Brianna Taylor grand jury in

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
21,465
Reaction score
7,953
Points
360
police are supposed to make things better, yet they make them gruesomely worse

NO JUSTICE! NO PEACE! FUCK THE POLICE!
statistically speaking they do make things better,,its just when they fuck up its a big deal to snowflakes,,,
So if Ms Taylor was your daughter would you become a...........as you call it.........a snowflake.
I'l let you know when that happens,,,

the fact is out of millions of interactions a yr a few fuck ups are bound to happen,,,
And they need held accountable in every one of those cases.
of course,,,

absolutely,,,
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
7,361
Reaction score
948
Points
160
Location
North Carolina
police are supposed to make things better, yet they make them gruesomely worse

NO JUSTICE! NO PEACE! FUCK THE POLICE!
statistically speaking they do make things better,,its just when they fuck up its a big deal to snowflakes,,,
So if Ms Taylor was your daughter would you become a...........as you call it.........a snowflake.
I'l let you know when that happens,,,

the fact is out of millions of interactions a yr a few fuck ups are bound to happen,,,
So a young woman losing her life is wrote off as a fuck up.
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
59,875
Reaction score
2,583
Points
1,815
Just like with Tamir Rice the jurors never got the chance to vote on guilt.

I knew that.

I believe that Cameron lied to the Grand Jury to get the ruling he wanted.

 

Tommy Tainant

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
24,394
Reaction score
4,784
Points
290
Location
Y Cae Ras
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,197
Reaction score
4,006
Points
215
LOUISVILLE, Ky. — The Louisville judge who signed a search warrant for Breonna Taylor’s home that ultimately led to her death said Thursday she is concerned that the detective may have lied to obtain the warrant.

Judge says she is 'concerned' detective may have lied to get Breonna Taylor search warrant

This is interesting also......the prosecutor said that those who enacted the raid had nothing to do with the warrant.

And they indicate that Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly, who was shot and wounded during the search, had a larger role in verifying information with the postal inspector's office than previously stated.
 

GHook20

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
217
Points
58
Location
Las Vegas
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
 

Tommy Tainant

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
24,394
Reaction score
4,784
Points
290
Location
Y Cae Ras
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,197
Reaction score
4,006
Points
215
Louisville police officers carried out a no-knock raid at the home of Breonna Taylor despite the fact that they were repeatedly told there were no packages, “suspicious or otherwise,” delivered to the residence that could be tied to their drug investigation, according to a new report.

Seems the judge is concerned or trying to cover for herself.

Jefferson Circuit Judge Mary Shaw, who signed the search warrant for Taylor’s home, has since expressed concern that she was misled by officers in the investigation. Despite the worry, she told the Courier Journal on Thursday she would defer to the FBI investigation.

Louisville cops repeatedly told Breonna Taylor was not receiving suspicious packages tied to drug investigation, report says
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,197
Reaction score
4,006
Points
215
But what is utterly mind-boggling is that Cameron didn’t present any evidence to the grand jury about the Louisville Metro Police Department’s efforts to obtain a search warrant of Taylor’s home — actions that at best were sloppy and at worst were criminal.

In fact, when grand jurors pressed for more information, Cameron’s prosecutors pushed back and told them they weren’t interested in such things............

...........The problem is, if it wasn’t for an officer swearing — untruthfully — to a judge that Taylor was receiving packages in the mail for a suspected drug dealer, the police likely would never have gotten permission to raid Taylor's apartment and the 26-year-old woman would be alive today.


Since Cameron wouldn't, Tom Wine must seek charges against police who got search warrant
 

GHook20

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
217
Points
58
Location
Las Vegas
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
 

Quasar44

Platinum Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2020
Messages
6,601
Reaction score
3,829
Points
903
Location
Las Vegas
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
Yes . If the cops want to enter , you agree and deal with it later in court
But blacks don’t think as we do
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
21,197
Reaction score
4,006
Points
215
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
Yes . If the cops want to enter , you agree and deal with it later in court
But blacks don’t think as we do
You lie and hold a double standard so yeah.
 

Tommy Tainant

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2016
Messages
24,394
Reaction score
4,784
Points
290
Location
Y Cae Ras
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
You are talking about the Black woman shot in her own home right ?
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
6,269
Reaction score
1,020
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
The extend of the charges should go beyond just the 3 plain clothes cops involved.
The judge was guilty for authorizing a no-knock drug warrant, the police were guilty for trying to serve it in the middle of the night, congress is guilty for allowing a War on Drugs which is clearly illegal, etc.
 

GHook20

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
217
Points
58
Location
Las Vegas
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
You are talking about the Black woman shot in her own home right ?
Read slowly... because that is not what I am talking about. You brought up due process, yet the cops got a VALID NO KNOCK warrant to search her home. They still knocked. Her boyfriend shot at the cops, WHO HAD EVERY RIGHT TO BE IN THE HOME AND DO IT BY FORCED ENTRY. Note: the BF originally told the cops she was the one that shot at the cops. The cops fired back and she was struck. Not one of her rights were trampled on.

This case actually is proof why a no knock warrant is necessary. If they just executed the no knock, they would have gotten the jump on the BF and there would have been no shots and no story for t he fake news narrative.
 

GHook20

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2020
Messages
217
Reaction score
217
Points
58
Location
Las Vegas
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
Yes . If the cops want to enter , you agree and deal with it later in court
But blacks don’t think as we do
You lie and hold a double standard so yeah.
Monday morning QB against the police is a leftist trait. Smh they don’t learn
 

Rigby5

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2017
Messages
6,269
Reaction score
1,020
Points
170
Location
New Mexico
The police were fired at and acted in self defense
the guy had legal use of a gun and he fired at intruders.
You just can face facts... they had a no knock warrant, but THEY KNOCKED ANYWAYS, which turned out to be a bad move. He didn’t fire at intruders, intruders by the legal definition have no right to be in the home. With the warrant they had the UNEQUIVOCAL right to be there. He fired upon cops, and despite the lies cnn and msnbc spewed, she was awake and standing behind him.

A legally purchased gun doesn’t allow you to fire at anyone, much less cops. In addition she was not innocent the warrant was for her, because of the illegal work she was doing for her ex-BF, man she knows how to pick them.
You have a tenuous grasp of due process.
Due Process was even discussed moron!
Due process says she is innocent until proven guilty. Why do you struggle with that ?
Why do you struggle with the fact the they had a valid warrant for her arrested? This has nothing to do with her innocence or guilt, rather they had the full right to enter her home unannounced (which they still announced themselves) and her boyfriend fired at the police.
You are talking about the Black woman shot in her own home right ?
Read slowly... because that is not what I am talking about. You brought up due process, yet the cops got a VALID NO KNOCK warrant to search her home. They still knocked. Her boyfriend shot at the cops, WHO HAD EVERY RIGHT TO BE IN THE HOME AND DO IT BY FORCED ENTRY. Note: the BF originally told the cops she was the one that shot at the cops. The cops fired back and she was struck. Not one of her rights were trampled on.

This case actually is proof why a no knock warrant is necessary. If they just executed the no knock, they would have gotten the jump on the BF and there would have been no shots and no story for t he fake news narrative.
A person's home is sovereign.
There is very little justification for ever issuing a warrant for a home, and the ONLY excuse for a no-knock warrant is when there is a hostage at risk.
You can NOT legally issue a no-knock warrant to collect evidence, on a private home.
You have to already have all the necessary evidence before a warrant can be issued.
So the warrant was totally invalid.
There was no evidence.
They were at the wrong old address, the person they wanted was already in custody.

And NO, there is only one person who said the police identified themselves, and that was only after he changed his testimony. Walker and the rest of the building say the police never replied to Walker yelling who was breaking in.

And no, police do NOT have any right to break down a door in the middle of the night, and never can have that right, unless there is a hostage.

Although Walker fired the first shot, that was legal, in self defense, of an obvious plain clothes home invasion.
It is illegal for police to conduct a raid out of uniform.

And regardless of who shot first, police to not then have a right of self defense, to shoot indiscriminately.
They are paid to accept risks and not risk the lives of anyone else, by firing indiscriminately, as they clearly did.
They clearly were guilty of reckless endangerment at the very least. But since they got the wrong address and came in the middle of the night, they get ALL the blame for everything. They MADE everything happen. So then they ARE guilty of murder.

There is NEVER a legal or rational excuse for no-knock warrants, that violate the basic hierarchy of rights.
If they had followed the law, and came during the day, no one would have been harmed, and everyone would have been happy with the outsome.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top