What is the purpose of the law. The Law is in place to hold accountable those who are guilty of the crimes enumerated in its codes. These enumerations are directly related to the behaviors which are classified as wrongs. The wrongs are then determined to be criminal when one of the acts listed in it is committed. When an act is committed and it is determined to be a act that is classified as criminal, then the persons who have committed the crime needs to be charged with the crime for committing the wrong doing. Such is the case here. Why wasn't the police charged for the wrong acts they committed in the commission of doing what they termed as their job. Anyone else who would have committed an act in the course of their jobs would be charged for the criminal act. The police should not be a exception to the rule, because " Acts under the Color of Law ", can be help accountable for crimes committed. The AG in this case did not even consider those charges that the police should have been held accountable too. He only permitted the police to be brought up on those charges he felt would not hold in a trial. In addition, it has been determined that the " No knock warrant ", was based on incorrect information, purposely done to obtain a warrant. This is no longer exceptable. My main reason that ALL of those involved in this should have known ( first ), that person who they were looking for was already in custody ( Since January 2020), in which case it had been over 30 days or longer since Taylor had any interaction with the person whom they were looking for. Second, Once the USPS had notified them that they had not any packages sent or received at her address for this person whom they were looking for. There should not have been any reason for the search of Taylors home. Is she had been under surveillance prior to that, there would have been no reason for a warrant in the first place.

 

Breonna Taylor jurors: Louisville police 'didn't know what they were doing'

Crystal Hill

·Reporter

Wed, October 28, 2020, 6:10 PM PDT·5 mins read

Two grand jurors in the Breonna Taylor case said Wednesday that they believed three Louisville, Ky., police officers acted with negligence when they fired into Taylor’s apartment during a botched raid that left the 26-year-old woman dead. The jurors, who spoke to the press on the condition that their identities be withheld, also said they did not believe the officers’ accounts of the shooting.

Identified simply as “Juror One” and “Juror Two,” the two male jurors spoke at length about their experiences on the grand jury during a conference with reporters that was attended by their attorney, Kevin Glogower. Asked whether he considered any of the actions by the officers to have been criminal, Juror Two didn’t hesitate.

“From the evidence that I heard, yes.” Juror Two responded, adding of the March 13 raid, “They made mistake after mistake after mistake, and we know what the result was.”

The jurors decided to go public with their account of their time on the grand jury after Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron announced last month that none of the three officers who shot into Taylor’s apartment — Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly, Detective Myles Cosgrove and former Detective Brett Hankison — would be charged directly with her death. Hankison was charged with three counts of wanton endangerment for firing into a nearby apartment.

Black Lives Matter demonstrators in Louisville, Ky. (Jon Cherry/Getty Images)

After securing permission from a judge to speak publicly about the grand jury proceedings, the jurors told reporters Wednesday that the grand jury process, in which, according to Kentucky law, prosecutors are supposed to offer legal advice to jurors and draft indictments when requested, was highly controlled and seemed to be steered toward a specific result.

“It seemed to me that they deliberately did [the proceedings] backwards or sideways,” Juror Two said. “When we got to the end and only heard that they were going to offer three charges, there was an uproar.” The two jurors declined to go into detail about the other jurors and declined to elaborate on what specific charges they thought should have been filed.