In fact, the attorney representing Taylor’s family refers to it as an apartment!

“ If Brett Hankison’s behavior was wanton endangerment to people in neighboring apartments, then it should have been wanton endangerment in Breonna Taylor’s apartment too,” Ben Crump, the prominent civil rights lawyer representing Taylor’s family, tweeted Wednesday.

I’m guessing you were the kid at the sleepover that corrected anyone who said, “Let’s ride our bikes tomorrow morning,” with “You mean THIS morning? It’s after midnight so it is already ‘tomorrow’!” You may think you are just being accurate (well, not in this case) but it really makes you seem like an asshole.

The reason that the indictment did not include Taylor’s home was because the officer was intentionally firing into that apartment but failed to strike anyone. If one of his bullets had hit Taylor, he likely would have been charged in her death. The “wanton endangerment” focused on the innocent bystanders he put in danger with his actions.

It may be that the only apartment struck that was occupied was that of the husband, wife, and baby. If not, it is must be because Kentucky’s grand jury hates blacks.

It's interesting that you've gone so far as to quote some weird local news source from Podunk, Illinois, but it uses the word apartments which is incorrect. All three charges relate to ONE apartment and it's the one where a white family lives. The people he endangered were identified by their initials in the indictment. There are no charges for his bullets that entered Taylor's other neighbor's apartment, let alone Taylor's.

And, once again, the grand jury can only consider charges for crimes that are presented to them. That may sound strange to you, but that's how it works.

I thought it sounded strange that the officer could be punished for bullets going into one apartment, but not the other two that were struck by bullets that day. You got your facts wrong, and on top of that you decided to go and make it about race! Congrats!

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WAND) - One of three officers tied to the deadly March 2020 police-involved shooting of Breonna Taylor is now facing charges.

Hankinson was terminated by the police department on June 23.
https://www.wandtv.com/news/1-officer-tied-to-deadly-shooting-of-breonna-taylor-now-facing-charges/article_74209c32-fdc1-11ea-a5dc-a30524da56ee.html

I don't need for you to tell me that he out of line. I'm well aware of that. The issue I was commenting on does not revolve around his conduct.

There has been no punishment, just a grand jury indictment. Grand juries don't indict for crimes that are not presented to them. Does that help?

Sorry, I misread your statement. I do not know how the punishment was solely for firing one of the shots but not the other two, i have never heard of that happening, honestly, so I question where you got this info. It is not like he was aiming at either of them, but most importantly, it was that he fired blindly through the house from outside. All of his shots were taken outside of police guidelines.

You should know whether that is true.

We just might if they'd had their bodycams on like they were supposed to.

The police filed a report that said Taylor was uninjured. Apparently, six gunshot wounds and death don't count. Tough job.

From where he was shooting, his bullets only struck the apartment of the person who happened to be white.

Not true. His bullets went into three apartments. Taylor's, the white neighbor's, and a black neighbor's.

I apologize for my crassness. What I meant by “I do not know that to be true,” was that I do not know if the boyfriend intentionally used her as a human shield, or if he just happened to be behind her when he fired on the officers. Also, I am curious if the autopsy report said she had six gunshot wounds or if it stated how many times she was actually shot by the officers.

The problem with this case, and so many of the recent ones, are that the media failed to report on them until after a lawsuit was filed. Washington Post’s first big story on Taylor’s death got all of its details from the lawsuit filed by the family/boyfriend against the city. We all know that cities do not talk about pending lawsuits, so the public only learned what those trying to win millions of dollars from their lawsuit wanted us to know about what occurred that day.

This is why people were so stunned that no officers were indicted. If you have only been told the details from the boyfriend’s point of view, and you believe that those details are all factual, then it would be shocking that the police officers were not charged. I fully understand why people are outraged, and it isn’t easy to change someone’s opinion when they believe that they know the facts of what happened when they have not been hearing the facts.

One thing that I am hoping cities and police departments will start doing a better job of is explaining the laws, policies, and procedures that the police have to follow...to better educate the public instead of just remaining silent when the media is misinforming the masses. While they cannot share all of the information and details while an investigation is being conducted, explaining how the process is conducted is something most people have never been educated on. Knowledge is power... and is something that the general public is desperately lacking in when it comes to how our legal system works.

well, that narrows it down to anywhere but austin.

Heh. Correct!

well, that narrows it down to anywhere but austin.

Also, it really seems like the only way Taylor was struck so many times and her boyfriend was not struck at all is if he used her as a human shield. I do not know that to be true, but it is the most obvious explanation.

You should know whether that is true. Where were the bodies found? Does the forensic analysis of the (crime) scene comport with your "obvious explanation"?

Wow. Especially the part about the human shield scenario.

So if you don't live in TX-23 where do you live, Victoria?

I'll narrow it down especially for you, MC: My primary residence is in Texasssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!

I find it odd that the cops say that Breonna Taylor and Kenneth Walker were standing together in the hallway when they broke down the door. Walker shot once and they responded with a hail of bullets, yet none hit Walker and six hit Taylor.

A couple of things: When the bullets start flying, it is not easy to determine who is still firing and who is not. This is why you will read stories of two shooters firing 3 shots at police and the police returning fire 50 times. Granted, it’s typically 6 - 10 officers firing, but the numbers definitely seem disproportionate. Sadly, that is just how it is. Officers are trained to keep firing until they are no longer fired upon. But with multiple officers firing from different locations, it is not always easy to determine when the suspects have stopped shooting.

Also, it really seems like the only way Taylor was struck so many times and her boyfriend was not struck at all is if he used her as a human shield. I do not know that to be true, but it is the most obvious explanation.

Going back to what I was saying earlier: This is why I partly why I believe the officer who shot Jacob Blake is a hero. Officer Sheskey had to realize that Blake’s children were in the vehicle he was trying to get to, as he put himself in the direct line of fire needlessly if not. Moving behind Blake close enough that he could physically grab Blake’s shirt, it prevented any of the other officers from firing on Blake unless he was able to get behind the wheel and try to drive off. If Blake did that, the officers would have been forced to fire into the vehicle to stop him, and it would have put the children’s lives at risk. Sheskey had to stop Blake from getting behind the wheel to protect his own life and the children’s lives. When Sheskey fired on Blake, his children were out of the line of fire and were not at risk of being injured.

In addition, it's interesting that Hankison is charged with wanton endangerment because bullets entered Taylor's white neighbor's apartment, but not for the bullet that entered her black neighbor's apartment.

He fired blindly into the house from outside. His charges were justified. From where he was shooting, his bullets only struck the apartment of the person who happened to be white.

He's also shown you that he has the police, ICE, border security, militias and the media on his side.

No, he doesn’t. In fact, he does not even have his supporters full support when it comes to not peacefully turning over power if he loses the election. Surprising no one, Fox News has not really been reporting Trump’s comments on this subject to their viewers, and many refuse to believe that he actually did make such comments. That was the case at Devon’s police department when Devon was talking politics with two Trump supporters. After Devon played them Trump telling the media that he would not promise that there will be a peaceful transition of power if he loses, both of them told Devon that they would be more than happy to help remove Trump from the White House if that is what it came to.

Again, we see how Fox News viewers are simply unaware of a large number of the offensive and corrupt actions that Trump has made while in office.

It should also be noted that our military leaders have sent out reminders to our troops that their oath is to our Constitution, not the President.

So if you don't live in TX-23 where do you live, Victoria?

And where the hell you get my name from?

** This guy **

Cain't remember giving it out in these pages, but I gotta disclose that the weed in Countri-Cali does not help the short term memory.

Some of us are more detail oriented than others too; I have the skills Donald Trump wishes he had.

Y'all got good weed in Texas-23?

Texas 23rd Congressional District

I don't live there, but it's a huge chunk of land on the border of Texas and Mexico... so there has to be good weed in there somewhere. :)

Yeah, you go slap them damn Aussies down when they diss us like that. And them Canucks, too!

MtnCaddy
19

Fifteen years! Cruel and unusual punishment inflicted and unconstitutional...

Goddamned auto correct -- I SWEAR I typed "fifteen YARDS"

And where the hell you get my name from? Cain't remember giving it out in these pages, but I gotta disclose that the weed in Countri-Cali does not help the short term memory. Y'all got good weed in Texas-23? And how's that race looking?

Nobody should be playing non-stop in FL and PA.

Oh, yasssssssssssssss... and OH! :)

Texans are already forced to vote in person during the pandemic unless they have an excuse (coronavirus isn't a valid excuse), and now the GOP wants to shut a week of that early voting down.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-virus-outbreak-voting-greg-abbott-lawsuits-7cb1e08d94846fad4e5a32f72a15ae0d

The GOP all over the country are working hard to ensure that Americans are disenfranchised. #pathetic

Today's offering Nobody from our bedfellows at The Lincoln Project.

That's harsh... but factual. :)

It is possible to make an accurate assessment without being so nasty, you know. :)

Nasty!?

Oh, dear. You haven't "seen" me nasty yet. Trust me on this. :)

TWEET!

You can't do that here; if you want to TWEET, you have to go on the Twitter machine... look for the blue birdie. ;)

(throws yellow piece of cloth)

No littering. That's a misdemeanor.

"Unnecessary roughness. 15 years from the spot of the infraction. Still third down."

Fifteen years! Cruel and unusual punishment inflicted and unconstitutional:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

~ Amendment VIII, United States Constitution

*
Aussie (how do you know these things?)

'Cause I remember stuff, Taras. :)

https://www.dailykos.com/user/Mopshell

Mopshell is only half wrong. S/he is describing the 40-whatever percentage of Americans who fancy themselves to be Patriots for backing Trump and the Repugs. The rest of us, the country, our Constitution and even realities like Covid and Recession be damned -- "winning" is all that counts.

She lumped us in a "you all" category...

He's told you; he's shown you you, yet you all still believe in the fantasy of a fair election.

~ Mopshell

*
... and insinuated we believed in fantasy, and she has no idea who she's talking to so I defended our honor. :)

Ouch!

Gotta love Bernie!

So, it's be mean to Australia day today, eh?

I'd say that just a little bit of an exaggeration there, eh?

So, it's be mean to Australia day today, eh? We're all members of the small but strong state of Weigantia - let's try to be nice and take care of each other.

If Australia infers we're all stupid, we're definitely going to defend ourselves. That goes double for our friends to the North... so, suck it, Canada! :)

Aussie (how do you know these things?)

She's said she's an Aussie. We're taking her word for it.

Bravo, Senator Sanders!

TWEET!

(throws yellow piece of cloth)

"Unnecessary roughness. 15 years from the spot of the infraction. Still third down."

Aussie (how do you know these things?) Mopshell is only half wrong. S/he is describing the 40-whatever percentage of Americans who fancy themselves to be Patriots for backing Trump and the Repugs. The rest of us, the country, our Constitution and even realities like Covid and Recession be damned -- "winning" is all that counts.

Rupert Murdoch (Aussie import) is on Fat Donny's side.

Nice guy, that Rupert. His wife is from Dallas and used to be married to none other than Michael "Mick" Jagger.

I wonder what Murdoch's son James is up to these days? *be right back*

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/09/09/how-james-and-kathryn-murdoch-became-a-political-power-couple-in-the-trump-era.html

So I guess they're not all ignorant. :)

Rupert Murdoch (Aussie import) is on Fat Donny's side.

Trump intends to use dirty tricks to retain power and Americans don't believe it could possibly happen to them so they won't be prepared for it.

Excuse me for stating the obvious, but you couldn't be more incorrect. "Americans" obviously know that Donald Trump will cheat and it can happen to them. Did you just crawl out from under a rock or are you just assuming "Americans" did?

He's telling the public about his plans. He's saying, "throw out the ballots" and there won't be a transfer of power, "there'll be a continuation."

Yes, we know.

He's hellbent on seating another justice who will go along with his dictatorial scheme of calling in SCOTUS to declare him the winner.

Yes, we know.

He's also shown you that he has the police, ICE, border security, militias and the media on his side.

The "police" aren't a monolith... nor are any of the other institutions you've listed, and I cannot fathom why you've included "the media" on your "bucket list."

He's told you; he's shown you you, yet you all still believe in the fantasy of a fair election.

I would say "you seem a little confused," if not for the fact you appear to be extremely confused. Are all you Aussies this patently ignorant?

In addition, it's interesting that Hankison is charged with wanton endangerment because bullets entered Taylor's white neighbor's apartment, but not for the bullet that entered her black neighbor's apartment.

On Tuesday, I bought something on eBay from somebody in Chicago. USPS tracking says it's in Podunk, Mississippi now! WTF?

for about 30 years now the GOP has wielded congressional tradition as a blunt instrument for a sustained grab of power over the judiciary, while the democrats have remained mired in arguments over propriety and partisanship. now that mitch's hypocrisy is laid bare, my hope is that democrats will finally begin to fight back in kind. if not, there will be more like don who come to believe that democratic efforts are just "part of the show."

donald is certainly exploiting this trend in his attempts to hold on to power, but by no means did he create it.

JL

In the 1880s and 1890s, the House had an effective "filibuster" that kept them from doing much of anything.
Gridlock ruled the day, due to endless "quorum votes" and the like. It took one powerful speaker to change all of that:

Mr Speaker! by James Grant recounts this bit of history, and how the elimination of the "House filibuster" meant legislation could move forward once again.

I strongly encourage anyone interested in the subject to check this book out, because it is indeed instructive. It wasn't always the Senate who blocked reforms....

-CW

Oh, and no more giving future Mick Mulvaneys extra roles to carry out during lunch. I get that it is Republican doctrine to "prove" that government is the problem, but people at the upper echelons shouldn't hold more than one post at a time.

I believe that the structure of the government needs to be reviewed, rethought, and revamped from time to time, but I am vehemently against putting people in charge of functions whose mission they don't buy into in the least. Whether it's trying to zero out the budget of the CFPB or The Betsy de Vos kill education dead (or at least make it more profitable for my friends) method, we cannot let our society suffer this way again.

As for Judicial nominees rated not qualified by the ABA, I'm not in a position to know whether the ABA is sufficiently non-partisan to handle these assessments, but there should be some entity assessing the qualifications of people being considered for lifetime appointments. Candidates not rated as even minimally qualified should not receive a vote.

Grrrrrrr

End the filibuster, pack the Supreme Court, legislate the actual rules for all the unspoken conventions that Trump and his gang have violated or ignored, prosecute the lawbreakers in the previous administration, relieve the victims of the plague, rebuild the crumbling infrastructure, rebuild relationships with our allies, and most of all, begin the mitigation of the carbon-based economy that is burning the planet alive.

Two years. That's all they will have.

Yeah, I know. "Like Joe Biden," said the Bernie Bro.

But recall our Great Depression. FDR was no wild-eyed Commie but he recognized that nibbling around the edges wasn't going to keep Communism/Socialism from our shores, hence the New Deal. RepubliCONs have spent many of the ensuing years trying to undo the same New Deal.

Again, I recommend Wealth and Democracy: A Political History of the American Rich by Kevin Phillips (short Foreign Affairs review.) Considering the subject matter this is an engaging read. He starts out by examining why Northern Europe and North America (as opposed to, say, China) rose to the technological and financial dominance it has enjoyed for 500 years.

He goes on to show how American government from the Revolution to this day has grown the wealth of the big guys as opposed to the rest of us.

Phillips points out the cyclical nature of Progressives rising to combat the inequalities of these policies. And conditions are more than ripe for our current Leftward tilt of the Democrats.

He's telling the public about his plans. He's saying, "throw out the ballots" and there won't be a transfer of power, "there'll be a continuation."

He's hellbent on seating another justice who will go along with his dictatorial scheme of calling in SCOTUS to declare him the winner.

He's also shown you that he has the police, ICE, border security, militias and the media on his side.

He's told you; he's shown you you, yet you all still believe in the fantasy of a fair election.

And Joe won't do that until he realizes that meeting the RepubliCONs halfway as Obama tried will just result in the same underwhelming results.

I believe Obama's negatives were higher than they would have been if not for so many of us Progressives being sooo disappointed in Hope and Change.