And here I’ve been arguing that fascism isn’t adhered to in America.
Sorry, I believe in due process and presumption of innocence.
Last edited:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Ex-officer Brett Hankison indicted in connection with Breonna Taylor's death
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Sorry, I believe in due process and presumption of innocence.
S
Sarcelle
Guest
Plus, both of them could have been asleep and didn’t hear the police identify themselves.
The next thing they know they’re awakened by unknown men holding guns and entering into the apartment at the middle of the night. For all they know, she and her boyfriend thought they were home invaders.
Don’t they have the right to defend themselves against trespassers with a legally acquired firearm?
Isn’t this what defenders of the second amendment claim?
The next thing they know they’re awakened by unknown men holding guns and entering into the apartment at the middle of the night. For all they know, she and her boyfriend thought they were home invaders.
Don’t they have the right to defend themselves against trespassers with a legally acquired firearm?
Isn’t this what defenders of the second amendment claim?
Last edited:
C
ConcernedAmerican
Guest
I don’t have a problem with that. I do have a problem with cops firing a barrage of bullets, missing the man shooting at them, and killing a bystander. The fact that it isn’t a crime to do so says a lot.I’m not sure why you do not understand the legal fact that, once fired upon, police can return fire when legally serving a warrant.
The account I heard was that the boyfriend heard the banging on the door. They got out of bed and he retrieved his gun. They broke Down the door. He fired. They returned fire.Plus, both of them could have been asleep and didn’t hear the police identify themselves.
He has not been charged for firing first.
That’s why he isn’t facing charges.Don’t they have the right to defend themselves against trespassers with a legally acquired firearm?
Isn’t this what defenders of the second amendment claim?
S
Sarcelle
Guest
He didn’t pull the trigger that killed Breonna, the cops did.The ex boyfriend had them. And weapons. And he had placed Taylor in a terrible situation.
Sure you do.I don’t have a problem with that.
So, you’re saying they should have a bullet limit. Why?I do have a problem with cops firing a barrage of bullets, missing the man shooting at them, and killing a bystander. The fact that it isn’t a crime to do so says a lot.
It is only a crime if they are committing a crime. If there’s an intruder in my house, I’m perfectly happy with my wife shooting all rounds In self defense.
Last edited:
He fired at the police first. He hit an officer in the leg. They returned fire.He didn’t pull the trigger that killed Breonna, the cops did.
C
ConcernedAmerican
Guest
I’m saying they should hit their target and be held responsible when they don’t.
R
RogueSemicolon
Guest
In an Interview with police, Kenneth Walker said that he and Breonna Taylor were in bed with Netflix on the TV when they heard a loud noise coming from outside their front door. They both called out several times, demanding who was at the door. Walker grabbed his gun (admitted he was “scared to death”) and Taylor shouted “at the top of her lungs,” asking once again who was at the door. They got out of bed and left for the door when the door was busted in and Walker fired his gun, not knowing who was there but believing them to be home invaders.They were, instead, police officers in plain clothes, and Walker had just shot one of them in the leg. Officers responded by firing several shots into the apartment, missing Walker but hitting Taylor, who was pronounced dead at the scene about five minutes later.Plus, both of them could have been asleep and didn’t hear the police identify themselves.
Tessa Duvall for the Louisville Courier Journal provides a more detailed breakdown of the incident taken from “public records, official statements and interviews with witnesses and people close to the case,” and responds to eight myths about what happened that have been circulating on social media:
Last edited:
C
CradleRC58
Guest
That is precisely why her boyfriend was released. He invoked his stand your ground/castle doctrine privilege.
If the police just knocked and he opened the door and then fired his weapon at the police he would be charged. But the police forced entry and her boyfriend was justified in using his weapon to deter what he assumed was a home invasion.
No-knock warrants at residences resemble home invasions. In states that recognize a citizens right to self-defense, no-knock warrants are bad policy. Unfortunately it took Ms Taylors’ death to realize it’s a bad policy.
The other thing revealed in this case is a lack of understanding that shooting blindly into the interior of an apartment building, or even a single family home, is really a reckless and non - professional tactic by any member of law enforcement.
For those reasons, I believe the grand jury made the right call. A breakdown in the system is why Miss Taylor was killed. Not the fault of the officers who returned fire.
The indictment of the other officer who haphazardly fired his weapon in a reckless manner is justified. That man has no business being anywhere near a weapon. Or a badge.
I have a feeling that the police chief who fired him would agree.
If the police just knocked and he opened the door and then fired his weapon at the police he would be charged. But the police forced entry and her boyfriend was justified in using his weapon to deter what he assumed was a home invasion.
No-knock warrants at residences resemble home invasions. In states that recognize a citizens right to self-defense, no-knock warrants are bad policy. Unfortunately it took Ms Taylors’ death to realize it’s a bad policy.
The other thing revealed in this case is a lack of understanding that shooting blindly into the interior of an apartment building, or even a single family home, is really a reckless and non - professional tactic by any member of law enforcement.
For those reasons, I believe the grand jury made the right call. A breakdown in the system is why Miss Taylor was killed. Not the fault of the officers who returned fire.
The indictment of the other officer who haphazardly fired his weapon in a reckless manner is justified. That man has no business being anywhere near a weapon. Or a badge.
I have a feeling that the police chief who fired him would agree.
This is the most sensible statement you’ve made.I’m saying they should hit their target and be held responsible when they don’t.
C
ConcernedAmerican
Guest
And yet you’re defending them for getting off with killing an innocent woman.
R
RogueSemicolon
Guest
From Andrew Wolfson of the Louisville Courier Journal:
As also noted in the article, in order to specifically get a murder conviction in Kentucky, the defendant must have conscious intent to kill. (It is not explained what is required to obtain any of the other three kinds of homicide convictions.)
[The reasoning behind the grand jury’s decision] likely hinged on what Attorney General Daniel Cameron told reporters Wednesday: Kentucky’s “vigorous laws on self-defense.”
Cameron said there were no homicide charges against Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly and Officer Myles Cosgrove — who together fired 18 shots, six of which hit Taylor — “because they were justified in firing after being fired upon.”
Criminal defense lawyers said they were not surprised by the outcome — including the decision toindict only former Officer Brett Hankison, who already had been fired for shooting blindly into Taylor’s apartment.
As also noted in the article, in order to specifically get a murder conviction in Kentucky, the defendant must have conscious intent to kill. (It is not explained what is required to obtain any of the other three kinds of homicide convictions.)
Last edited:
C
CradleRC58
Guest
Ms Taylor is dead because the policy of allowing no-knock warrants in a state that allows invoking stand your ground and castle doctrine, by a resident who believes he/she is a victim of a home invasion, finally reared its ugly head.
U
Useless
Guest
No-knock warrants have nothing to do with this case. Both parties agree that the police did knock before entering.
No. In defending their right to due process and presumption of innocence. One poster here has already admitted opposing these basic principles of justice.And yet you’re defending them for getting off with killing an innocent woman.
I’m also opposing false accusations of racism.
They fired in self defense.
V
VanitasVanitatum
Guest
Why were there only charges for the white neighbors?Again, if you make an accusation of racism, you have to have evidence that they acted with racist intent, or the accusation is racist. Are you claiming the Ky. AG is racist against blacks?
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.