crime based on a whole lot of history involving police officers that should have been convicted of crimes.”
                      And yet this GJ did indict one officer for committing a crime.

                      “I’m only speaking of those that commit crimes lest you imagine I’m saying something else.”
                      Yes, you are perfectly clear – GJ’s can not be trusted unless they reach the conclusions you wish.

                      “The unarmed Breonna Taylor was shot not once or twice by accident but six times.”

                      Police are taught to fire multiple times if they fire at all. Many are taught to empty their magazines.
                      Most courses on firearms will tell you the same thing. This comes up in nearly every shooting case.

                      It is very rare for a single or small number of shots to be fired.

                      Regardless this is not an “accidental shooting” – the police fired deliberately – they intended to hit Walker who fired at them – multiple times I beleive. They missed and strick Breonna who was near Walker.

                      “You seem to think her having an armed man in her home makes her complicit in her death.”
                      Not at all. Breonna’s death was unfortunate. But it was not a crime.
                      People die in automobile accidents all the time – but most of those are not crimes.

                      It is not Breonna’s association with Walker that is problematic, it is her allowing a drug dealer to use her appartment for a variety of illegal purposes. Breonna was aware of Glover’s drug dealing, she recieved drug money from him. He used her appartment as his legal address, he received packages there. It is foreseable that she might be raided by the police.

                      The person I “feel sorry for” is Walker – to my knowledge he asked for none of this.

                      “The NRA would have armed people in almost every home.”
                      No problem with that.
                      No problem with Walker being armed.

                      I think that “night and fog” warrants – no-knock warrants at midnight are rarely a good idea – as this points out.

                      The question is whether the two officers were criminals. – the Grand Jury got that right.

                      “I will make no assumptions as to what that’s a problem in her home.”
                      Breonna’s “problems” are not the boyhfreind with a gun, but the boyfriend that is a drug dealer. and the extent of her own involvement.

                      “I’m saying hitting the wrong person six times isn’t an accident.”
                      Then you are wrong.

                      Are you saying that the officers deliberately avoided shooting Walker so that they could kill Breonna ?

                      I beleive all officers fired multiple times – they are trained to do so. Most everyone defending themselves with a gun is trained to do so.
                      They probably emptied their weapons – and that is far more than 6 shots. My guess is that less than 1 in 5 shots hit Breonna.
                      What is remarkable is that Walker was not hit.

                      And did you miss the fact that this all occured after midnight in a dark apartment.

  10. Suspect accused of shooting 2 Louisville cops at Breonna Taylor protest identified as chief says injured officers recovering from shots to hip, abdomen.

    Larynzo Johnson, 26, was taken into custody at 8:40 p.m., according to an arrest citation listing two charges of first-degree assault on a police officer and multiple counts of first-degree wanton endangerment — the same charge passed down on former LMPD officer Brett Hankison for Taylor’s death.

    1. One of the oft-mentioned “young black men” whose shooting victims included another young black man, a police officer.

  11. Side Comment. Pertaining to choke holds. 2007 A book called Drop was written by Co;nnolly which spoke to that subject in minute detail. In the book the LAPD had banned the choke hold becas ause it was impossible to tell what the results might be.be. Pepper Spray had been tested and used near thirty years with no adverse affects like choke hold, CS and CN etc. So tell us WHAT PD still allowed the use of Choke holds in the 21st century? It’s just like the big oil spill caused by BP in the gulf. The first thing they did was use an illegal method to cover it and let the ocean hide the evidence. And NOTHING happened to BP for that crime.

  12. Or is it just another form of racism?k the way to settle is burn up a few towns and cities and steal everything in sight. On the other hand you could file an appeal just like normal folks do. Not like it’s hard and you have a couple of state levels and a couple more federal levels. Naaahhhhh that’s no fun and you need a new TV and some more booze.

  13. Even now there are so many false narratives about this killing, irrespective of the Grand Jury investigation and report. I will list a few that are in evidence or undisputed. First, the cops were at the residence were not involved in obtaining the search warrant. They were merely executing it as the law required. Second, it was a warrant for the correct address, Ms Taylor’s apartment. Third, all the officers say they “knocked and announced police”. At least one neighbor corroborated this by saying he heard the shout of “police”. Even the boy friend says he heard the knock, having time for him and Ms. Taylor to get out of bed, grab his gun, exit the bedroom, and position himself in the hall way. Third, Ms Taylor was NOT in bed when shot, she was positioned beside or behind her boyfriend, in the hall way. Fourth, the boyfriend fired first, wounding one of the cops. The cops then lawfully returned over whelming fire in self defense, as they are trained to do when their lives are clearly at risk, into the hallway, striking Ms Taylor. Fifth, Ms Taylor, according to the Grand Jury report, had a fatal wound that a medical expert determined resulted in death in 20 seconds to 2 minutes. The claim that lack of medical aid resulted in her death was found to be incorrect by the Grand Jury. Finally, I make this observation. There has never been a single piece of evidence or information produced by anyone that Ms Taylor’s race was the reason she was shot. None. Her death is a terrible loss of life, but nothing I have seen or heard indicates it happened because of her race.

    1. Very good post Quickchange. If that is what was presented to the grand jury, with the evidence to support it, then their decision is reasonable. Well, reasonable if you believe in truth supported by facts and not just truth.

    2. Outstanding summary of the facts. I would only add that that the subject of the warrant was a former “boyfriend” of the dead woman and that HE provided her address as his address. It was the current “boyfriend” who aimed and shot the gun at the police officers.

    3. In a statement Taylor’s boyfriend gave to the media, the boyfriend even admitted that it was “15 minutes” between the time he first heard the police officers at the door to the apartment, and the time of her death. HIs words: “15 minutes.” Even if it wasn’t that long, there was clearly a very lengthy delay between when the police first knocked on the door and announced themselves, and when they broke into the apartment to execute the warrant. Several minutes at least. Which is consistent with the officers’ testimony, and completely inconsistent with the sudden execution of a “no knock” warrant. If it was “no knock” then they would have breached the door in seconds and since the boyfriend immediately attempted to gun them down upon entry, and their return fire was immediately after an officer got shot, this would have all transpired in less than a minute from start to finish, and not anything close to “15 minutes.” That admittedly long lapse in time was the police giving Taylor and her boyfriend a second, third, fourth…etc. chance(s) to voluntarily comply. Which they didn’t.

    4. Oh crap. The way you described what happened, it’s now clear as a bell what happened. The boyfriend used Breonna Taylor as a shield to protect himself against the police gunfire. She sounds like she was more a hostage than a girlfriend. (And obviously, “girlfriend” or “fiance” is more palatable for the family and the MSM than “crack whore.”)

  14. Turley claims: “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.”

    Here’s your problem, Turley: 1. The officers shouldn’t have been there in the first place. They were looking for Taylor’s former boyfriend, who was the object of the warrant, but: HE WAS ALREADY IN CUSTODY. They never even checked before trying barge into Taylor’s apartment, and therefore, their presence on that property was trespassing, pure and simple. 2. Taylor’s boyfriend denies that they knocked or identified themselves. It was 12:30 a.m., and he and Brionna were both asleep when they heard someone breaking in. He was defending his home against an intruder, which he had every legitimate right to do, as I’m sure Kentucky is a castle doctrine state. Therefore, to the extent your “opinions” assume the truth of what the police said, your reasoning is faulty, as is your reliance on the truthfulness of the police involved (see #4). 3. After they shot her 6 times, they did nothing. They did not call for an ambulance right away. They didn’t try to render first aid. She wasn’t dead yet. She didn’t die until after she got to the hospital. A wounded dog would have received better treatment. But, the kicker is this: 4. After they got back to the police station and realized that they never should have gone to her apartment in the first place, they approached the former boyfriend who was the subject of the warrant, and said they’d drop the drug charges if he would finger Brionna Taylor as a drug dealer. Last night, on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show, one guest commented that supposedly there’s no honor among thieves, but this guy proves that adage wrong. The former boyfriend REFUSED to lie about Brionna to get the cops off the hook, even though he could have gotten out of jail.

    That black prosecutor, who is a protege of Mitch McConnell, presented the police defenses to the grand jury, which is not common procedure, and did not vigorously prosecute the case, according to sources. That there would be no criminal charges for killing this innocent woman was a foregone conclusion.

    So, here’s what you have: the police invaded someone’s apartment at 12:30 a.m. without any probable cause, and based on a faulty warrant, all of which could and should have been prevented. One cop got shot, resulting in 22 rounds being fired at Brionna, with only 6 hitting her. (her boyfriend is a better shot than the cops, obviously). One of the cops shot wildly and his bullets went into other apartments and he was indicted for some sort of recklessness offense, but he didn’t kill Brionna. The cop who did kill her gets off with no criminal charges. Brionna Taylor is dead for no valid reason. She was not even suspected of a crime. The cops sang their usual tune of “fearing for their lives”, or “acting in self-defense”, but it was murder. Killing an innocent person is wrong, and if Brionna was named “Mary Anne” or “Brittany” and was white, the outcome would have been different. People of good conscience are thoroughly sick of the police culture and the killing of black people by the police without consequence.

    1. Natch why do you clowns always pick sides against law and order?

      Are you so sure that the erosion of law and order you are advancing will not affect you personally?

      Seems like you are probably safer in life with the cops doing their thing than just standing back and letting the crime rip like they’re doing in Chiraq and the big apple.

      I know, crazy me for suggesting you reckon your own interests

      1. “Natch why do you clowns always pick sides against law and order?”

        See Evan Sayet’s, The Kindergarten of Eden. This, from a review:

        “It answered a lot of questions for me and I swear there was a moment where it all clicked into place. Previously, I could not understand why liberals are so inconsistent on various subjects and unable or unwilling to acknowledge their inconsistency. (Religion should be mocked but Islam must be protected and celebrated. Black lives matter but not if they are aborted, etc.) I have come to realize that they are very consistent but not the way I expected. The subject of the day does not matter, nor does logic, reason, history or anything that they are saying. They are not engaging you. They are not listening to your point and offering a counterpoint. At the root is the simple need to tear down the good and successful while building up the evil and failed. They will twist themselves and reality to achieve that end.

        This book gave me the perspective to stay amused and avoid the frustration when talking to liberals. Honestly it is exactly the same as speaking with a young child. I realized that I could argue the side of the modern liberal effortlessly and predict their reactions on any subject. It really is that simple.”
        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

      2. You wanna talk about “law and order”? How about all of the laws Trump routinely breaks? The list is too long to repeat here. He has always been viewed as sleazy and crooked.

        It’s not either-or when it comes to the police. There is such a thing as the cult of police–the “us v. them”…”they’re out to get us” mentality. It is impossible to protect and serve people you view as different from you, people you know don’t respect you, and whom you believe therefore constitute a threat. They never acknowledge the reasons why people don’t respect them, much less whether the reasons are valid. Instead, they circle the wagons. According to witnesses while Brionna lay dying, the cops were trying to get their stories straight instead of helping her. So, the Barney Fifes pull out their guns and blast away, claiming they fear for their lives or they thought they saw a weapon. They don’t bother to check whether the object of the warrant might have gotten picked up already. They want to prove their machismo, including the female ones–the uniform gives them the privilege to break into people’s homes. Of course, those “people” aren’t THEIR people, because if they were, they’d check on the validity of the warrant before busting in, they wouldn’t go out at 12:30 a.m., and they’d be polite. People like Brionna Taylor don’t merit such consideration. That culture has to change, and that is what all of the protests are about.

        When something like this happens, which it does all too frequently, watch for the local news to put a pro-cop story on the air: some cop did something nice for someone–they bought a kid an ice cream cone, or retrieved a cat stuck up in a tree. It’s all part of the pro-cop media bias, at least where I live. After awhile, the pattern is clear.

        Your problem, is that you don’t see Brionna Taylor as someone who could be your friend, sister, daughter, niece, co-worker, or someone you could care about. She is a “cultural other”, so you cannot perceive that her death was wrongful. You do, however, see the cops as the good guys and believe whatever story they come up with. So, when the coppers claim that they announced and the boyfriend disputes this, you believe the coppers. I don’t. I’ve seen first-hand that wearing a police uniform does not necessarily automatically confer integrity, honesty, altruism or any other virtue. Too many unarmed and innocent people are being killed by the police.

        1. Natacha, if if’s, and’s, and but’s, were candy and nuts, every day would be Christmas.

          Her boyfriend fvcked up big time, and apparently so did someone with the Police department for not checking to see if the suspect was still living at the residence.

          Sh*t happens. It was her time to die. One day it will be your time, and my time, and every person in this discussion’s time.

          Life is not fair, and the only true justice is meted out by Karma (sowing and reaping).

          All the idiots screaming out “No justice, no peace” really mean is, if it didn’t turn out the way I wanted it to turn out, then I’m going to throw a temper tantrum.

          Stop throwing tantrums, Natacha, and grow up.

    2. Of course Taylor’s then-current “boyfriend” denies hearing the police officers announce themselves. It was his shooting that caused ALL of what happened. Your post plays the proverbial “race card” – not only nonsense about the shooting by police officers being motivated by race, but also despicable comments about the elected Attorney General of KY. It is clear that, unless a black person thinks and speaks as someone like you, she or is his not really black, is an Aunt/Uncle Tom, etc. Sad that you and so many others willingly fall into this trap of dividing the USA on the basis of ginned-up divisive politics.

      1. No. The cause of Brionna’s killing was the cops either lying about the grounds for the warrant, or were negligent for not bothering to check before busting into an apartment in the middle of the night, looking for someone they already had in custody. The cops did try to charge the boyfriend who was defending his home, but they dropped the case. The cops also tried to get Brionna’s former boyfriend to accuse her of being a drug dealer, but he refused, even though they dangled a pardon as incentive. The City of Louisville agreed that Taylor’s death was wrongful and settled the wrongful death claim for $12 million. What does all of this tell you?

        I never mentioned race, but they had to know that the suspect they thought could be there was black. The AG of Kentucky is a McConnell lackey. When a case is presented to the grand jury, the AG is: 1. usually not the one actually presenting the case–it is usually a deputy. Not in this case. McConnell’s syncophant presented the case, along with the coppers’ version of events. That’s not the purpose for a grand jury. 2. the AG is not supposed to present or emphasize any applicable defenses because the reason for impaneling a grand jury is to determine whether there’s probable cause to conclude: a. that a crime was committed, and if so, what crime; and b. who are the suspects. This AG handled the grand jury personally, and presented the police’s version of events, and that’s the problem. Regardless of what you believe, it is the case that the facts are disputed. A petit jury (trial jury) is supposed to decide what facts they believe when the facts are disputed. The grand jury only decides whether there is probable cause, what crime was committed and who should be arrested, and the burden of proof is much lower. The Taylor family will never see their day in court against those who killed Brionna without any valid reason.

        There’s nothing ginned up here except the fact that all of this was politically-motivated. If the AG just went ahead and let the cops off, there would be howling you could hear all the way to Chicago. So, they impanel a grand jury, but have McConnell’s water-boy put in the cops’ version of events, guaranteeing that the outcome would go against the family. It stinks to high heaven.

        1. You accept the drug dealers story that the cops knocked but never announced themselves as the truth over what the cops said they did, which was they announced themselves? Enough said. You and your ilk are a disgrace.

        2. Natacha, you do realize that you’re a “lackey”?

          Just a common lackey. Who never has an original thought of your own.

          That is no way to go through life.

            1. Anonymous the Stupid, you seem to be against anyone who is able to put sentences together that have to do with the discussion at hand. It’s a clear demonstration of your Stupidity.

  15. The problem with this conversation by everyone is two issues that are not being separated.
    1. No knock warrant.
    2. Death of Taylor.

    A) Once the warrant was issued, the officers were charged with carrying out that warrant. Announced or not. No knocks are normally unannounced.

    B) When they entered the apartment legally, they fired defending themselves. Evidence is supported by wounded officer.

    C) Taylor was in the apartment and in the hallway next to her boy friend when he fired at police, striking the officers. They fired back at the subjects that fired at them.

    All of this is what anyone should expect police to do if they are instructed to investigate a crime, they carry that out and they are fired upon.

    The issue with the officer endangering others in adjoining apartments is a completely different crime. Shooting in a direction other than the threat has nothing to do with this killing of Taylor.


    Should no knock warrants be allowed?
    If yes, under what fircumstances?
    If no, what impact will that have on capturing criminals.
    Each community needs to decide using equal representation of races, split between police and local leaders.

    The other alternative is to turn our police into U.K. “Bobbies” where they defend themselves against armed criminals with a Billy club.

    1. How did they get a warrant to invade an apartment for someone already in custody? Did they lie? Were they negligent, even grossly negligent? Claiming that the former boyfriend was there, to justify the warrant, is wrong because he was already in custody. What is the degree of culpability for this wrong, and why should a 26 year old woman get shot in her own home and her killer get off scot-free? This isn’t right.

      1. How are these massive settlements going to the families of the deceased? $12 million to Taylor’s family. How many millions to Freddie Gray’s family? How many millions to the other criminals’ families? How are these cities coming up wtih these outrageous multi million dollar settlements to these families?

          1. I don’t think she was worth $12 million. Maybe $1 million for the boo-boo, but under the circumstances, even zero would have been fine. It was just an accident, and she was not blameless in this. She is the one who let the drug dealing thug use the apartment and live there.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

          2. “You’re more concerned about the settlements than about the killings?”

            Another Stupid statement from the rat latrine. The one who is dead gets nothing. It was an accident and yes the city can deplete all its funds so it doesn’t have enough money to do the things it is supposed to do like educate its young. Do you know how many kids can be brought out of poverty with $14 Million? Do you know how many lives that saves?Do you care? Obviously not. You are a rat that feeds off of filth.

                    1. Very good Olly. It’s good having Anonymous the Stupid here. He marks the lowest level of intelligence.

                    2. Be compassionate. He worships the ground you post on. That would explain why he hangs on your every word.

                    3. “Be compassionate. He worships the ground you post on.”

                      Olly, you are a smart man. I would prefer if Anonymous the Stupid could stand on his own two feet.

                    4. ” Repeating: Both of you are stupid.”

                      Are you doubling down on your Stupidity by repeating yourself? Brains is something you lack. Go dig ditches.

                    1. “Both of you are stupid.”

                      You have a point, but adding yourself to the row makes you Stupid as well. However, I have a name and an icon that is identifiable so one can refer to many postings that have content and opinion appropriate to this blog. You, on the other hand are as Stupid as the one’s you associate with.

                  1. Allan’s got it bad for Anonymous. He really needs to step away from this blog for awhile. He takes this place way too seriously.

                    1. It seems Anonymous the Stupid doesn’t learn. He is now pretending to be a psychologist. He is almost too Stupid to be a patient.

                  1. This guy Allan has never ‘met’ a comment to which he didn’t feel compelled to respond. It’s sad and pathetic.

                    1. Anonymous the Stupid, I have this problem. I like to sometimes communicate with Stupid people and there are very few in my social circles so I come to the blog with a bit of cheese… and there you are. A Stupid rat in all your glory.

                    2. “Anonymous says September 25, 2020 at 2:42 PM
                      This guy Allan has never ‘met’ a comment to which he didn’t feel compelled to respond. It’s sad and pathetic.”

                      Allan’s a bit ‘off.’ It’s painfully obvious.

            1. her death was unintentional it seems, and yet, remains a tragedy. if her bf was a dope dealer, so what. still it is sad.

              and yet sadder still, all the chaos done in her name

              it is being exploited by BLM as an excuse for their ongoing months of riot and intimidation of voters.

              folks, don’t get trolled into saying things that are needlessly dismissive. there’s no point to justifying this accident or trivializing the error of the policeman whose reckless misuse of his weapon, has now lead to him being charged.

              at the same time there is not one bit of justification for all the rioting and idiotic policy positions which are postured upon this tragedy

              1. “whose reckless misuse of his weapon”

                In these politically sensitive times where information is held irresponsibly and rioting is occurring how does one know for sure it was a misuse of the weapon? I have read conflicting reports. Where was the man with the gun when he fired. Where was the woman and where was the cop?

                We are dealing with blind shots after another policeman was wounded. One has to track all the bullets from his gun and figure out what he was firing at. Was he firing towards the gun that shot the policeman? Was the woman in that area? Were the bullets deflected? Was the sound deflected?

                Kurtz, you are the attorney that sometimes deals with these situations. Can you really conclude from what you know that it was reckess misuse?

                I am disturbed about the death but there is nothing that can bring her back to life. I don’t want to take (ruin) another life because we have Stupid people that are rioting, support rioting etc. I don’t have the answers. I have even been told one of my details was wrong but right now I am not sure that the entire picture is known and this cop may be being used to help things settle down.

                1. if the KY prosecutor and grand jury felt there was a reckless use, I can accept that. if he fired through a wall, that is not a sound police tactic in a residential area. that one is easy for me. now that cop is entitled to presumption of innocence and due process and a jury can decide if the charge fits or not.

                  I also have no problem with lack of charges against the other 2.

                  1. Kurtz, since it was a legal entry I haven’t bothered to totally familiarize myself with the case. I won’t judge the innocence or guilt of the policeman in question. However, his guilt isn’t police brutality. If guilt exists it is likely a lack of training or his innate lack of ability to be a policeman.

                    However, what I understand is the first policeman was shot through the door outside of a closed room. Under those conditions a policeman might have to fire through the wall. It was a bad situation but it became political just like George Floyd so I won’t make the same mistake again. I won’t blame the police without a complete evaluation of the circumstances.

                    It appears that one Anonymous is posting specific incidents where the police may have been at fault. She figures that in a grocery store there must be one fruit that is bad. Therefore all grocery stores sell rotten fruit. It is that type of Stupid logic that creates a lot of problems that need not exist.

            2. No, she was not a drug-dealer, and no ranting or lying by Hannity, Ingraham or Tucker will create such facts. The cops tried to get the ex-boyfriend to lie about this, but he refused. She did nothing wrong, but the cops did. They killed an innocent woman by either lying to get a warrant, or being grossly negligent in failing to check whether the suspect was already in custody, and then tried to gin up lies to justify their behavior after the fact.

          1. Isn’t it obvious to you, yet, that Brionna’s scumbag “boyfriend” used her as a human shield when he opened fire on the police? Why else would she have been the one shot, and not the boyfriend? The boyfriend was shooting at the police from behind her. It was deliberate. The boyfriend’s firing a gun at the police caused the police to return fire. The boyfriend is subject to charges for felony murder. Or are you some kind of gang-banging misogynist that hates women, and advocates using them as human shields in shoot-outs with the cops? Please tell the rest of us.

          2. Her bf is lying about the cops by saying they did not announce themselves and he was afraid. But you go ahead and keep buying into HIS story, not the cops, not what the GJ heard.

      2. As I said and it appears you did not read, there were two issues. One the warrant and two, the killing. The officers conducting the raid, being shot at and were defending themselves were not the ones getting the warrant. Louisville detective Joshua Jaynes was the officer that obtained the warrant. The other officers were the ones carrying out the warrant. They did the shooting.

        If an officer gets shot at, what do you want them to do? I want them to come home alive and to do that they better fire back or they will be dead!! I support the police and in this case, I see nothing wrong with the way the warrant was carried out.

        Again, my point is the no knock warrant being the primary issue, not the way the police carried out the warrant. Should it have been no knock, should the police have no knocks and if so, who should set the standard for approvals.

      1. When did I say anything about race. You did not read did you?

        I said it was one of two things.
        1. No Knock warrant
        2. Police conducting raid legally, getting shot at and returning fire.

        Explain were I said something about race?

        Now we could discuss hypothetical situations where Lt Jaynes was racist and knew that when he got the no knock, while if it was a white’s apartment, it would not have been no knock. But what proof do you have on that?

      1. Not this “pope” anyway. OK with Benedict; OK with John Paul. Francis thinks his white robes give him some authority to speak about political issues and be accorded credibility.

  16. So the supposed Uncle Tom AG cowed, do your really think that the Grand Jury didn’t hear all the avidance before making it’s determination? No matter the facts in your eyes it’s a wrong outcome.

Leave a Reply