Ask Me Help Desk - Breonna Taylor

Breonna Taylor

After watching the Kentucky Attorney General today, I was pretty much convinced this was one shooting that was, although tragic, "justified" in the circumstances, in the sense that the police were not culpable.

I hate to say this but then I heard that the AG gave a speech at the Republican Convention and is a supporter of Trump. I started to think again. Did the AG lie?

Since Trump is a notorious liar and his supporters don't seem to be bothered by that, could others be following Trump and also lying? There is precedent. The nutty actions of people who are enthralled by Trump - from mass killers to ordinary people.

I especially thought of rally folks being interviewed and claiming COVID-19 is a HOAX! They seemed like the nicest people, and yet.................................

Then questions arose. One civilian witness corroborated the police version of events by saying they heard the police banging and announcing they were police. That was powerful testimony. Until....................

Then it came out that there were 11 or 12 witnesses who did NOT hear anything. Hmm. Did the AG bring that up to the Grand Jury? If he did, he didn't say anything.

There is also a Kentucky law about a third-party bystander being killed which would put the police shooters in danger of being charged.

Of course, more is to come. I hope cool heads prevail tonight in Louisville. One thing is certain - Breonna Taylor was a wonderful human being.

Quote:

One thing is certain - Breonna Taylor was a wonderful human being.

How do you know that? Honest question.

Might add that it is difficult to testify about what you did not hear.

The big question is whether or not the police followed official policies and procedures. I don't know if they did or didn't, but if they did, and that seems to be the case, then I don't see how they can be charged. Perhaps the family should sue the city of Louisville.

It's pretty hard to keep a cool head and civil tongue when after 6 months we get fed a crap sandwich and even more questions than answers. I will note the civil settlement was about changes as well as money, so that's something I guess, but somehow not very reassuring at this point. The protests across the country continue, as we await the FBI report.

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

It's pretty hard to keep a cool head and civil tongue when after 6 months we get fed a crap sandwich and even more questions than answers.

More and more crap is coming out as the questions begin. Why did AG Cameron not mention that 12 witnesses did not hear anything? What else did he say that swayed the Grand Jury?

A New York Times investigation concluded that a neighbor, who was on the staircase immediately above Taylor's apartment, heard the officers shout "Police!" once (contrary to what law enforcement told investigators) and knocked three times, while approximately eleven other neighbors, heard no announcement. According to this investigation, every neighbors' account conflicts with law enforcement.

An attorney for the family says the witness initially denied hearing anything, but changed his story after several more interviews by the police pressuring him to change.

They had a no knock warrant so technically they did not need to knock although they say they did . Once her boyfriend opened fired ,they returned fire . She was a victim caught in the cross fire . Blame the boyfriend .

I don't know if she was a wonderful human being or not . There was a reason that the police decided to get a warrant to enter her apartment .

An internal police report and corroborating evidence show that Taylor had more extensive ties than previously made public with Jamarcus Glover .The findings of the report, corroborated by jail phone recordings ,a tracking device on Glover's car ,and video of Taylor at the drug house ,detail multiple links between Taylor and Glover .Glover was arrested the same night as Taylor’s shooting. He was picked up at the drug house . He was released on bail but is now a fugitive. The documents show that she was allowing him to use her address to register vehicles and for banking purposes. She was also allegedly moving money around for him while he was incarcerated. This contradicts reports that they had broken up 2 years ago.

In the meantime, in the weeks since Taylor's death, hundreds of other black Americans have been killed by hundreds of other black Americans. That gets no press since there is no political mileage to be gained from it, and that's what this is largely about. There is no call to improves inner city schools, or to return to the two-parent family system that served us so well for so long. Why? Because there is nothing to be gained politically from that. That would not drive voters into the arms of the democrat party.

From my preliminary understanding it is lawful for police to return fire when fired upon, but it is also lawful for a citizen to defend his home. We do know 911 was called before entry was made and nobody inside the apartment heard them announce they were police. Who calls the cops if they knew the cops were the ones doing the knocking? Whose right of self defense applies first? Why didn't the cops retreat and re-announce themselves instead of opening a barrage of fire?

Then we have the warrant. How was it obtained? What evidence or probable cause did they have?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

In the meantime, in the weeks since Taylor's death, hundreds of other black Americans have been killed by hundreds of other black Americans. That gets no press since there is no political mileage to be gained from it, and that's what this is largely about. There is no call to improves inner city schools, or to return to the two-parent family system that served us so well for so long. Why? Because there is nothing to be gained politically from that. That would not drive voters into the arms of the democrat party.

The protests aren't about CRIME but police brutality and all the root causes of it. Crime does get coverage locally, and the complaints about many inner city related issues has been constantly raised, but the especially egregious nature of police brutality is horrific and ongoing. Talk about politicizing a serious issue. You are definitely guilty.

@ Tom

It took 6 months for that?

Quote:

@ Tom

It took 6 months for that?

I don't know all the details . I am guessing the Grand Jury got the information. Beyond that ;if evidence used is not leaked then yes ;it may take some time for it to go public .

Quote:

but the especially egregious nature of police brutality is horrific and ongoing. Talk about politicizing a serious issue. You are definitely guilty.

If this Taylor case is your evidence, you are in serious trouble. The GJ did not agree with you at all.

I can't politicize that which has already been politicized out the wazoo.

That's another thing sticking in my craw, the whole SECRET grand jury thing run by the DA, who is a friend of the cops.

every grand Jury run properly is secret .

If it's SECRET how do you know it's properly run?

got me .maybe we should ask the FISA court

I would think the secrecy is to protect the innocent. You would like that if you were an innocent person accused of a crime that you did not commit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

got me .maybe we should ask the FISA court

No objections.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I would think the secrecy is to protect the innocent. You would like that if you were an innocent person accused of a crime that you did not commit.

Or cover a cop or a DA's arse, we don't know since it's secret.

point taken . The saying that a DA can indict a ham sandwich has stuck for a reason . Still the presumption of innocents has to be maintained . As we have seen. Too often there is a mob mentality, or a trial by media ,and public pressure ,can and does often influence DAs as well.

It's not a presumption of innocents that the real issue, it's the probable cause and the events that follow that matter. A court is where the presumption of innocents comes in, but arresting someone or even searching them has nothing to do with that presumption. You talk of mobs? The cops their union and the brass and the DA have a lot of influence with lawmakers. A lot more and more insidious than a mob in the streets.

They've been in the streets for months now and haven't budged anybody who counts to change a darn thing yet until this civil suit. At least it looks like the end of no knock warrants.

This is going to turn ugly when these mobs of law-breakers begin taking their "destruction tour" to areas where people live. Sometimes I think that's what needs to happen to them. If they come to my house, or I imagine to Tal's house, they'll find out a thing or two. People are getting tired of adults acting like children. It's easy to be philosophical about all of this when it's someone else's business they are burning or looting. We can certainly hope that all of this ends peacefully, but I'm not feeling good about that. The law-abiders will start pushing back at some point. People will start saying, "You are not going to burn my home or business down."

Quote:

This is going to turn ugly when these mobs of law-breakers begin taking their "destruction tour" to areas where people live.

It is happening . It just doesn't get the same press.

https://www.startribune.com/police-s...6fkINKN2YvZNo0

tal

Quote:

At least it looks like the end of no knock warrants.

agree

Hope they catch the criminal arsonist loon. Another thing that's come from this shooting is formation of a civilian/official review board Announced by the DA, as well as,

https://www.courier-journal.com/stor...ly/5792731002/

Quote:

Those changes include:

Early action warning system to identify officers with red flags.
Mandatory commanding officer review of all search warrants.
Mandatory body camera counting from two officers of all currency seizures.
Mandatory written approval of SWAT matrices before search warrants are executed.
Encouraging officers to perform at least two paid hours a week of community service in the communities they serve.
Housing credits for officers to live in certain low-income census tracts in the city.
Hiring a team of social workers to assist with dispatched runs.
Commitment to bargain for increased drug and alcohol testing in the next FOP contract.
Overhaul of processes for simultaneous search warrants.
Mandatory EMS/paramedic presence for all search warrants.
Elimination of the "closed by exception" basis for closing investigations into officer conduct when there is a retirement or resignation.
Personnel files: Metro will negotiate with the FOP in 2021 to expand on the records it may maintain in police officers’ personnel files.

There is more but this seems a good start.

Welcome needed reforms that don't compromise effective law enforcement . Above seems reasonable .

Quote:

Mandatory commanding officer review of all search warrants.

You do realize that judges already have to approve search warrants?

Quote:

Mandatory body camera counting from two officers of all currency seizures. Mandatory written approval of SWAT matrices before search warrants are executed. Encouraging officers to perform at least two paid hours a week of community service in the communities they serve.

Those are worth considering.

Quote:

Housing credits for officers to live in certain low-income census tracts in the city. Hiring a team of social workers to assist with dispatched runs.

$$$ Where is that coming from in an age where liberal dems are wanting to cut police budgets?

Quote:

Commitment to bargain for increased drug and alcohol testing in the next FOP contract. Overhaul of processes for simultaneous search warrants.

Worth considering though when has alcohol/drug use been a large problem?

Quote:

Mandatory EMS/paramedic presence for all search warrants.

No need for that and an added expense when liberal dems want to reduce budgets.

meanwhile Sleepy Joe slept . Yes with riots in Louisville and protests across the country . The Quid campaign "put a lid" on his campaign yesterday morning at 9:30 AM . They said it was for debate prep. https://apnews.com/article/election-...f1fc31c857903e

By "debate prep", do you mean they are preparing the questions which will be asked in the same manner that Hillary Clinton was able to enjoy? 8D

I think getting out of the dufus's way while he talks crazy and does stupid stuff is a great strategy. He's been doing just fine so far.

That's a legit point. Someone needs to tell Trump that if he loses to a dim-wit like Biden, it will be the fault of his big mouth.

Trump knew Chris Wallace was going to be a debate moderator . So Trump did an exclusive interview with Wallace daring him to take his best shot . In contrast Biden is memorizing index cards . The secret is to get under his skin by talking about Hunter corruption . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWx8SL0RYRo

That'll work as long as Biden can remember who Hunter is. 8D

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

You do realize that judges already have to approve search warrants?

Those are worth considering.
$$$ Where is that coming from in an age where liberal dems are wanting to cut police budgets?
Worth considering though when has alcohol/drug use been a large problem?
No need for that and an added expense when liberal dems want to reduce budgets.

The FBI is looking into the search warrant process as part of the investigation, but can't hurt for a supervisor to do that before one is applied for as a routine procedure. If workers can be routinely tested, so should ones with a badge and a gun. No brainer. You might nip potential issues in the bud, since its likely a symptom of a greater problem that needs to be addressed. As for more social workers and medicos, especially in preparation for high stress situations where anything can happen...also a no brainer, not just for the safety of cops and citizens alike but for those calls that involve mental and medical intervention. I think they should be an integral part of a modern cops training personally, and certainly as important as regular firearms training.

Considering the risk of death and injury should the money be an issue or a political consideration? We get what we pay for. We don't skimp on judges and administrators, why skimp on frontline essential personnel (In any profession frankly)?

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

The FBI is looking into the search warrant process as part of the investigation, but can't hurt for a supervisor to do that before one is applied for as a routine procedure. If workers can be routinely tested, so should ones with a badge and a gun. No brainer. You might nip potential issues in the bud, since its likely a symptom of a greater problem that needs to be addressed. As for more social workers and medicos, especially in preparation for high stress situations where anything can happen...also a no brainer, not just for the safety of cops and citizens alike but for those calls that involve mental and medical intervention. I think they should be an integral part of a modern cops training personally, and certainly as important as regular firearms training.

Considering the risk of death and injury should the money be an issue or a political consideration? We get what we pay for. We don't skimp on judges and administrators, why skimp on frontline essential personnel (In any profession frankly)?

All excellent points above. I would like to add one.

Everybody agrees there are bad rogue cops, but most cops are good decent people putting their life on the line every day to protect the citizenry.

The second part of that sentence needs clarification.

It's equally true that cops tend to be silent when their brother cops are observed breaking the law, especially in minority communities. This silence does more than anything to perpetuate the distrust and fear minorities, and increasingly people in general, have when dealing with the police.

Then there's the criminal justice system which badly needs reform as it skewers in favor of the moneyed classes and works against the poor. But that's a topic for another day.

I'm not following you on the alcohol testing. Are you saying a cop should not be able to drink some when off duty? As to drugs, it varies from one city to the next, but from what I can tell, many departments already do so. They used to randomly test our bus drivers for drug use.

Quote:

Considering the risk of death and injury should the money be an issue or a political consideration? We get what we pay for.

So you're OK with a tax increase to pay for this? Are you standing against the liberal dems who are calling for reductions in police funding?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

I'm not following you on the alcohol testing. Are you saying a cop should not be able to drink some when off duty? As to drugs, it varies from one city to the next, but from what I can tell, many departments already do so. They used to randomly test our bus drivers for drug use.

Not saying that, but given the nature of their job and they have guns, I think more scrutiny and extra care and caution should be the norm. The long term effects of alcohol/drugs is devastating enough and easily ignored by high functioning individuals until it's too late, and that's without any other issues. We should do much better than we do for our vets so let's not kid ourselves to believe we are doing enough. We are NOT.

Quote:

So you're OK with a tax increase to pay for this? Are you standing against the liberal dems who are calling for reductions in police funding?

Whatever it takes to better facilitate cops serving and protecting, because I think there are numerous issues as Athos rightly points out that have gone unaddressed for to long. Many have been outright neglected and ignored by some of you people. It's a lot more complex and far reaching than you can know. Just a symptom of a bigger problem.

Quote:

It's equally true that cops tend to be silent when their brother cops are observed breaking the law, especially in minority communities.

There is some truth to the first part of that sentence and I doubt that many people would disagree with it. The second part, however, is questionable. I don't know of any data to back that up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

There is some truth to the first part of that sentence and I doubt that many people would disagree with it. The second part, however, is questionable. I don't know of any data to back that up.

so you believe that minorities bring trouble upon themselves, I don't know of any data to back that up.

Quote:

so you believe that minorities bring trouble upon themselves,

What? That wasn't even being discussed. The subject is cops covering up for each other's misbehavior. Pay attention.

Maybe it should be as a predicate for examining a bigger picture. It might just give you insight into the WHY of protests as a venue to vent and highlight injustices that go back decades.

In these shootings, it is very nearly always the case that the person killed was violently resisting arrest. The deceased can hardly be called an innocent victim of police brutality, and frequently, after the matter is investigated, it's found that the police behaved properly. Now in the case of the several thousand black Americans murdered, nearly always by other black Americans, they are truly innocent victims who get killed just because someone else wants them dead. This includes young children killed in someone's front yard, or even killed sitting in their own home. There are no national protests about this. There is no national organization dedicated to stopping it. Why? Because there is no political advantage to be gained from it since it cannot be blamed on white people. So this sickening state of affairs will continue for the very reason that no one cares. Liberal dems certainly do not care.

I suppose you will continue to ignore the amazing changes that have occurred over the decades, and also the self-destructive life habits of many people in the black community. We'll just keep on talking about the very, very small sliver of the picture that amounts to police misbehavior. There is political hay to be made there. This is all about beating Trump and nothing else. It's a racist approach to life that pre-determines guilt/innocence based on the color of the skin of the policemen and criminal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

the self-destructive life habits of many people in the black community.

what about the self-destructive habits of many people who are not BLACK, you ignore the real issue, a community full of self-destructive habits and label it a minority problem. It is no wonder BLM runs riot

Quote:

what about the self-destructive habits of many people who are not BLACK, you ignore the real issue, a community full of self-destructive habits and label it a minority problem. It is no wonder BLM runs riot

And yet again you are off topic. The topic WAS the black community and the injustice directed at it by police, so yeah, I confined my comments to that area. Most people in America realize that speaking about one area does not amount to pretending that other problems do not exist. We're able to think in those broad terms, and especially when we are not just dialed in to being critical. You?