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