The grand jury returned one indictment in the Breonna Taylor case. Two officers were not charged, and one was charged with wanton endangerment for firing blindly into the dwelling. Sadly predictably, BLM and other activists are crying that she did not receive justice. People can reasonably disagree as to the merits of no knock warrants. However, that’s a separate issue from did the officers involved follow the law.
It’s ironic that the grand jury indictment came on the same day as the Catholic National Prayer Breakfast. Bishop Barron gave an excellent speech at the breakfast that was focused on a different issue, but has points that apply to help evaluate whether justice occurred in this case. In his speech Bishop Barron noted that the concepts in the Declaration of Independence were a marked departure from previous political thought. Before the Declaration of Independence political thought was people were unequal.
Political classes existed based on the inherent inequality in people. Some are more intelligent, some are stronger, et cetera. This difference in ability (and often lineage) left people in defined classes in society. How, then, do we get to “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal”? The Bishop reasoned that the answer is self evident in the text itself, “they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights” – it is the endowment by their Creator that grants the rights and leaves all people created equal.
It is in this context, that we are all made equally dignified by the Creator with certain inalienable rights that we need to assess whether justice has occurred. The fact pattern is well known: the officers were serving a no knock warrant. Taylor’s significant other though they were being robbed and shot at the officers. The officers returned fire killing Taylor in the process. It’s a tragedy, but does justice demand they be punished? The answer is no, and an attempt to do so is an injustice to the officers.
All men are created equal, and the officers’ right to bodily integrity is equal to Breonna’s right to bodily integrity. Their right to bodily integrity was threatened when her significant other opened fire. They have the same right to defend themselves as her significant other did to defend himself. The unindicted officers’ rights and Breonna’s rights were both compromised in an identical manner.
So how do we resolve the conflict of rights? It’s easy to say that none of the actors was at fault and this was a horrible tragedy. However, taking that stand ignores the fact that she was killed and her right to bodily integrity was violated. To address this concern we have to at least examine the events and see if any actual wrongdoing occurred as opposed to a series of tragic events. At its core justice demands giving someone their due. This means giving her what she is due, but not at the expense of the rights of the officers.
The grand jury process has accomplished this goal. The district attorney presented the case to the grand jury. As a result of the presentation the grand jury came back with one indictment of wanton endangerment to the officer who fired blindly into the dwelling. This result suggests the process was fair and seeks accountability for the officer who violated the use of force policy and endangered every one’s right to bodily integrity.
So why is there an outcry against the grand jury indictment? Justice was served in the classical sense because everyone received their due. The officers’ actions were examined to see if they were contrary to law. The grand jury gave a nuanced indictment pattern for the case. It is easy to write this off as a case where those opposing the return simply want vengeance rather than justice. This easy reconciliation likely is substantially correct for a significant number of the individual members who are unhappy with the result, but it also illustrates a different problem regarding justice.
Some who condemn the officers and the system in general will argue that restorative justice was not served. However, that argument fails because it is contrary to one of the tenets of restorative justice. Restorative justice is founded on the three principles of:
- Repair: injustice causes harm and justice requires the harm to be remedied
- Collaboration: the best way to have the harm remedied is for the parties to decide together how to remedy the harm
- Transformation: the remedy to harm ideally creates a change in the conditions that lead to the injustice
Restorative justice is a controversial concept. Even if we are to accept it as meritorious the cry that restorative justice demands change does not support creating injustice. Making the officers a scapegoat to the alleged systemic injustice is injustice to the officers. Worse, insistence on punishment for the officers involved fails the collaboration principle of restorative justice. If the cry for restorative justice is based on the premise that no knock warrants are improper then the goal should be to address the underlying issue of no knock warrants. Saying that justice was not served because restorative justice did not occur is to dictate rather than collaborate. It is to deny the very principles of restorative justice.
The district attorney presented the case to a grand jury, and the grand jury returned an indictment in a nuanced manner. That gives Breonna what she is due – an accounting of the officers’ actions. You cannot create justice by engaging in injustice against others. To do so is to violate the very reasons we were founded – the proposition that all men are created equal with inalienable rights endowed by the Creator.
The raid turned out not to be a ‘no-knock’ raid. Witnesses reported that the officers knocked on the door and announced themselves. They waited awhile and broke in when they received no response.
Nothing less than the blood of all cops involved in the raid will satisfy the BLM mob.
A substantial number of people out there have no actual interest in justice. They are interested in political power, which they perceive they get from rioting and burning people’s property. They are to some extent right. Others just want to raise hell and see this as a semi-justification. Still others are ANGRY and want to vent that anger. Some actually believe the bullshit. Some are committed anarchists who want to destroy our country just because. These rioters are at least somewhat organized thru BLM and AntiFa. They are being funded some how or other. These behind-the-scenes figures should be identified and imprisoned.
Greg, the fact pattern is clearly not what you stated. I didn’t bother giving this story one ounce of interest until that Kentucky AG came forward. He destroyed the 6 month media narrative in under 6 minutes.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/09/the_truth_finally_emerges_about_breonna_taylors_death.html
This gal appeared to be consorting with drug dealers. The entire narrative of how we got here is exactly like the ‘hands up don’t shoot’ lie, ‘he was just getting iced tea and skittles’ lie and so many others.
Our MSM is garbage, and virulently covering for democrats to the point of fomenting violence. The goober that rented the U-Haul truck we saw disgorging all the signs and shields yesterday to the rioters is a Soros employee at the ‘Bail Project’. She has been very active over the last few years.
Assuming the officers involved in the shooting did not know the warrant was fraudulently obtained the outcome makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is the officer who obtained the warrant hasn’t been charged with anything, you could even make a case that a murder charge should have been made against him.
Gary, for your information, the warrant was not fraudulently obtained. You’ve swallowed too much BLM hogwash.
Howie, all the news reports say the officer lied about the post office packages on the application.
You seem to be incapable of blaming a cop for any illegal action
‘all the news’ there it is folks. all it takes for gullible people to be swayed is repeat bs enough and they’ll fall for it. Gary is a classic example.
Gary, are you aware the so called ex-boyfriend was being arrested at the same time this raid was occurring? Of course you don’t because your news doesn’t tell you that,
Did you know the ex-boyfriend uses her address as his own? of course not.
Did you know she had over $14k he had stashed with her?
That the police were there to gather evidence on the ‘ex-boyfriend’?
That they had placed a tracker on his car and knew when he was there?
None of what I have written came out until yesterday when the AG started laying it out and most of it was available but not reported.
All of the allegations you mention came out months ago. It was all part of a plea agreement designed to get the cops off the hook. It was all reported.
Dan know what your talking about before commenting.
so you idiots have known all of this this whole time and believe you can make up the story she was sleeping peacefully and attacked because of a bad warrant? Y’all are straight up ready for war over your fantasies?
Thanks for the heads up! Your terms are accepted.
Gary, here is the point of contention about the packages: Detective Joshua Jaynes claimed a US postal inspector ‘verified’ that Glover was receiving packages at Taylor’s home, but Louisville inspector Tony Gooden said Louisville police did not ask his office to conduct that investigation, but a different agency did. He said the local office concluded no potentially suspicious mail was being sent to Taylor’s apartment.
That does not necessarily mean Jaynes lied. He could have talked to a different postal inspector. Or the postal inspector who said LMPD did not ask for an investigation could be lying because he did not want the post office to be identified with the Breonna Taylor killing.
On several occasions I asked postal inspectors for information about the mail of suspects. They checked it out for me without making a formal investigation. And that could have happened with Jaynes.
So when you say “you could even make a case that a murder charge should have been made against” Jaynes, you are way out of line.
Howie, you could be right, maybe you’re wrong, but if you’re wrong then murder charges could be appropriate.
Dan, you seem disconnected from rational thought. Maybe you should get help.
says the guy that denies reality
gary I get more done before you wake up than you do all day
Here’s the bottom line. We have a justice system here in the US, that by all measurable standards is the best system in the world. Is it perfect? No. But it’s pretty damn good.
The problem is that in the last few years, second guessing our justice system has become the new national sport. Now, that, in and of itself might not be a horrible thing – every system can use some oversight and occasional correction. But there are a vast number of people who routinely place their opinions above those who actually have seen ALL of the evidence and have spend days, weeks, and even months trying to make sense of it all.
Gary – here’s a piece of rational thought for you: You have no freakin’ clue whether the warrant was illegally obtained or not. You haven’t even SEEN the actual warrant, much less the supporting documentation. You know NOTHING about the case except for a few isolated facts that have been fed to you by a media that is way more interested in ratings, than it is in civic duty.
A duly elected District Attorney (who was obviously NOT racially biased) presented the facts to an independent Grand Jury who, after due and sober consideration, returned an indictment. Now, maybe I think that it’s the wrong charge. But WTF do I know? I wasn’t there.
Are there questions to still ask? Possibly, but we ought to be leaving those questions to people who actually have factual information. Otherwise, you’re not helping – you’re hurting.
Fat, I agree. Guess what you don’t either
Yeah, but you know who does know everything? The District Attorney, and the members of the Grand Jury. So doesn’t it sound kind of silly for you to say “What doesn’t make sense is the officer who obtained the warrant hasn’t been charged with anything, you could even make a case that a murder charge should have been made against him.” You have no clue about what makes sense or not.
So, unless you have access to some store of super secret information that nobody else in the world knows about, or unless you have proof that the DA or the cops involved are crooked. (that means actual proof, not some half-baked, wild assed insinuation, just because you got hassled by a cop way back when) why not let the DA, the Grand Jury and the US Legal system do their work.
Michael Morton would be a good reason not to be totally trusting of the system.
Just because you’re an ex cop afraid of his little shadow is no reason to be afraid to question authority.
Interesting. . . . So, you bring up a single case that happened a third of a century ago to support your position. . . . .
Just to be clear, I’m certainly not suggesting that the system is perfect. I’m not saying that there aren’t bad cops, or bad DAs. I’m not even saying that juries don’t sometimes make mistakes. What I AM saying is that relying on a few snippets of information, that are being fed to you by a Media that has an obvious bias, is not a supportable position. You’re not questioning authority, you’re carrying water for George Clooney and his buddies.
And, just for the record, I am not now, nor have I ever been a LEO, an officer of the count, or an attorney.
Sounds more and more like the DA manipulated the system to get the outcome he wanted. Even the grand jury members are calling BS.
The merit of the underlying warrant is irrelevant to the question the grand jury had to answer. The question before the grand jury was did the officers involved in executing the warrant engage in criminal activity.
People can legitimately disagree on the merits of a no knock warrant in general. That’s not what was at stake in the grand jury proceeding.
In the end, this comes down to people wanting to dictate terms and outcomes and not seeking justice. I go around with a Trump facemask. People give me grief, and every time I say, “that’s the difference between us and you. We leave people in peace while you give people grief.” Every single instance it has been an African American initiating the encounter. They lose their minds when they are accused of not being peaceable saying there’s noting peaceful about Trump. Yet who is rioting?
We are dealing with a small minority (number, not race) that not only thinks they have the right to engage in such behavior, but are disconnected from reality. Free speech? Sure, give me grief for wearing a Trump mask. I open myself up to it by wearing the mask. But nothing peaceful about Trump coming from the rioting segment of the population? That’s why we shouldn’t fall on our swords anymore. We don’t need to stoop to their level, but we also need to start using bare knuckle politics since discussion and reason aren’t available with that segment of society, and they actively seek engagement.
Fat,
I could have brought up the 93 cases where people were released from jail or prison (2019 only) for misconduct due to the police, prosecution, or others within the justice system. I simple chose the first one that came to mind. So issues within the justice system aren’t all that rare, not all that common either.
I’m not relying on snippets of information, I’m relying on the public record. The issue of the warrant was not addressed to the grand jury according to the prosecutor and if it’s been investigated no official comments have been made.
That was the most far-fetched, intellectually insulting rationalization for government sanctioned murder of its citizens that I have read so far.
BS
Your comment perfectly describes your comment.