Well, yes, yes and no

Daniel Cameron, Kentucky’s Attorney General, said the pair – Sgt. Johnathan Mattingly and Officer Myles Cosgrove – were “justified” in their use of force as they fired in self-defence after Ms Taylor’s boyfriend fired a shot.

That part seems justified. Cops being shot at, cops fire back.

Former police officer Brett Hankison, who fired a number of the shots, was on Wednesday charged with three counts of wanton endangerment in the first degree, after it was determined he had shot into neighbouring flats.

That also seems fair. Duty of care and all that even under fire. The actual problem, in the larger picture, is here:

Ms Taylor, 26, was shot multiple times by plainclothes officers who entered her home after midnight using a no-knock warrant that allowed them to enter without warning during a drugs investigation on March 13.

Armed men are – righteously, this is the police and here they#re in plain clothes – storm into your home without warning? Your ability to distinguish between this and a home invasion is? A home invasion you are – righteously – allowed to defend yourself against?

The problem here is, to use something of an unpopular word, structural. Insane policing that is.

68 thoughts on “Well, yes, yes and no”

  1. I think it’s been established that the police claimed to have knocked and identified themselves. My personal and wider knowledge of the association between police officers and the truth, especially when covering their arses, leads me to doubt that claim.

  2. I’ve not looked at the details, but for me a key question is whether they were uniformed or plain clothed.

    If someone is asleep then, whether an intruder: knocks, shouts police and then breaks the door down; or just breaks the door down whilst shouting police is all irrelevant. The person is asleep/waking and so unlikely to consciously hear it or have the cognitive ability to process it. Shouting ‘police’ also does not provide any proof of identity.

    The lead officers being plain clothed would cause any reasonable person to assume that the intruders are not police and have the right to defend themselves (which in the US includes with guns). Heavily armed people clearly uniformed as police officers is essential for ‘identification’ to be possible by the homeowners.

  3. Spookily reminiscent of the Cory Maye case: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Maye

    No one has done more to highlight the travesties arising from the War on Drugs than journalist Radley Balko, author of ‘Rise of the Warrior Cop: The Militarization of America’s Police Forces’, who took a personal interest in the Cory Maye case.

    Today Trump promised school choice for every child if elected for a second term, which would be the best thing done for black children since desegregation. If he would also end the War on Drugs he’d qualify as a modern day saint.

  4. DocBud: an independent witness in the complex heard them knock and announce themselves three times before entering. Miss Taylor also has a rap sheet, three previous criminal boyfriends and someone left a dead man in her car in 2016, although I suppose that could happen to anyone.

  5. Bloke in North Dorset

    The real crime here is that there was no need for a midnight raid, no knock warrant or not, which makes it about as risky as it gets and is almost guaranteed to end in a firefight. They had a camera on the place and would have known who was in there and they could have spoken to her about her boyfriend’s activities at any time in a neutral setting eg as she left work.

    There’s also doubt about the legal status of the warrant and whether it was issued after police used known false information to obtain it. If any of the officers knew that they were committing a crime.

  6. @Ljh: for a law enforcement system that’s supposedly ‘a risk to all people of colour’ it hardly ever (except in the case of Cory Maye) snares a genuine innocent, does it?

  7. It’s almost as if the forces of law have a meeting beforehand where they say “How can we make a real mess out of this, not just a pig’s ear but a genuine sh!t show?” Then, having decided, they proceed to do it.

  8. Breonna Taylor did not have a criminal record. So the police found one unnamed witness to corroborate their story, as opposed to the numerous neighbours and Kenneth Walker who claimed that they did not hear the police announce themselves.

    An indication of the police we are dealing with is that the main target, Jamarcus Glover, was arrested at 12:00, 40 minutes before the raid on Breonna Taylor’s apartment. The time on Glover’s warrant execution form was later amended to 12:40 to make it look like the raids were simultaneous. The police also lied on the report of the raid on Taylor’s apartment, stating that Taylor was not injured and that they had not used force to enter.

  9. Murders, shootings and stabbing in London get a perfunctory four light paragraphs on the BBC site; killings in America get wall-to-wall coverage and analysis all over the media. Can someone tell our media they aren’t Americans, and we aren’t particularly interested?

  10. The grand jury apparently believed the Police announced their presence FWIW. I haven’t followed this case very closely but I was led to believe it involved a no knock warrant – the fact that it didn’t actually do so speaks volumes about what’s fueling a lot of faux racist BS. Take the most egregious rumor about a case and put it in the headlines stat!

    I agree wholeheartedly that no-knock warrants should only be allowed in the most extreme cases (ticking nuclear bomb type stuff) and if I were a cop I sure as Hell wouldn’t want to crash in unannounced.

  11. I’ve seen this on telly, don’t they all have bomber jackets with FBI or NYPD in yellow writing on the front back and arms ?

    Next thing you lot are going to tell me is that “Do you feel lucky, punk ?” Isn’t an approved standard police challenge.

  12. Breonna Taylor did not have a criminal record right up until point she was wrongfully killed by the Louisville police department. There appears to be absolutely no support anywhere, except apparently in your mind, JuliaM, that the killing of Breonna Taylor was even remotely justified, not even the police are saying that.

  13. What BiND said. There is just no reason for this sort of approach in all but a tiny handful of highly-unusual cases – yet it has now become the default approach for warrant service in large parts of the country. The claim made by police is that they have to behave this way to prevent the destruction of evidence – the old chestnut about how the dope dealers will flush the evidence down the toilet. So surely the way to prevent that – and it is easy enough to do if you want to, and especially with modern technologies – is to serve the warrant when your suspects aren’t home.

    Another point that needs to be made clearly is about the discussion around whether police knocked and announced themselves – as though the only people who would ever yell out ‘Police! Search warrant!’ are your actual police. Unfortunately, this is a common tactic of home invaders in less-tony neighbourhoods. This sort of formulaic approach – a quick knock on the door, the shout of ‘Police! Search warrant!’ followed by the immediate application of the battering ram and a swarm of armed men in plain clothes – is indistinguishable from a criminal home invasion. Why are we surprised when people react as though it is a home invasion?

    Some hard truths need to be faced.

    As crime rates, generally, have been in steep decline in the US for most categories of crime, the police have been looking for things to do to justify their numbers and funding. With the gradual decriminalization of drug crimes – the old, reliable standby of law enforcement – we should not be surprised that the result is ever-more aggressive enforcement of the smaller number of crimes that do remain. The unpleasant truth is that, if we looked at policing in terms of the number of officers vs the number of crimes committed, US police numbers should be about half of what they are. But police and correctional-officer unions are so powerful that such a reduction in numbers is not politically possible, never mind all the people working in the criminal-justice system who are similarly underemployed. Why would we be surprised that all these people put a lot of effort into ensuring their continued employment?

    The training and practice of law enforcement in the US has been on a wrong path for a long time. There is excessive emphasis on an ever-more aggressive and militaristic approach, with police positioning themselves as some sort of warriors engaged in a war on crime. Again, as actual crime decreases, the intensity of police activity increases, to where we now have swarms of officers equipped like an occupying army, dressed like soldiers and behaving as they think soldiers behave. This cannot end well.

    And far too many officers now espouse an ‘us and them’ mindset, complete with the idea that they are there to punish people they see as being ‘bad’. For many officers, their process has become the punishment – which is why things like this warrant service for a petty, non-violent drug offender was turned into a paramilitary raid – the goal may have been lawful, but the process was to do plenty of damage, toss the house and leave it in as big a mess as possible, terrorize the inhabitants, and maybe (if they’re lucky) shoot the family dog.

    Far too many police officers enjoy this sort of thing far too much. I don’t think it’s a race thing, it’s a question of class and an urge to authoritarianism, that tends to attract the wrong kind of mindset and then encourage and reward it.

    And we should not underestimate the increasing role of the police in many places as a separate group of revenue collectors, who are often made partly responsible for funding themselves. In many places, the police have sometimes become little better than the criminals they are supposed to be catching and discouraging, charged instead with extracting money from the population to pay their own wages. Such practices as civil asset forfeitures, traffic enforcement and extractive ordinance enforcement do nothing to prevent real, actual ‘police an’ tieves’ crime, but only serve to alienate and impoverish the population – many of whom are poor enough already.

    Unfortunately, I’ve no idea how to fix this.\

    llater,

    llamas

  14. llamas September 24, 2020 at 11:01 am – “There is just no reason for this sort of approach in all but a tiny handful of highly-unusual cases”

    How do you tell which is which beforehand? How do police know how they will be greeted? I notice you are not a police officer. Why do you sit in judgement on them?

    “is to serve the warrant when your suspects aren’t home.”

    How do you prove whose drugs they are?

    “As crime rates, generally, have been in steep decline in the US for most categories of crime, the police have been looking for things to do to justify their numbers and funding.”

    Oh really? How? By decriminlising drugs?

    “The unpleasant truth is that, if we looked at policing in terms of the number of officers vs the number of crimes committed, US police numbers should be about half of what they are.”

    That is not true. The murder rate alone proves that is not true. The West is under policed. America too.

    “But police and correctional-officer unions are so powerful that such a reduction in numbers is not politically possible, never mind all the people working in the criminal-justice system who are similarly underemployed. Why would we be surprised that all these people put a lot of effort into ensuring their continued employment?”

    So the police are so powerful they cannot be fired but they are so scared of being fired they are framing innocent people? You know, I think one of these is unlikely to be true.

    “And far too many officers now espouse an ‘us and them’ mindset, complete with the idea that they are there to punish people they see as being ‘bad’.”

    Yeah. No idea how they come up with these ideas. They should take lessons from Britain’s Gender Neutral police forces.

    “Far too many police officers enjoy this sort of thing far too much.”

    Evidence?

    This looks like just another piece of undergraduate nonsense. The pigs are, like, totally to blame. The drug dealers are innocent. Uh huh.

  15. What I read was guy shoots through the door, police shoot back, shooter is not hit but the woman is 8 times – human shield?

  16. Dennis, Pointing Out The Obvious

    Hasn’t it already been established that this wasn’t a ‘no knock warrant’ and the cops identified themselves?

    Yes, those are the facts. What you are missing is the fact that facts don’t matter in this type of case.

  17. Dennis, Clear-Eyed As Always

    Armed men are – righteously, this is the police and here they#re in plain clothes – storm into your home without warning? Your ability to distinguish between this and a home invasion is? A home invasion you are – righteously – allowed to defend yourself against?

    The fact that it wasn’t a no-knock warrant and the police identified themselves as such prior to the beginning of the gunfire renders the questions you ask moot, don’t you think?

  18. Jussi September 24, 2020 at 12:03 pm – “What I read was guy shoots through the door, police shoot back, shooter is not hit but the woman is 8 times – human shield?”

    Umm, she was African-American. You know, perhaps not wafer thin

  19. Doc

    Have you read the report I linked to? She certainly had a whole lot of close contact with people who did have records.

  20. So much for Subtlety – I served for several years as a police officer in a department in the suburbs of Detroit. Where did you serve?

    I thought not.

    Yes – absolutely. Decriminalize the possession and use of all drugs. All of them. Speaking as a Former Police Officer – I am convinced that the harm done, to the police, to society as a whole, to the liberties of the population, and to the politics of the nation – far outweighs the harm that individuals do to themselves by using them.

    It should be noted that police unions and associations have fought the decriminalization of drugs in various US states tooth and nail (for the most part). Why? Because it reduces the amount of police work to be done.

    You wrote:

    ‘“The unpleasant truth is that, if we looked at policing in terms of the number of officers vs the number of crimes committed, US police numbers should be about half of what they are.”

    That is not true. The murder rate alone proves that is not true. The West is under policed. America too.”

    Untrue. Look up the stats. The rates for all crimes in the US, including murder, have been steadily declining for about 25 years now. Since you are so sure, of just what ain’t so, here’s a handy link to prove what I say:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

    You wrote:

    ““But police and correctional-officer unions are so powerful that such a reduction in numbers is not politically possible, never mind all the people working in the criminal-justice system who are similarly underemployed. Why would we be surprised that all these people put a lot of effort into ensuring their continued employment?”

    So the police are so powerful they cannot be fired but they are so scared of being fired they are framing innocent people? You know, I think one of these is unlikely to be true.”

    One of these things, is not like the other. It’s not politically possible to reduce the numbers of police (by reducing hiring and allowing forces to deplete). But I never said that any police officers were ‘framing innocent people’ – although it should be noted that Ms Taylor and Mr Walker were both factually, entirely innocent of any articulable crime whatsoever.

    You wrote:

    “Far too many police officers enjoy this sort of thing far too much.”
    Evidence?”

    My own personal experience. However, since that counts for nothing here, suggest you read ‘The Rise of the Warrior Cop” by Radley Balko – packed with true-life examples of exactly what I am referring to.

    Feel free to try again.

    llater,

    llamas

  21. Don’t twist my words.

    No-one is saying that she deserved to die or that she had a criminal record. I am simply linking to evidence that she had closely associated with known criminals for many years. Nothing more than that.

  22. Meanwhile, in brokeback UK

    British policeman, 43, faces disciplinary probe after branding George Floyd a ‘drug-crazed maniac’ and blasting Diversity’s BLM-inspired Britain’s Got Talent dance routine

  23. So Much For Subtlety

    llamas September 24, 2020 at 12:34 pm – “I served for several years as a police officer in a department in the suburbs of Detroit”

    Policing White suburbs is not like policing Blacks. Nor did you answer any of my questions. How do you know before the raid?

    “Speaking as a Former Police Officer – I am convinced that the harm done, to the police, to society as a whole, to the liberties of the population, and to the politics of the nation – far outweighs the harm that individuals do to themselves by using them.”

    Arseholes do not become angels because their drugs are legal. There is no reason to think it will have any impact at all. But Three Strikes did

    “Why? Because it reduces the amount of police work to be done.”

    You may buy insane conspiracies but it doesn’t mean the rest of us have to

    “Untrue. Look up the stats. The rates for all crimes in the US, including murder, have been steadily declining for about 25 years now. Since you are so sure, of just what ain’t so, here’s a handy link to prove what I say:”

    That does not prove what you said. I know the murder rate has dropped. So what? That doesn’t show America is under-policed. It has gone from obscenely high to merely very high.

    “It’s not politically possible to reduce the numbers of police (by reducing hiring and allowing forces to deplete).”

    The Pacific North-Westr shows this is not true.

    “But I never said that any police officers were ‘framing innocent people’ – although it should be noted that Ms Taylor and Mr Walker were both factually, entirely innocent of any articulable crime whatsoever.”

    Well not factually. Legally, yes. But you do not explain why you think that police jobs are untouchable but they need to work so hard to instill needless fear.

    “My own personal experience.”

    So you are an arsehole. Doesn’t mean other policemen were or are.

  24. So Much For Subtlety

    llamas September 24, 2020 at 1:53 pm – “Ok, reaches over and sets phaser to – Ignore.”

    You may be happy with the high levels of crime in America. Doesn’t mean shit. The voters want less crime. Surrendering to criminals does not produce that.

  25. So, if you associate with criminals, you have to accept, although entirely innocent yourself, that you may be wrongfully killed by the police?

  26. @DocBud: ’ How does that relate to the fact that she was wrongfully killed?’

    In the same way as his constant wrangling and harassing of dangerous wild animals got Steve Irwin an early grave, perhaps?

  27. So Much For Subtlety

    DocBud September 24, 2020 at 2:19 pm – “So, if you associate with criminals, you have to accept, although entirely innocent yourself, that you may be wrongfully killed by the police?”

    Well yeah. Not that we know she was innocent. She seems to have let her ex use her place as a stash house.

    But let’s rephrase that. If your boyfriend is a member of the Comancheros, you have to accept that you may be wrongfully killed by the Banditos? Well yeah, you sort of do.

    Don’t hang out with drug dealers.

  28. I’ve a careless driving conviction (the facts of which were the kind of fucking disgrace to make me all gammony). Anyway …

    You lot have been warned.

  29. Jesus wept, there is some unbelievable bollocks being spouted on this thread. Steve Irwin voluntarily risking his life with wild animals to make tv programmes is somehow related to someone being killed by a supposedly professional police force with a duty of care not to kill innocent people.

    There is no evidence that anything illegal was ever stored at her place. Yes, if you associate with outlaw bikie gang members, then there is a risk that you might get caught up in a gang war with a rival gang, but I’m pretty sure the police are not an outlaw bikie gang. I know they’re not competent or professional, but they are supposed to be and should be held accountable to that standard.

    Gone midnight here in Aus, further responses will be delayed accordingly.

  30. So Much For Subtlety

    DocBud September 24, 2020 at 2:41 pm – “There is no evidence that anything illegal was ever stored at her place.”

    If she knows her ex is using her place to drop money or even take his mail, then she is probably committing a crime.

    “Yes, if you associate with outlaw bikie gang members, then there is a risk that you might get caught up in a gang war with a rival gang, but I’m pretty sure the police are not an outlaw bikie gang. I know they’re not competent or professional, but they are supposed to be and should be held accountable to that standard.”

    Indeed the police should be accountable. But being a gangster’s moll comes with risks. One of them is a higher risk than average of being shot by police.

    She should not have let her ex use her place for anything. That does not give the police the right to shoot her but it sure as hell raises the chances of it happening.

  31. Dennis: Oppressor, Warmonger, Capitalist and Consumer of Petroleum Products

    Well, yes, killing Julia just because you agree with her does seem a tad strong really.

    Depends. Does she associate with known criminals?

  32. @ DocBud – +1. Your line about “Yes, if you associate with outlaw bikie gang members, then there is a risk that you might get caught up in a gang war with a rival gang, but I’m pretty sure the police are not an outlaw bikie gang. I know they’re not competent or professional, but they are supposed to be and should be held accountable to that standard” is my nomination for the thread win.

    For the rest – good luck trying to get any reasoned discussion here. I’m afraid I have better things to do.

    llater,

    llamas

  33. Bloke in North Dorset

    “If she knows her ex is using her place to drop money or even take his mail, then she is probably committing a crime.”

    For which the punishment is death? Seems a bit harsh.

  34. JuliaM wrote:

    ‘@BiND: If the rival drugs gangs had come a-knockin’ instead of the law, the punishment might have been worse than death.’

    Except, of course, that neither Ms Taylor, nor Mr Walker, were involved in the drug trade, so there’s no reason that ‘rival drugs gangs’ would ‘come a-knockin.’

    Furthermore, I’d be fascinated to know what you consider might have been worse than being shot eight times. Nine times, perhaps?

    Let me anticipate your response – well, maybe they would have anyway! Rival drugs gangs can make mistakes, too! In other words, the actions of the police are no different than what you would expect of a ‘rival drugs gang’.

    Which is kind-of my point. They raided the wrong house, looking for at least two persons who weren’t there, and who didn’t live there. The entirety of the affidavit for the search warrant consists of descriptions of possession of trivial quantities of drugs in other locations, followed by a whole stream of ‘maybe there might be some illegal drugs and money at the house, because these people sometimes go there’. Not a shred of direct evidence. And for this, we beat down somebody’s front door in the middle of the night and end up killing an entirely factually- and legally-innocent person?

    This is what police work in the US has degraded into. And all driven by a slavish, hysterical attachment to a “War on Drugs”, lobbied for and supported wholeheartedly by the unions and leadership of the police officers whose jobs depend on it.

    And some people here are just-fine with that – after all, she once dated a drug dealer. Why, then, she’s fair game! Anything that ever happens to her, ever again, is just fine! Shot dead in her own home? Well, you know, lie down with dogs, get up with fleas!

    From the wording of your post, you consider what happened to Ms Taylor to be a ‘punishment’. For what, may I ask? And who decided that she was to be ‘punished’?

    llater,

    llamas

  35. “I am convinced that the harm done, to the police, to society as a whole, to the liberties of the population, and to the politics of the nation – far outweighs the harm that individuals do to themselves by using them.”

    I reject your hypothesis. The question of drugs, and so many other things, is not a question of load the scales and go whichever way seems better. The Federal government has NO AUTHORITY to regulate drugs. None. Double ought zero. It doesn’t matter how damn hurtful they might be, they are still none of the federal government’s business.

    Proof? The 18th Amendment. And liberty trumps government “help.”

    “Government exists to protect us from each other. Where government has gone beyond its limits is in deciding to protect us from ourselves.” — Ronald Reagan

    “The unpleasant truth is that, if we looked at policing in terms of the number of officers vs the number of crimes committed, US police numbers should be about half of what they are.”

    You are not incorrect, but for the wrong reason. Most officer/civilian contacts are NOT criminal incidents. My local police dept tells me that the vast majority of their calls are non-recordable.

  36. Gamecock wrote:

    ‘You are not incorrect, but for the wrong reason. Most officer/civilian contacts are NOT criminal incidents. My local police dept tells me that the vast majority of their calls are non-recordable.’

    and, while there is a lot of truth in what you say, you touched upon another of my betes-noir. You are right when you say that many officer/civilian contacts are not criminal incidents – you say ‘most’, I say ‘many’, but let’s not quibble about exact numbers. And my response, as a former officer, is – why are you sending police officers to address these non-crimes? The police have become the default agency that gets called when anything or everything bad ever happens, and in many cases they are very poorly-equipped to handle them. Not agreeing in any way with the wider positions taken by BLMantifa, but in this one area, they might well have the beginnings of a point – not every negative event in life is best served by the arrival of armed law enforcement officers.

    As to your larger point, about whether the state has any authority to regulate drugs, I’ll freely admit that philosophical questions like that go well above my pay grade. But – right or wrong – the state has taken that power to itself, so all one can really do is look at it from the viewpoint of the lesser evil.

  37. Bloke in North Dorset

    @BiND: If the rival drugs gangs had come a-knockin’ instead of the law, the punishment might have been worse than death.

    Perhaps, but that’s not the point. Other gangs aren’t being paid by the tax payer to uphold the law and to act in a way that protects its citizens.

    They’re paying the police in the expectation that they will have a duty of care when upholding the law and planning no knock raids in the middle of the night puts everyone at risk, police, suspects and neighbours. And throughout all this I’ve not seen one justification of that middle of the night raid, its almost like the police had decided to become judge, jury and executioner and were looking for a way to implement it.

  38. “And some people here are just-fine with that – after all, she once dated a drug dealer. Why, then, she’s fair game! Anything that ever happens to her, ever again, is just fine! Shot dead in her own home? Well, you know, lie down with dogs, get up with fleas!”

    We have this argument every time there’s a rape and the whole ‘Well she was wandering semi-coherently drunk through the bad part of town, what does she expect’ comment comes up.

    There’s a difference between moral desserts and practical culpability. Very few people deserve to die for their actions, but their actions may very well hasten the chances of their demise. If I invent a new form of personal flying apparatus and strap it to my back and jump off the nearest tall building, and crash immediately to my death, while I did not deserve to die, I most definitely added to the chances I would.

    Ergo if you associate with known drug dealing criminals, especially in a place like the US where guns are commonplace for criminals, non-criminals and the police alike, then the chances I’m going to end up shot dead have just gone up exponentially vs the local Sunday school teacher who is married to her childhood sweetheart and is a stay at home Mother.

    Like it or not our actions have consequences. We may not deserve those consequences, but we can definitely have hastened their arrival.

  39. “And my response, as a former officer, is – why are you sending police officers to address these non-crimes?”

    Exactly. The town I live near is a growing suburban neighborhood. Middle class boring. A middle manager used to go to my gym. When I read that they had 41 officers, I confronted him. I was thinking they needed like 8. Maybe a few extra volunteers for Friday night football games. He confirmed 41 officers, and exclaimed, “We need more!”

    When I asked him WTF, that’s when he told me about non reportables. So what is happening, as you pointed out, llamas, is that people call the police, and the police don’t say, “Ma’am, we ain’t your big brother. What you are calling about is not a police matter.”

    And then the cops joke that all the firemen do is get cats out of trees.

  40. llamas September 24, 2020 at 3:17 pm – “For the rest – good luck trying to get any reasoned discussion here. I’m afraid I have better things to do.”

    You don’t seem to have a lot of better things to do. Because you refuse to go away. As for the reasoned discussion, you post nonsense and then refuse to defend it. That is not our fault.

    Bloke in North Dorset September 24, 2020 at 3:27 pm – “For which the punishment is death? Seems a bit harsh.”

    You assume they intended to kill her. There is no evidence of that.

    A certain lifestyle carries a certain risk. If I buy a very large motorcycle, I run a greater risk of dying. We all know this. It is not unreasonable to point that out. And it doesn’t mean that motorcycle riders deserve to die.

    She chose poorly

  41. llamas September 24, 2020 at 6:54 pm – “And my response, as a former officer, is – why are you sending police officers to address these non-crimes?”

    It is obvious – because they do not know. If the emergency services get a call about a hostage situation it may be terrorism, it may be a bank robbery gone wrong, or it may be someone off their meds who just needs talking to. How do they know? They default to the police. What else can they do?

    This is especially true in Black communities given the incredibly high rates of violence therein.

    “not every negative event in life is best served by the arrival of armed law enforcement officers.”

    Great. If only the police had 100% certain knowledge that hind sight gives you and their other critics.

    “But – right or wrong – the state has taken that power to itself, so all one can really do is look at it from the viewpoint of the lesser evil.”

    And the lesser evil is enforcing the law. Which the authorities in America are reluctant to do. Marijuana will be legalised in the US – and I predict it will affect the crime rate not at all.

  42. Bloke in North Dorset September 24, 2020 at 7:24 pm – “Other gangs aren’t being paid by the tax payer to uphold the law and to act in a way that protects its citizens.”

    They aren’t. But then other gangs are not being paid to carry out No Knock raids at 2 in the morning. The police are. Because the voters want something done about crime.

    “They’re paying the police in the expectation that they will have a duty of care when upholding the law and planning no knock raids in the middle of the night puts everyone at risk, police, suspects and neighbours.”

    Well that is sort of not true, isn’t it? They don’t do it because it is fun. Although I bet they love the over time. They do it because drug dealers are dangerous people who own things like AK-47s. So they raid when the police are safest. Rightly. The middle of the night probably also reduces the risk to the neighbours too.

    You can’t apply White middle class standards of policing to people who are not White and middle class.

  43. A home invasion you are – righteously – allowed to defend yourself against?

    Ah, but this is America. Filthy druggies (and they must be or else the police wouldn’t be ther, right?) don’t get to defend themselves against the police. According to Scalia’s ‘New Professionalism’ the modern day LEO is a highly trained and skilled professional with integrity. Who would never half-ass a warrant application that is then rubber-stamped by the duty judge just hours before they plan a violent assault on someone’s home in the early hours of the morning.

    And, if by some chance, this *were* to happen, well, then you have the courts to get recompense for your injuries. Well, except for those killed in the process. They’re kinda OOL. But hey, assuming the court doesn’t just throw out the case because of ‘qualified immunity’ (because your rights weren’t violated in the exact same way as anyone else’s so how is that highly trained LEO supposed to know . . . right?)then your surviving family will, some years hence, get a nice payout from the taxpayers of that locality.

    Did you know that many jurisdictions in the US have laws against fortifying your home?

  44. JuliaM
    September 24, 2020 at 7:26 am

    Hasn’t it already been established that this wasn’t a ‘no knock warrant’ and the cops identified themselves?

    It was a no-knock but they knocked anyway. And, at 4 in the morning, waited a whole 10 seconds before busting the door down.

  45. Llamas:“Except, of course, that neither Ms Taylor, nor Mr Walker, were involved in the drug trade…”

    I’ll ask you the same question I asked DocBud – did you read the linked document above? You want to tell me they weren’t involved in the drug trade?

  46. Agammamon: “And, at 4 in the morning, waited a whole 10 seconds before busting the door down.”

    Given the purpose of a surprise raid is to prevent disposal of the evidence, that doesn’t seem unreasonable.

  47. If the rival drugs gangs had come a-knockin’ instead of the law, the punishment might have been worse than death.

    Straight out of Life of Brian:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnn2aGVcCEc

    I did read the report John linked to, didn’t find a justification for a death sentence in it. It did occur to me that with that level of surveillance, you’d think they’d know where everyone was.

  48. It was a no-knock but they knocked anyway. And, at 4 in the morning, waited a whole 10 seconds before busting the door down.

    Taylor was shot at 12:43. Did they measure the 10 seconds from the body cam footage? Of course they didn’t, there was no body cam footage. So we rely on the word of the police and one unidentified witness, who is contradicted by numerous other witnesses.

    It’s interesting that, after initially saying that Walker would be charged with attempted murder, they chose not prosecute him. The city also chose to settle the wrongful death suit out of court. Certainly seems like one side is doing its level best to avoid legal scrutiny.

  49. Bloke in North Dorset

    SMFS,

    Well that is sort of not true, isn’t it? They don’t do it because it is fun. Although I bet they love the over time. They do it because drug dealers are dangerous people who own things like AK-47s. So they raid when the police are safest. Rightly. The middle of the night probably also reduces the risk to the neighbours too.

    Why did it have to be in the middle of the night? They could have taken both people for questioning during the day and then searched the premises when they were sure there was something there? They had been watching the premises for a while and had a camera on it. What was so important about the drugs they were supposed to have that it couldn’t wait for a less confrontational time?

    Its almost like they calculated the best was they could to get a firefight going. And what sort of training means they’re spraying rounds in to neighbouring apartments? Was this bust so urgent that it justified putting neighbour’s lives at risk?

    I have a lot of sympathy for individual police officers, although I’m sure there’s a bunch of sociopaths have joined and even more since the militarisation of the police started. As the old saying foes a fish rots from the head down and most of these problems start from the poor management and training.

    I’m fairly sure you’ll have heard of Jocko Willink, if you haven’t look him up first and then listen to his podcast with Jordan Peterson where they talk about the probability and problems of getting sociopaths in those sorts of organisations. And then listen to Jocko on the Rogan podcast talking about training and the problems police face. Both very sympathetic to the police but pointing out the problems of poor selection, training and management.

  50. “This is especially true in Black communities given the incredibly high rates of violence therein.”

    And the high incidence of single mothers, with no men around. Need a man? Call the cops.

    The ironing being that “defund the cops” is most likely to cut these services first.

  51. When black women call 911* because McDonald’s is out of McNuggets, the problem is they called the wrong number, not that they called the police. They should have called the police non-emergency number.

    *911 is the standard U.S. emergency number.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *