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. BREAKING: “A Kentucky State Police ballistics report does not support Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s assertion that Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, shot a Louisville police officer the night she was killed.”

    1. Lets assume this is true – and given that not only haven’t you provided a source, but you are posting anonomously so the quote is just words fallen from the ether with no clue as to their credibility.

      So ?

      Walker fired, he has admitted that. That is all that is needed.

      If your report is correct, Walker got lucky and did not hit what he was trying to shoot.
      Walker also got lucky because the Officers shooting back did not hit what they were trying to shoot – but instead shot Breonna.

  2. Attorney for Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend on the case, police shootings and self-defense

    •Sep 24, 2020

    CBS This Morning

    After the March police raid when Breonna Taylor was shot and killed, authorities charged her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, with attempted murder. Those charges were later dropped. Walker is now suing the Louisville Metro Police Department, claiming police misconduct. Steven Romines, one of Walker’s attorneys, joins “CBS This Morning.”

    1. Romines comments on Radley Balko’s excellent article:

      https://twitter.com/Sromines/status/1309244396316094466

      “Tweet

      Steven Romines
      @Sromines
      Literally everything in this article is 100% accurate and consistent with the evidence in the case.

      Radley Balko
      @radleybalko
      · Sep 24
      New from me: https://washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/24/correcting-misinformation-about-breonna-taylor/

      4:32 PM · Sep 24, 2020·Twitter for iPhone

    1. Again, the issue is thevwarrant, how it was obtained, why it was obtained and what misleading and incorrect data is included.

      Police have teams that carry out warrants. They are involved in multiple raids per year. Just because officers are involved with “bad raids” does not make them guilty. It is those creating the warrants that need to be disciplined, fired or charged.

  3. Jamelle Bouie (NYT): “this is a great piece from @radleybalko debunking the misinformation around the breonna taylor case. it also suggests, quite strongly, that daniel cameron gave an incredibly misleading, bordering on outright lying, press conference https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/24/correcting-misinformation-about-breonna-taylor/

    I agree. An excerpt:
    “The most serious questions here concern the investigation itself, and why these officers were asked to serve a warrant on Taylor’s home in the first place. There’s the lie about the postal inspector. There is the fact that despite the surveillance on Taylor’s home, the police didn’t know there was another person inside. There are the police bullets that were inadvertently fired into surrounding apartments. There’s the cut-and-paste language used to secure the no-knock portion of the warrant. There’s also the fact that the officer who procured the warrant was not part of the raid team. There’s the fact that five officers involved in the Taylor raid were involved in another violent, botched raid on an innocent family in 2018.
    “…
    “And there are more questions:
    “— Why serve a warrant in the middle of the night on a witness tangential to an investigation?
    “— Why did the police alter the times on their reports?
    “— The most recent activity involving Taylor on the search warrants was in January. Why wait until March to serve the warrant on her apartment?
    “— Why didn’t police do any further investigation to better establish how involved in the drug conspiracy Taylor really was?
    “To simply blow this off as a tragedy for which no one is to blame is an insult to the life and legacy of Taylor, but also to the dozens of innocent people who have been gunned down in their own homes before her. And the effort by Cameron and others to make all of this go away by feeding the public half-truths that blame the victims in this story — Taylor and Walker — for Taylor’s death is inexcusable.
    “We could prevent the next Breonna Taylor. We could ban forced entry raids to serve drug warrants. We could hold judges accountable for signing warrants that don’t pass constitutional muster. We could demand that police officers wear body cameras during these raids to hold them accountable, and that they be adequately punished when they fail to activate them. We could do a lot to make sure there are no more Breonna Taylors. The question is whether we want to.”

    1. CTHD, Sorry to butt in, but I have to agree with.most of this comment. I think the city of Louisville has already acknowledged the wrong doing in this case with the settlement when it comes to the warrant.

      Everything from the information to support the raid to the raid itself needs to be reviewed and changes made where needed. Community leaders, not just elected officials, need to be part of any changes, along with police. People need to debate the information like you provided.

      What needs to stop is blaming the officers charged with carrying out the warrant. Once they were fired upon, they had every right to defend themselves. The reckless endangerment may or may not hold up if that officer was shooting in the direction of the perp. That will be determined.

      1. Ron, you’re not butting in. I posted it because I hoped that it would be of interest to others.

        I agree that the warrant was a real problem. But it also seems that the officers didn’t announce themselves as police loudly enough, and that’s a concern too. They had a no-knock warrant, but they claim it wasn’t executed as a no-knock. If they’re going to announce themselves, they need to do it loudly enough to let the person(s) inside know that they’re the police and give the person time to come to the door. Walker said that he never heard them say they were the police. If that’s true — and most of the witnesses confirm it — then they screwed up.

        1. “If that’s true — and most of the witnesses confirm it — then they screwed up.”

          As I understand it, only one witness confirmed it, and it was during his third interview that he finally did so.

          1. I see that I wasn’t clear when I wrote “Walker said that he never heard them say they were the police. If that’s true — and most of the witnesses confirm it — then they screwed up.”

            I meant that most of the witnesses confirmed not hearing the police identify themselves, consistent with Walker’s claim.

            The article I linked to discusses this:
            “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.”

            That’s why Jamelle Bouie said that the article “also suggests, quite strongly, that daniel cameron gave an incredibly misleading, bordering on outright lying, press conference”

            1. Why are you making a huge deal over whether the police announced themselves when they had a no knock warrant ?

              There was no requirement to announce.

              As to whether the police actually announced – I do not know. One witness claims to have heard them announce.
              The police claim they did – but claiming that is in their interests,
              Just as Walker’s claim that they did not is in his interests.

              As to the others ? It is not possible to know if the police did not announce or the others did not hear.

              You seem to have incredible expectations of earwitnesses.

              Regardless, none of this is relevant. Whatever issues there are they have nothing to do with the two officers that shot Breonna.

                1. “He’s Walker’s attorney. He probably knows a hell of a lot more than you might think he does.”

                  Because you say so ?

                  I would further note that defense attorney’s have no obligation to be truthful to the press.
                  They are not testifying under oath. They are advocating for their client.

                  I expect Walker’s attorney to spin the narative as best for his client.

                  Prosecutors have an actual duty to justice – but I do not particularly trust what they say publicly either.

                  And prior to the start of a trial there is zero reason to beleive that a defense attorney has better knowledge on all issues than all of us

                  1. John say, there is already a record of police reporting being deliberately misleading or not truthful when it serves to protect the department from further scrutiny. All the inconsistencies pointed out by CTHD pose serious questions about what was really presented to the grand jury. Ballistics reports already mention that there is no evidence that walker actually hit the officer.

                    As it has been with police departments lately, they are more invested in protecting a bad unit or screw up than come clean.

          2. And that is what I have been discussing with CTHD Everything I yave seen said witnessES. Now you say one witness. This is what the GJNhad and we think. ..

            1. Whether the police announced is only relevant to whether Walker committed a crime.
              If the police announced and he heard it, then Walker is guilty of assaulting an officer.

              If they did not, then Walker is innocent.
              But the police were not required to announce in this case.

              Whether they should have been is a question of policy and procedure that implicates the city and the police brass.
              Not the officers.

          3. It is irrelevant whether they announced – they had a no-knock warrant.

            Whether they should have or not is an issue elsewhere.

        2. And there was a Lt., Sergeant, Commander or some senior officer in charge. The police are like the military. The superior officer is responsible, so if they did not announce loud enough, then they need to hold the senior officer responsible. Not ALL officers involved because you dont question supervisors unless what they plan to do is clearly illegal.

          So they say this happened after midnight. They say there are witnesses. How many were wide awake? Were they also in bed? Were they in the hall with their doors open? How likely would you hear police if you lived in the apartment building? None of this has been in reports I have read, but the GJ had it.

          It is just hard, and sometimes unfair to both sides, to make decisions without 100% of the information, and not what is found on “Fake News Social Media” news outlet.

          1. “It is just hard, and sometimes unfair to both sides, to make decisions without 100% of the information”

            That is something you understand but those on the left don’t.

            Your point about knocking at that hour is excellent. They were knocking on his door so most of the noise goes into the apartment. The neighbors might not hear even louder noise that might have to go through a front door down a hall and into a closed bedroom. These people want to blame the police no matter what the story is.

          2. I agree that it can be “hard, and sometimes unfair to both sides, to make decisions without 100% of the information,” which is why Kentucky Gov. Beshear has asked the state Attorney General, Cameron, to release the grand jury transcripts to the public. If Cameron does that, we’ll know what info the GJ based its decision on.

            For the record, neither the Washington Post nor the NYT are “Fake News Social Media” news outlets.

            1. Well they may not be “Fake New Social Media” news sites, but they sure as hell do not report the news in an unbiased manner. I stopped reading anything those papers wrote years ago because they became so one sided.

              So since you seem to read them, how have they reported the line of command structure when it comes to police and lower level officers following senior officers commands. Or do they just report “police” and then stand back and watch cities burn and officers getting shot because they paint all police as corrupt and racist?

              Because that is what I have been reading from those on the left here and most just regurgitate the media portrayal of the situation.

              I dont accept any media news reports, all the way from Breitbart to MSNBC and everything in between until I see or hear actual evidence that decisions were made on. That is why I keep asking questions.

              But I doubt Grand Jury testimony will be released in this case since anyone testifying believing that testimony to be secret could become the target of attacks from those that want and eye for an eye in this case. If you knew in the future that anything you said thinking it would be kept secret ended up being released, would you come forward and risk your life or that of your family? I sure as hell would not.

              1. Ron, is there any news organization that you believe consistently reports the news in an unbiased manner, and if so, what is it?

                I listen to NPR regularly, but beyond that, I read/listen to news from all sorts of organizations in a less regular way — articles/video that I identify when I search for info online, articles/video highlighted by diverse people in online comments, etc.

                1. There are not many I believe. If I hear something I dont react until I hear actual proven facts.For instance Trump Russiagate, Bidens involvement with Ukraine, Michael Brown “murder”, Clinton Foundation scandal, all either proven to be incorrect, lies or unproven.But right or left, they all became top stories on one or all of the news. But I do find watching BBC world news to be less political because they are not one of our politically charged media.

                2. “is there any news organization that you believe consistently reports the news in an unbiased manner”

                  Today ? Few major news organizations.

                  The good news is that we have myriads of sources. Further we have myriads of local news organizations that generally report local stories without bias.

                  Further we have decreasing need for the news media per say, we have increasing access directly to primary sources and facts ourselves.

                  I do not need CNN to tell me what Biden or Comey or Trump said. I can find multiple video’s of exactly what was said with full context.

                  I do not need MSNBC to tell me what is in the horowitz or Mueller reports – I can read them.

                3. I listen to NPR alot too. They are the most clueless organization in existance.

                  It is hard to find anywhere where people purporting to be experts are so entirely clueless about whatever the topic is.

                  Virtually everything on NPR starts with a huge set of assumptions that they never challenge or allow to be challenged that are mostly false.

            2. Grand Jury Transcripts should NOT be released to the public.

              The governor does not have the authority to do so, and probably the prosecutors do not either.

              You would have to get permission from every person who testified.

              You do not seem to grasp that your desire to know does not trump the actual rights of others.

            3. You are correct nether WaPo nor NYT are social media.

              They have however discredited themselves horribly in the past 4 years (and before) by printing badly sourced and ultimately false news repeatedly and by allowing editorialy content to leak(take over) into straight news.

              They are no longer a credible source.

          3. There was no announce requirement for this warrant.

            There are questions about how a warrant much less a no-knock warrant was granted based on the warrant application but that has nothing to do with the officers executing the warrant.

        3. CTDHD

          The warrant was a no-knock warrant.
          They were not obligated to knock.
          They were not obligated to announce.

          It is pretty universally agreed they knocked.

          There is SOME testimony that they announced.
          Regardless Walker did not hear them announce.

          You are fixating on tiny details of procedure.
          Failing to follow procedure is NOT a crime.

          Grand Juries indict for Crimes.

          The provenance of the warrant is complex.

          On the one hand based on the information in the warrant it never should have been granted.

          On the other there is information that exists sufficient for a warrant for Taylor and her appartment.

            1. I like Balko and tend to Trust him – But Balko does NOT confirm anything.

              He reports what he has heard – just as the rest of us do.

              Balko is not a primary source. In my cause – for FACTS I tend to trust him. I even agree with much of his analysis – but not all.

              Balko is another of the many who equates personal judgement of anecdotal evidence as proof of systemic racism.
              It is NOT. It MIGHT in some instances be proof is individual instances of racism, but systemic racism has a meaning, and that meaning is NOT that some cops are racist. Jim Crow was an example of systemic racism – that is racism deliberately built into the system.

              Words have meaning. We are not likely to be able to fix problems if we are not accurate about them.

              As to the witness issue. So ? We are unlikely to ever know the truth – on of the reasons that police executing warrants should have body cams. But as RonP has noted the raid was after midnight – it is unsurprising that different people have different recollections.

              Whether the cops announced or not is relevant only to whether Walker can be prosecuted. The cops had a no-knock warrant.
              Whether they announced or not does not alter the fact that the two officers breaking down the door committed no crime.

    2. Absolutely nothing you have posted from Balko has anything to do with the Grand Jury decision.

      The Taylor family received $12M as part of a wrongful death tort.

      There appears to be alot of evidence of problems within the municipality.

      I probably agree with every point Balko made.

      But that changes nothing with respect to the grand jury decision.

      I would also note that none of Balko’s criticism’s address the actual innocense of Taylor or her roommate.

      We expect the police to follow the constitution, the law and due process.

      But their mistakes in doing so do not make those they go after innocent.

      This warrant was part of a drug sweep that rolled up an entire drug enterprise.
      The evidence is that Breonna was nominally part of that.

      Her life still matters, and the police are still supposed to do their job correctly.

      But there is still no crime on the part of the two officers serving the warrant.
      And the procedural errors do not convey innocence to either Breonna or her roommate.

      1. Thank you for this op-ed by Turley which I would have otherwise missed. Turley does himself a lot of credit by how he managed to stay clear of politics even while expressing his views of those that are involved. I don’t necessarily agree with everything Turley said but that is not something necessary to recognize a good op-ed.

        His finale was: ” I hope he brings an end to this two-year spasmodic, cathartic record. The law is clear, and it is time for a ruling that was never in serious doubt. It is time to dismiss the criminal case against Flynn.” Turley has placed Sullivan where Sullivan belongs. It is Sullivan’s reputation that is at stake.

        1. Sullivan’s reputation is gone. Frankly it is time for him to retire.

          s Turley notes Sullivan got several high profile cases right.

          Sullivan was instrumental in getting the Ted Steven’s debacle reversed – though in that case an FBI agent lied – bot ONLY once.

          There have been so many lies in Flynn, and so much misconduct.

          Though I would note, that MOST of what applies to Flynn applies to Manafort, Stone and all those that Mueller prosecuted.

          Though the FBI reached the conclusion that there was nothing there in XFR several weeks before getting to that point with XFH,

          By Mid January 2017 there was ZERO foundation for ANY further investigation.

          Nothing that occured afterwords changed that on iota.

          And We are NOW learning that the FBI had identified the Steele Primary SubSource a national security risk years earlier and that Steele himself had previously been flagged by the FBI as unreliable and likely being mislead by Russians BEFORE the Steele Dossier.

          So when the Papadoulis-Downer meeting failed to produce a basis for continuing, Why did the FBI use the Steele Dossier ?

          Absent verifying a single claim, given Steele’s prior established lack of credibility, and the even worse unreliabilty of his primary subsource, how does thos constitute a basis for an investigation ? Why didn’t this die in September 2016 ?

          And AGAIN what changed between Sept 2017 and may 2017 that justified appointing a Special Counsel ?

          It is time to see all of Muellers Warrant applications and Subpeona’s.

          If they have no foundation beyond what is in the Page Warrant application then the entire Mueller report should be burned, and any Mueller prosecutions withdrawn.

          It is also time to determine what Mueller’s team knew and when.

          At some early point – Rosenstein, Mueller, Mueller’s team should all have known that the Steele Dossier was crap by an unreliable hack using information from a national security risk.

          At that time they were obligated to publicly drop everything.

  4. “IN A SMALL ILLINOIS CITY, A BLACK MAN DIED AFTER OFFICERS SHOVED A BATON IN HIS MOUTH. BLACK OFFICERS SAY THEY’VE SUFFERED AT THE HANDS OF THE DEPARTMENT, TOO.”

    “Lawsuits from Joliet Police Department officers are among at least 12 current federal complaints against the agency. The men say their civil rights lawsuits are part of a decades-long history of discrimination.”

    https://theappeal.org/joliet-police-lawsuits/

    (The population of Joliet is ~144,000.)

      1. more BLM agitators and their allies attacking long standing Democratic police departments. i find this the most interesting and yet unexplained aspect of this story. Will County where Joliet is located has been a Democrat party stronghold for many decades hell who knows how long.

        little town but a big prison was there. closed in 2002 and all inmates moved mostly nearby to SCC Stateville Correctional Center

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9A-wWnnYyK8

        yes this was it in the Blues Brothers

        1. Found downthread:

          “A uniform should not be a free pass to criminality and coverup” -Frank Serpico

          https://www.americanswhotellthetruth.org/portraits/frank-serpico

          frank serpico
          @SerpicoDet

          “It’s most unfortunate but understandable that our views get distorted by the very corrupt in power we are trying to remove

          We are pro honest police for the good of society and the police that serve it

          A uniform should not be a free pass to criminality and coverup”

          https://twitter.com/SerpicoDet/status/1308851932237377542

          1. Anonymous is there a reason you are reposting this or are you holding your reason for the reposting because you are afraid you will be made to look foolish?

          2. Again – do we need the same thing multiple times ?

            A uniform is NOT a free pass to criminality of coverup – I agree with Serpico.

            That is true of people like Lt. Col. Vindman and a slew of FBI agents as well as the entire Meuller team.

            1. This anonymous creature has been quoting these empty statements for a very long time. She believes that if she finds proof of one policeman out of 900,000 then all 900,000 are guilty. It is an insane position but we know that we have to live amongst some insane people.

              1. I know alot of police officers – many are friends. If I were hiring police it is not likely I would hire any of them.

                I have lots of problems with the culture of modern policing. I would greatly like to see that reformed.

                I would like the 4th amendment to get its teeth back.

                But I am not going to indict these two officers for a crime because the outcome of a police raid was unfortunate.

                Nor am I going to make changes to policing without being sure of net positive results.

            2. Balko’s article was also posted at least twice. It happens and the duplication isn’t necessarily by the same person. Some of us don’t always have the time to read all the comments so, what is duplication to you, might not be duplication to others. Not everyone spends as much time here as you, Allan, and some others, John.

              1. You are on most of the threads. John is not. I know so because I miss him when he isn’t. John provides facts. You provide drivel.

                1. When I am not arround it is because I am busy.

                  I have atleast 4 “careers” I am following concurrently. From March through mid-august most of those were inactive.

                  Since mid-august several things are booming now.

                  1. John. it seems we have some similarities. I used to always be busy working on completely different things but for a good length of time I have had everything I want or need. I am not looking for more so though I am ultimately responsible for many different things there are other people that can manage them and I can be involved as little or as much as I wish. That doesn’t mean I am inactive. I had the ability to stop working years ago and slowed down but them saw an opportunity and took it. Another “job” was born but eventually I left it to others to manage. It is the challenge not the money. Right now I am thinking what I can do next that is totally different. I’m gardening more and my gardener seeing me doing manual labor that he is paid to do just shakes his head.

              2. I am not talking about Duplicate posts.

                You are literally duplicating the same quote inside the same post, and usually 3 times.

                I am hard pressed to see that as anything but deliberate.

                Regardless, it undermines your arguments.

                I would also note that most of the material you cite I have no problem with.

                I might disagree with Balko on priorities. I also occasionally disagree with him on analysis – Balko is fully prepared to convert annecdotal evidence of misconduct where there is some indications of racial factors and jump to a conclusion of “systemic racism”.

                There are racists in all walks of life including Policing. But in this country Racism is less consequential than it has ever been as an issue.
                Racial discrimination does not make the list of top 10 factors effecting the future of a minority in this country today.

                The Jim Crow south was systemically racist. We have very little systemic racism remaining in this country – and most of that is in the “great society programs” or things like minimum wage.

                The left is currently having a meltdown over a problem of little consequence. Worse still they are demonstrating that THEY are racists.

                Most every Nazi that ever was would agree to the clear separation of racial groups that is inherent to modern leftism.

        2. Anonymous seems to be a big fan of data mining but only produces a sampling of results that prove nothing. She is so devoid of proof that she had to go back decades to revive Serpico. You noted the city she mentioned was democrat run but does she realize that black on black murder is most prevalent in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore and mostly where democrats are in control.

          Do you think Anonymous cares about the minority groups that are losing their jobs, neighborhoods and children because of people like her?

            1. Predictably, Kurtz sweeps in…to smear…

              “Police History: Frank Serpico and the preservation of honor”

              Lt. Dan Marcou
              Blue Knights

              https://www.police1.com/patrol-issues/articles/police-history-frank-serpico-and-the-preservation-of-honor-1O7F3EbsKCzwulKD/

              My Conversation With Frank Serpico

              As a police officer — as well as trainer — I was heavily affected by Frank’s story. Throughout my career, when faced with an ethical decision, I would ask myself, “What would Frank do?”

              As my own retirement approached in 2006, I sent a letter to Frank and told him how much his story had affected not only all of law enforcement, but me personally.

              To my surprise I received a call from Frank. He said he had called to ask if it was all right to give my phone number to a neighbor.

              The young man was writing a report on “Frank Serpico the Hero,” and Frank felt uncomfortable talking about himself in that context. He asked, “Could you talk to the kid?”

              I responded “Certainly! By the way Frank, while I have you here, could we talk a bit?” I asked.

              “Sure, but only if you call me Paco. My friends call me Paco.”

              During this unforgettable conversation I told Frank I taught ethics to recruits and asked if he had some words of wisdom that I could pass along to my students as I continue to them tell his story. I expected that Frank’s words would be powerful.

              I was not disappointed.

              He said, “Police work is an honorable profession — if you do it with honor.”

              Frank’s words resounded like a thunderclap on a lazy summer day.

              Frank Serpico has done our profession honor by giving us all the gift of honor. I am so humbled that all I can think to say in return is, “Thanks, Paco.” – Lt. Dan Marcou

              “About the author

              Lt. Dan Marcou is an internationally-recognized police trainer who was a highly-decorated police officer with 33 years of full-time law enforcement experience. Marcou’s awards include Police Officer of the Year, SWAT Officer of the Year, Humanitarian of the Year and Domestic Violence Officer of the Year. Upon retiring, Lt. Marcou began writing. He is a co-author of “Street Survival II, Tactics for Deadly Encounters,” which is now available. His novels, “The Calling, the Making of a Veteran Cop,” “SWAT, Blue Knights in Black Armor,” “Nobody’s Heroes” and Destiny of Heroes,” as well as his latest non-fiction offering, “Law Dogs, Great Cops in American History,” are all available at Amazon. Dan is a member of the Police1 Editorial Advisory Board.”

              1. “Predictably, Kurtz sweeps in…to smear…”

                Anonymous, how can one smear anyone who has caused so much damage to herself?

              2. Serpico is a self aggrandizing person. I don’t like him. He was off gallivanting around Europe for years after he squealed on his former comrades. Right ,right, so wonderful, whatever. Back in 1972

                But why did he take off for Europe. I ask a simple question, why? Was he just having fun with his film-based notoriety? I don’t like people like that. Apparently, some of the people he got close too, got to know him and don’t like him either. And not just his baby mama either. So, Why didn’t he want to pay for his own offspring? Some champion of “duty”., .

                I got news for ya. A lot of these “Whistleblowers” are narcissistic self aggrandizing people who exaggerate their contribution to society

                I read that he praised Colon Crapperneck. What’s that got to do with Serpico? oh, seeking the limelight again, that’s all. That Colon fellow is another guy who seeks relevance based on what he used to be good at years ago. That Colon fellow also is the kind of person who screwed over some of his former friends. I wont go into that, but, it’s interesting that they “found each other.” Such strunzi often do!

                He seeks to gain relevance now for whatever he did back in …. 1972! Really, this guy is over the hill and irrelevant to current events

                1. “Mr. Serpico still carries the detective shield he was awarded as he left the department on a disability pension and, often, his licensed revolver, with which he takes target practice on his 50-acre property not far from this Columbia County hamlet. He also still carries bullet fragments lodged just below his brain from the drug shooting; he is deaf in his left ear, and has nerve damage in his left leg.”

                  https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/24/nyregion/24serpico.html

                  He was shot in the face. He went through hell.

                2. I have no idea what he did in the late 70’s in europe. but in the 60’s and 70’s all he wanted was to be a good cop.
                  He refused to accept graft and because he would not his “comrades” repeatedly set him up, nearly getting him killed repeatedly.
                  On one instance he was setup and shot in the face with a .22 and his “comrades” ignored his calls for help.

              3. You and Kurtz are going round and round about Serpico.
                As if it matters.

                If the question is about police corruption in NYC in the 70’s – Serpico is an invaluable source.

                But he has nothing but aphorisms to offer about Breonna Taylor.
                He is not a witness and his knowlege of police is both dated and geographically limited.

                I have no idea if he was a dead beat dad. But that neither changes the accomplishments in his life nor the fact that he is not in anyway expert regarding Breonna.

                1. John Say wrote: “I have no idea if he was a dead beat dad. But that neither changes the accomplishments in his life nor the fact that he is not in anyway expert regarding Breonna.”

                  Serpico’s opinions are worth at least as much as yours, John Say. And he still consults with other cops, so it’s possible that he knows a bit more than the average guy who posts comments to this blog.

                  1. You are not too bright Anonymous. John writes on the blog. Serpico doesn’t. Posting rare random things or opinions that you feel help your position do not do that. They make you appear silly and you have been told this by others a long time ago.

                    1. I agree with the Serpico quote – in fact it is a truism.

                      The police are subject to the law just as the rest of us are.

                      What is wrong with the Serpico quote is that it is not on point.

                      Like much of what the left fixates on it is a bright and shiny object, but it does not really address the questions being asked.

                      Did these three officers in the context of the Breonna Taylor warrant commit a crime ?

                      The Grand Jury got that right.

                      Other issues such as was the warrant properly granted, are tangents. They are important – with respect to OTHER decisions.
                      Not this one.

                  2. You seem to know alot about Frank Serpico for someone who does not appear to know much about Frank Serpico.

                    But lets address the core.

                    If as you say Serpico’s connectionjs with police make him an expert – then so am I. I have extensive relationships with police.
                    Further your standard sets you up for failure in your own argument – the 900,000 police in this country are by YOUR criteria experts on policing that we should all defer to.

                    If the police were the experts that you claim Serpico is by virtue of ties to the police -we would not be arguing right now, because the jib would be being done perfectly.

                    What you fail to grasp is that The requirements for good policing are NOT determined by the police, but by the people.
                    Police are the enforcement arm of government. They are not government as a whole. They are a tool, a means, not an end.

                    As noted in the declaration of independence the purpose of government is to secure the liberty of the people, and the determination as to whether government has accomplished that belongs to the people – not government. It belongs to each of us as individuals.

                    As to Serpico’s comments – I happen to agree with them. But they have no meaning in the context of Breonna Taylor.

                    Maybe the LPD is corrupt – I do not know. But that is not the issue being debated.

                    The issue is whether the 3 officers in question acted criminally. The Grand Jury got that right this time.

                    Serpico’s remark about uniform’s is correct but not on point.

                    Beyond that I would be happy to agree that Frank Serpico is an NYPD officers who has earned our respect and who is far more expert than I am about police corruption in NYC in the 60’s and early 70’s.

            2. I liked the movie. What is more important is Anonymous feels the necessity to slime the police. She is one of those that will holler the most when there are no police around to save her or her property. In digging for her evidence she has to go back decades which demonstrates her case is very poor. Of course the police aren’t perfect and in Serpico’s time, at least in NYC, they were worse but what these foolish people are creating is a future where police departments become worse than they previously were. She conveniently forgets where the biggest problems are … large democratic cities. The pool of good policemen due to the stupidity we are seeing in these major democrat hel!holes is beyond belief. Good potential policemen are not going to want to subject themselves to what we are seeing so we might end up having to hire those that have less respect for the law.

              The foolishness displayed on this blog is beyond belief.

                1. Interesting, I did not post the question at 717 pm. The little avatar is similar to the one that pops up for me, but it wasnt me

                  I dont really care who all the anonymouses are

            3. Serpico didn’t refuse to pay child support. He requested that the amount be reduced… You likely know the story, but you’re deliberately misrepresenting it.

              1. “Serpico didn’t refuse to pay child support. He requested that the amount be reduced… You likely know the story, but you’re deliberately misrepresenting it.”

                Anonymous tell us what happened if the child support wasn’t reduced? Come on. Now is your chance to shine. Take a shower and come out clean. Then educate us.

                1. Serpico wanted the amount reduced because he claimed the woman deceived him claiming that she used Birth control.
                  The court dissmissed that claim as irrelevant.

                  Child Support is about children.

                    1. With respect to the Grand Jury decision – Serpico is meaningless.

                      But we debate lots of things here that are off topic.

                      The problem with your Use of Serpico is that you beleive Serpico’s tweet – which is a truism, actually means something in the context of the topic.

              2. Ah lol big difference there? he got hauled into court more like because he did not pay, and then he asked for it to be reduced. said the girl he was bangin said she was on the pill. wow, what a dad! wished the kid didn’t even exist. what a swell pop. go ahead and pull it if you want to “discuss” it in detail

                deadbeat dad, Stronzo Serpico,. seeking the limelight again, must have run out of money! residuals aint what they used to be.

                …. b.. b. …but he blew the whistle on cops back in 72! hey, let’s see what sort of corruption there is in NYC cops today — or did you not hear, one was picked up for spying for the PRC.

                https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8764613/NYPD-cop-accused-spying-behalf-China-raised-suspicions-party-attended-AOC.html

                LETS SEE. WHO SUGGESTED ON THIS WEBSITE THAT AOC MAY HAVE CONTACTS TO CHINESE SPIES. REMEMBER? YESSSSSSSS
                it was just a good guess, however. I have no personal knowledge of such things, pure speculation!

                now if FBI is smart they will lean on him hard and give him a witness protection program berth if he spills enough beans. I suspect there’s of stinky tofu that may come out of his mouth before it’s all over!

                1. “Serpico,. seeking the limelight again, must have run out of money”

                  ‘Seeking the limelight again,’ you say. How so?

      2. Again, your point or do you instinctively search out only articles that are unfavorable to the police but are percentage wise rare? Is that the type of Stupidity we are supposed to put up with?

        1. Anonymous do you still think George Floyd was killed by the police or do you now think that information was wrongfully held back and that the policeman didn’t kill George Floyd.?

          Do you hate the police so much that you are trying to justify the shooting of police officers?

            1. Anonymous the Stupid, again you are repeating yourself. It appears you have a limited number of sentences you are able to copy. Your brain doesn’t function. One might think that is due to age but it is more likely an accident of birth.

              1. Allan says: “Anonymous the Stupid, again you are repeating yourself. ”

                “Anonymous the Stupid” — something uttered my Allan too many times to count

                lol, Allan. How many times have we heard this from Allan?

                I guess he’d better take his own comment to heart:

                It appears that Allan has a limited number of sentences he is able to copy. His brain doesn’t function. One might think that is due to age but it is more likely an accident of birth.

                Get help, Allan.

                1. Anonymous at 6:51 PM:

                  Allan really dislikes a couple of the anonymous commenters. He’s having a hard time distinguishing the ones he dislikes from the rest, and he also isn’t willing to just let it go, so he’s now attacking other anonymous commenters, confusing them with the ones he dislikes. It’s only going to snowball, as he ticks off additional people.

                  He needs to just walk away from it, but he won’t, and perhaps he can’t.

                    1. Anonymous the Stupid were you too Stupid to write this last sentence with the former sentences. We are not talking about leaving something out of a long response. We are talking about a couple of sentences. Should I revise the 3rd grade to 2nd grade?

                    2. You cowards believe that if you go to the rat latrine and gather your fellow rats or alternate aliases that you can intimidate with numbers much like BLM/ Antifa intimidates. That is why you guys feel the way you do about those rioters and looters. That is probably why you support Biden because you are afraid as well as being uneducated.

                  1. Brainless Wonder, I don’t dislike anyone. That is not my nature. I am here to show you what you look like. If you looked in a mirror you would require my comments and you would save a lot of time.

                    It appears those from the rat latrine are intimated when facing numbers. If you associate with Sh1t you get Sh1t on your hands. I wear gloves and wash carefully.

            2. How would that be for the good of anyone ?

              Allan is pretty accurate in fact and oppinion. Which is far more than can be said of those on the left.

              Regardless, silencing a voice you disagree with is not for the good of anyone.

              1. lol

                No one is saying that Allan needs to leave permanently, but he definitely needs a break.

                No one is trying to silence anyone.

                John says: “Allan is pretty accurate in fact and oppinion [sic].”

                Sure, he is. Because you happen to agree with him, as evidenced by this: “Which is far more than can be said of those on the left.”

                1. The problem Anonymous is that John is extremely accurate with data. I think accuracy is a major part of his job and why he is trusted to do things most people wouldn’t be able to do.

                  You are demonstrative of a a fatuousness character. You want to be in the middle of things but you have little to offer. What have you ever added to the blog except for your nonsense?

                    1. It is merely the difference between a smart person and one that is intellectually challenged like you.

                2. “No one is saying that Allan needs to leave permanently, but he definitely needs a break.”
                  Does it matter ? In what world do you have the right to demand or compel the non-violent speech of another ?

                  “No one is trying to silence anyone.”
                  Sure sounds like it. Ir in your world is temporarily silencing someone OK, so long is it is not permanent ?

                  “John says: “Allan is pretty accurate in fact and oppinion [sic].”

                  Sure, he is. Because you happen to agree with him”
                  If you have been around here, you would be aware that I have had very long disagreements with Allen on a number of subjects.
                  Even in those disagreements he has been accurate in his facts.

                  “as evidenced by this: “Which is far more than can be said of those on the left.””

                  That is your idea of evidence ?

                  Grow up all things are NOT equal. I have problems with the ideology and actions of both the left and right.
                  I have numerous issues with Trump.

                  But it is idiocy to pretend that the left TODAY is not a far more significant threat than the right.
                  That Democrats are more dangerous than Trump.

                  Hitler and Churchill both have their issues. But only an idiot would claim that Churchill was a greater threat than Hitler.

                  Comparing Allan to the left and finding the left seriously wanting is evidence of accurate perception of reality.

          1. George Flyod almost certainly died of a fentanyl overdose.

            But once he was taken into custody by police they were responsible for his health.

            There is likely no crime in his death, but there is a failure of a duty of care.

            1. The problem is that Anonymous the Stupid and most of the other anonymous’s here and rioting on the street don’t know the facts. If the more normal ill informed people did they would have called for a stop of the rioting right at the beginning.

              How many lives have been destroyed by these awful people? How many more kids have to die because these people wish to push an ideology they don’t even understand?

      3. So do we need a quote, a link to the quite AND the tweet with the quote in it ?

        And how about an actual SOURCE ?

        Saying something 3 times does not make it credible.

        Facts do, and we only need those once.

        Finally – wow out of nearly 1m police in the US some behave badly.

    1. All of this can be decided through the courts.

      I have no means to know whether the narrative you offer is correct, and certainly not whether it will hold up under scrutiny – like cross examination.

      That said – if you are claiming “SOME police officers behave badly.”

      Wow! hold the presses, News at eleven,

      Of course you make the jump from the possibility that some officers behave badly to “systemic racism”.

      There are 900,000 police officers int he US today. There are a handful of cases each year of pretty egregious misconduct by police that appears to target by race. If that were merely the tip of an iceberg – if there were 99 unrfeported incidents for each reported one – you would not have “systemic racism”.

      Absolutely we should work to root out misconduct by police.

      But the gulf between the problems we have with policing and “systemic racism” is larger than the distance to the moon.

      I am libertarian. I am not friendly towards the power we have given to the police.

      But that is OUR mistake – not theirs.

      It is people like you behind the laws that result in their oportunity for their bad behavior.

      The worst policing problem we have in this country today is too many laws.

      The next is too much discretion with respect to enforcing those laws.

      It is not an accident that the vast majority of policing problems occur in democrat controlled municipalities.

      Those on the right may beleive in law and order.

      But they do not for the most part look at the law as a tool to acheive political objectives, or to transform society.

  5. ‘Had they been wearing body camera[s], you’ll be able to hear the audio: ‘Police, police police.’ And that’s important. We don’t have that here.”‘ -Robert Boyce, former chief of detectives for the New York Police Department

    https://abcnews.go.com/US/breonna-taylors-death-ongoing-fight-justice/story?id=72935456

    Excerpt:

    After analyzing over 1,200 photos of the scene obtained by ABC News, Robert Boyce, former chief of detectives for the New York Police Department, said that during the thousands of search warrants carried out by law enforcement across the United States, “gunfire is very unusual.”

    “It’s these horrible incidents that happen; that do happen, unfortunately,” he said. “So it’s important to understand and keep things serious. Had they been wearing body camera[s], you’ll be able to hear the audio: ‘Police, police police.’ And that’s important. We don’t have that here.” -ABC News

    1. Most of us are in favor of police wearing body cams to serve warrants.

      But that is a policy decision made by the municipality, not the officers serving the warrant.

      Further BodyCam’s are relatively new. While warrants are ancient.

      The behavior of the officers is not criminal because the local police failed to have a body cam policy.

      Gun fire during a warrant is very rare. It is not disputed in this case that the first shots came from the apartment – not the police.

      This is tragic and lots of mistakes were made. The local government had innumerable poor policies.

      But the bad policies of a local government do not transform the conduct of these officers into crimes.

    1. sounds like a fascinating book, thanks benson

      SOUL FULL OF COAL DUST
      A Fight for Breath and Justice in Appalachia
      By Chris Hamby
      435 pp. Little, Brown. $30.

    2. No one served the rich and powerful better than the Wall Street bootlickers named Barry Obama and Eric “Too Big to Jail” Holder.

  6. Facts ignored:1) The warrant was for Taylor’s house and for her criminal boyfriend. 2) The police announced themselves as Police yet the suspects failed to comply & open the door. 3) They hid in the dark and shot the police first when the police entered. DUH! Police have a right of self-defense. And they returned fire. Taylor was not in her bed a previously claimed. Was he criminal drug dealing boyfriend hiding behind her?
    Shooting at the police takes away any pretext of defense especially since the police announced themselves. still most news media fails to inform the American people of all the facts.

    1. You’re confusing Taylor’s boyfriend (Kenneth Walker) and her ex-boyfriend (Jamarcus Glover). The warrant was for Glover, not Walker. Glover didn’t live with Taylor and he wasn’t in her apartment. Walker was in the apartment, and he had a license for the gun.

      Walker said that they didn’t hear the police announce themselves. Most of the witnesses said that they didn’t hear the police announce themselves. If someone breaks into your house and you don’t know that it’s the police, wouldn’t you assume that it’s a criminal who intends to harm you?

      Get the actual facts straight.

        1. Along with facts, the chain of command in police departments also needs to be understood. When an officer is given a command from superiors, they have no information concerning warrants other than tactical information to carry out the raid. How the warrant was obtained is not part if that data.

        2. People do need to get their facts straight.

          Kenneth Walker’s presence at the apartment is relevant in that he fired at the police.

          Otherwise it is not relevant. Glover was tied to the apartment and the warrant was for both the apartment and Breonna personally.
          Glover both identified the apartment as his home and was receiving mail there at the time, and was paying Breonna money from his drug dealing.

      1. Glover listed Taylor’s apartment as his residence at the time of the shooting.
        He was observed picking up packages from that apartment prior to issuing the warrant.
        Breonna received money from him that was the proceeds of Drug dealing and was aware of that.

        Further whether the warrant was weak or strong, the officers executing it had no involvement in getting the warrant.

        Some witnesses claim the officers identified themselves.
        ALL witnesses agree that the officers knocked even though they had a no-knock warrant.

        There is no confusion over the fact that Glover was tied to the apartment and is a drug dealer and the target of the investigation and the half dozen warrants that were executed simultaneously.

        Further the warrant specifically named Breonna – she too was a target of the search.

        You are Correct that Kenneth Walker was not.

    2. “2) The police announced themselves as Police yet the suspects failed to comply & open the door.”
      This is not clear.
      The officers had a no knock warrant.
      The CHOSE to knock.
      It is not clear whether they announced, it is not clear whether those in the apartment knew they were police.

      “3) They hid in the dark and shot the police first when the police entered.”
      It was after mid-night. Of course it was dark.

      “DUH! Police have a right of self-defense. And they returned fire.”
      Correct.

      “Shooting at the police takes away any pretext of defense”
      Only if you know it is the police.
      “especially since the police announced themselves.”
      That is still not clear. Knocking is not anouncing.
      There is only one witness that claims the police identified themselves as police.

      “still most news media fails to inform the American people of all the facts.”

      That is true.

  7. “A uniform should not be a free pass to criminality and coverup” -Frank Serpico

    https://www.americanswhotellthetruth.org/portraits/frank-serpico

    frank serpico
    @SerpicoDet

    “It’s most unfortunate but understandable that our views get distorted by the very corrupt in power we are trying to remove

    We are pro honest police for the good of society and the police that serve it

    A uniform should not be a free pass to criminality and coverup”

    https://twitter.com/SerpicoDet/status/1308851932237377542

    1. A phrase repeated many times but without context it sounds like you think the police should be willing to die rather than protect themselves when they enter a violent situation. That doesn’t sound very smart.

      1. “…it sounds like you think the police should be willing to die rather than protect themselves when they enter a violent situation. ”

        Nonsense.

        1. ” Nonsense.”

          That doesn’t change what you said nor does it add the lacking dimension. Therefore, the conclusion one can draw is that ” the police should be willing to die rather than protect themselves when they enter a violent situation. ” The situation under discussion is that the police were shot at and returned fire. I don’t think your answer was a smart one.

  8. “Correcting the misinformation about Breonna Taylor”

    Opinion by Radley Balko, Columnist

    September 24, 2020 at 3:50 p.m. CDT

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

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

    Balkon continues, and ends with this:

    “This is just an all-around tragedy. We shouldn’t focus on who to blame, whether its police, prosecutors, Walker or Taylor.”

    The most serious questions here concern the investigation itself, and why these officers were asked to serve a warrant on Taylor’s home in the first place. There’s the lie about the postal inspector. There is the fact that despite the surveillance on Taylor’s home, the police didn’t know there was another person inside. There are the police bullets that were inadvertently fired into surrounding apartments. There’s the cut-and-paste language used to secure the no-knock portion of the warrant. There’s also the fact that the officer who procured the warrant was not part of the raid team. There’s the fact that five officers involved in the Taylor raid were involved in another violent, botched raid on an innocent family in 2018.

    And there’s the 2015 study by criminologist Bryan Patrick Schaefer, who was allowed to embed himself with the Louisville police department. As Schaffer wrote, “Of the 73 search warrant entries observed, every entry involved using a ram to break the door down. Further, the detectives announce their presence and purpose in conjunction with the first hit on the door. A detective explained, ‘As long as we announce our presence, we are good. We don’t want to give them any time to destroy evidence or grab a weapon, so we go fast and get through the door quick.‘”

    Schaefer added that in the raids he observed, the difference between how police served a no-knock warrant and a knock-and-announce warrant was “minimal in practice.”

    Schaeffer also found that for warrant service, Louisville police fill out a “risk matrix” to determine whether to bring in a SWAT team. A case has to meet a minimum score before determining whether SWAT will be used. The other raids done in conjunction with the Glover investigation did use SWAT, which also means police ensure there are ambulances and medical personnel nearby. I happen to think SWAT teams are overutilized. But if you are going to break into someone’s house, a well-trained, full-time SWAT team is far preferable to a bunch of cops in street clothes kicking down a door.

    The irony here is that Taylor was not deemed threatening enough to merit a SWAT team. Instead, she was subjected to all of the most dangerous aspects of a SWAT raid, undertaken by officers in street clothes. There were no medics nearby. In fact, an ambulance on standby was told to leave the scene an hour before the raid. After she was shot, Taylor lie in her house for 20 minutes before receiving any medical attention.

    And there are more questions:

    — Why serve a warrant in the middle of the night on a witness tangential to an investigation?

    — Why did the police alter the times on their reports?

    — The most recent activity involving Taylor on the search warrants was in January. Why wait until March to serve the warrant on her apartment?

    — Why didn’t police do any further investigation to better establish how involved in the drug conspiracy Taylor really was?

    To simply blow this off as a tragedy for which no one is to blame is an insult to the life and legacy of Taylor, but also to the dozens of innocent people who have been gunned down in their own homes before her. And the effort by Cameron and others to make all of this go away by feeding the public half-truths that blame the victims in this story — Taylor and Walker — for Taylor’s death is inexcusable.

    We could prevent the next Breonna Taylor. We could ban forced entry raids to serve drug warrants. We could hold judges accountable for signing warrants that don’t pass constitutional muster. We could demand that police officers wear body cameras during these raids to hold them accountable, and that they be adequately punished when they fail to activate them. We could do a lot to make sure there are no more Breonna Taylors. The question is whether we want to.

    -Radley Balko

    1. “Correcting the Misinformation About Breonna Taylor and Impossible and Aberrant Intermixture”
      ___________________________________________________________________________

      Earlier Resettlement Plans

      The view that America’s apparently intractable racial problem should be solved by removing Blacks from this country and resettling them elsewhere — “colonization” or “repatriation” — was not a new one. As early as 1714 a New Jersey man proposed sending Blacks to Africa. In 1777 a Virginia legislature committee, headed by future President Thomas Jefferson (himself a major slave owner), proposed a plan of gradual emancipation and resettlement of the state’s slaves. In 1815, an enterprising free Black from Massachusetts named Paul Cuffe transported, at his own expense, 38 free blacks to West Africa. His undertaking showed that at least some free Blacks were eager to resettle in a country of their own, and suggested what might be possible with public and even government support.7

      In December 1816, a group of distinguished Americans met in Washington, DC, to establish an organization to promote the cause of Black resettlement. The “American Colonization Society” soon won backing from some of the young nation’s most prominent citizens. Henry Clay, Francis Scott Key, John Randolph, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Bushrod Washington, Charles Carroll, Millard Fillmore, John Marshall, Roger B. Taney, Andrew Jackson, Daniel Webster, Stephen A. Douglas, and Abraham Lincoln were members. Clay presided at the group’s first meeting.8

      Measures to resettle Blacks in Africa were soon undertaken. Society member Charles Fenton Mercer played an important role in getting Congress to pass the Anti-Slave Trading Act of March 1819, which appropriated $100,000 to transport Blacks to Africa. In enforcing the Act, Mercer suggested to President James Monroe that if Blacks were simply returned to the coast of Africa and released, they would probably be re-enslaved, and possibly some returned to the United States. Accordingly, and in cooperation with the Society, Monroe sent agents to acquire territory on Africa’s West coast — a step that led to the founding of the country now known as Liberia. Its capital city was named Monrovia in honor of the American President.9

      With crucial Society backing, Black settlers began arriving from the United States in 1822. While only free Blacks were at first brought over, after 1827, slaves were freed expressly for the purpose of transporting them to Liberia. In 1847, Black settlers declared Liberia an independent republic, with an American-style flag and constitution.10

      By 1832 the legislatures of more than a dozen states (at that time there were only 24), had given official approval to the Society, including at least three slave-holding states.11 Indiana’s legislature, for example, passed the following joint resolution on January 16, 1850:12

      Be it resolved by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana: That our Senators and Representatives in Congress be, and they are hereby requested, in the name of the State of Indiana, to call for a change of national policy on the subject of the African Slave Trade, and that they require a settlement of the coast of Africa with [black] men from the United States, and procure such changes in our relations with England as will permit us to transport [black] men from this country to Africa, with whom to effect said settlement.

      In January 1858, Missouri Congressman Francis P. Blair, Jr., introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to set up a committee

      to inquire into the expediency of providing for the acquisition of territory either in the Central or South American states, to be colonized with [black] persons from the United States who are now free, or who may hereafter become free, and who may be willing to settle in such territory as a dependency of the United States, with ample guarantees of their personal and political rights.

      Blair, quoting Thomas Jefferson, stated that Blacks could never be accepted as the equals of Whites, and, consequently, urged support for a dual policy of emancipation and deportation, similar to Spain’s expulsion of the Moors. Blair went on to argue that the territory acquired for the purpose would also serve as a bulwark against any further encroachment by England in the Central and South American regions.13

      – Robert Morgan

      1. So you think law enforcement (all three of the cops who shot their weapons were white) did a splendid job here?

        1. It is irrelevant whether they did a “splendid job”.

          The question for the grand jury is was it more likely than not that they committed a crime.

          The GJ got that right.

          Every bad outcome is not a crime.

    2. That has more wisdom in it than anything else I’ve read or glanced at on this subject.

      Decriminalize drugs now. Short term police lose some funding; long term they gain good will that no money nor wealth could purchase. Legal drugs (alcohol and opiates) kill many multiples more than all the illegal drugs combined.

    3. Much of what you note is true. It is relevant to the wrongful death tort that resulted int he $12m award tot he family.

      Most of it is NOT relevant to the grand jury.

      The officers in question had nothing to do with the issuance of the warrant. While there are some errors in your narative regarding the warrant – the warrant for taylor’s apartment was because it was beleived to be part of a criminal drug conspiracy – warrants are not issued for witnesses, your errors are irrelevant to the quilt or innocence of the officers in question.

      Your attack on the policies and procedures of the police department may have some merit.
      It is absolutely relevant to the wrongful death tort.
      But it is meaningless with respect to the grand jury decisions regarding the officers serving the warrant.

      I would further note that I, like Balko want far LESS SWAT team served warrants.

      It is irrelevant to the Grand Jury whether the city and police procedures are poor.
      It is irrelevant to the Grand Jury whether the officers in question were involved in other police shootings.
      Even the legitimacy of the warrant is irrelevant – so long as the officers in question did not have anything to do with procurring the warrant – which they did not.
      There is also some evidence that the officers did not follow procedures in serving the warrant.
      They were issued a no-knock warrant but chose to knock first. There is also testimony that they announced – though it is not clear whether those in the apartment heard that announcement. But they appear to have rushed to break the door down.

      Good process is to knock the door down without knocking or announcing when there is a no-knock warrant,
      And to knock, and clearly announce giving those in the apartment sufficient time to grasp that the police are at the door before breaking the door in.

      What appears to have occured is the WORST approach – those in the apartment were provided enough time to arm themselves to protect against a breakin, without clearly knowing it was the police.

      But again that fault results in wrongful death NOT a criminal indictment.

      Despite the flaws in the warrant, there are plenty of facts that indicate that there was more than sufficient evidence to grant a warrant for this apartment.

      Further there is lots of after the fact evidence that Taylor was aware that her apartment was being used as part of a drug operation.

    4. “We could prevent the next Breonna Taylor.”

      Policing is NEVER going to be done perfectly. We can reduce the errors that police make. We can not prevent that entirely.

      Government is FORCE, and mistakes will be made. Reducing them should be a goal. Eliminating them is not possible.

      “We could ban forced entry raids to serve drug warrants.”
      Or just end the unconstitutional war on drugs. Prohibition was a horrible failure – why did we expect criminalizing drug use to go better ?

      “We could hold judges accountable for signing warrants that don’t pass constitutional muster.”
      Absolutely

      I would further note that both in the Taylor case and in the infamous Carter Page FISA warrant – Warrant applications are SWORN.
      We can prosecute those who swear out false warrants.

      “We could demand that police officers wear body cameras during these raids to hold them accountable, and that they be adequately punished when they fail to activate them.”
      Absolutely

      “We could do a lot to make sure there are no more Breonna Taylors. The question is whether we want to.”

      Neither the left or the right actually wants things differently.

      The vast majority of police, as well as the vast majorityu of police misconduct today occurs in very blue urban areas.

      If the left wanted things to be different they would not need thr agreement of the right to do so.

      Whatever is wrong with our policing – it is not a failure of the right.

      If our law enforcement is flawed – the left bears the largest portion of the blame.
      They have the power to fix their own communities.
      They have failed to do so.

  9. Social media is worse than crystal meth, cocaine, crack and Adderall combined. Besides the usual cardinal sins driving destructive behaviors, social media is devouring the brains of most Americans, which begs the question:

    How did so many “intelligent”, “educated”, graduate degree holding Americans come to be such addicts?

    So much for “conservatives” and their chest-thumping wisdom

    Testimony of Tim Kendall House Committee on Energy and Commerce
    https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/files/documents/09.24.20%20CPC%20Witness%20Testimony_Kendall.pdf

    “These algorithms have brought out the worst in us. They’ve literally rewired our brains so that we’re detached from reality and immersed in tribalism” — Tim Kendall

    “The social media services that I and others have built have torn people apart with alarming speed and intensity” — Tim Kendall

    “These services are making us sick. These services divide us. It’s time we take account of the damage, and it’s time we put in place the necessary measures to protect ourselves—and our country” — Tim Kendall

    “Facebook and their cohorts worship at the altar of engagement and cast all other concerns aside” — Tim Kendall

    1. Pablo

      ‘Social media is worse than crystal meth, cocaine, crack and Adderall combined. Besides the usual cardinal sins driving destructive behaviors, social media is devouring the brains of most Americans.’

      For those that read Foxnews and other rags and read WAPO or the NYTime without overlaying all this ‘news’ with a filter of common sense, yes it can be disturbing. Foxnews and Republican doctrines are somewhat like opiates. We’re number one. MAGA. The greatest economy in the history of the US. etc. That’s easier than thinking. The first one’s free.

      1. Once Civil War 2.0 begins in earnest after the Democrats refuse to concede they lost an election against a morbidly obese entertainer with really bad hair, how will your handlers pay you? 8-ball cut with aspirin or bitcoin? We learned from non-Democrat news sources that Hunter Biden was paid off bigly by Russia. Maybe explore the prostitutes he used?

    2. Mr. Kendall goes what off the rails near the start of his testimony. Whether we are united or divided is our own business – not that of government. It is irrelevant what alter FaceBook and cohorts worship at. All that is relevant is that in return for Section 320 protection from defamation lawsuits they conform to the same neutral public platform censorship constraints as government.

      FaceBook etc are free to censor content as they please. But if they do so then they are subject to the same torts standards as other publishers.

      OR they can conform to the very limited censorship requirments of the neutral public platform standard that applies to government in return from legal protections from torts claims regarding the content they publish.

      Mr. Kendall’s desire that Social media serve some altrustic purpose is a fine aspiration – but it is not the business of government.
      And private actors that decide what content they will publish are NOT entitled to protections from torts claims for the content they choose to publish.

      Contra Kendall – and presumably you – neither government nor private businesses are their to spiritually elevate us.

      We do not even agree on what spiritually elevate us actually means.

      Those who you think are racists increasingly think you are not merely racist, but lawless.
      And frankly this nonsense is of YOUR making.

      We are divided because YOU have decided that you FEELINGS trump facts.
      That racism is defined in some nonsensical manner that is only one way.

      It should be pattently obvious that anyone who fails to grasp that we live in the least racist moment in history in the least racist country in the world is thoroughly disconnected from the facts.

      If you are clueless about history – why would anyone trust your judgement.

      I was born into a world that was orders of magnitude more racist than now, And that time was utopia compared to that my father was born into. And that was utopia compare to my grandfather, and that was utopia compared to my great grandfather and that …..

    3. Estovir is one of the ‘paint chip buddies’ who cruise this site. He posted that bizarre video above under the name “Svelaz”. Estovir uses endless names to warp these threads to his own, aggressively stupid viewpoints. New readers should know Estovir (and all his puppets) account for about half the comments on this blog.

Leave a Reply