Juror in Breonna Taylor case said grand jury didn't agree fatal shooting was justified

Nobody can prove they're lying, which is what matters in a court of law. A bunch of people sleeping in the middle of the night aren't the best witnesses for what they did or didn't hear and that would absolutely be used by the defense, regardless what anyone claims they did or didn't hear. It also doesn't help the boyfriend's case that he admitted early on to hearing them knocking, he just claims he didn't hear them say police. (Hence him and Taylor being in the hallway) It's strange to think they would bother with knocking but not announce.

Only 1 cop is accused of firing wildly, which he was fired for, and that is what the Grand Jury deliberated charges for. The outcry is that they didn't press for murder too. The reality is we have a bunch of people who don't understand law looking for what they feel should be charged instead of what the facts show.

Correct, It's possible the cop was shot by another cop. It's also possible he wasn't. The forensics were inconclusive which doesn't lend evidence to either side. The caliber does match the boyfriend's gun however. There is rumor that at least one of the cops had a gun with the same caliber as well, but I have not seen any definitive evidence of that, only rumor.

I agree on the warrant portion. The officer involved in obtaining the warrant should face the appropriate charges for falsifying information to obtain it. That is 100% irrelevant to this article however - That officer was not involved in the serving of the warrant, and this Grand Jury did not involve that officer or his part in this.

I possibly agree with the approving judge getting charges, pending more info. We have obviously heard nothing from them on the matter, and going forward without one whole side of the story is sloppy to say the least. It's worth investigating further at a minimum.

I agree things should change regarding no knock warrants (and plain clothes). But let's bring back the context of what we're talking about right now - criminal charges. You can not criminally charge officers who served a legal warrant, in a legal way, and legally shot back after being shot at. Unless you can show evidence they knew the warrant was obtained illegitimately to begin with, these officers were there doing their appointed duty in a legally upheld way. The only officer that can be held criminally out of that group would be the one firing blindly, as that is not covered under their authority and has been upheld in the past to be unacceptable. The warrant obtaining officer will hopefully be held criminally accountable down the line.

We should push for changes of no-knocks and plain clothes for these circumstances being unacceptable, but we can't retroactively charge someone for laws we want to change after the fact. That's unconstitutional and an outrageously slippery slope.

/r/news Thread Parent Link - nbcnews.com