Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report • Hacker News Board

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#281

Post by schwartzworld » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 10:13 PM UTC

justaguyhere wrote: post #186

kcolford wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my problem with police in general. They supposedly have all sorts of special privileges yet it's so easy to impersonate them. The only way to reliably identify a cop is by calling 911. Especially if you're driving. So I don't understand how you're ever supposed to believe someone's a police officer just because a home invader says so.

I remember reading a case where a woman was pulled over by a cop, in a pitch black area at night. She drove another mile or so before stopping when she found some light. She was arrested for "not stopping" or something along those lines. The case was dismissed, but she mentioned it took a toll on her. We can have all the guns and take all the precautions but these kind of incidents will continue to happen. The only w…

> the only way is to hire better people to the police force and more importantly train them better. Above all, have proper social support.

or, you know, not give every idiot cop a gun.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#282

Post by swrobel » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 10:35 PM UTC

Why is it acceptable to edit the headlines on HN, especially to something nonsensical like this?

Original: Louisville police release the Breonna Taylor incident report. It's nearly blank

HN: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#283

Post by newacct583 » Thu, Jun 11, 2020, 11:24 PM UTC

leephillips wrote: post #277

newacct583 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The judge issued a warrant that was requested by the police. Likely by the officers involved (though I don't know if that's been reported). I mean yes: you're right, our judiciary should be serving as a better backstop on public safety concerns than they are. And that's a problem. But the court signed off on the warrant that law enforcement wanted. As I see it it's still the police holding the bag here.

Of course; that’s the way it works. But I’m proposing the radical idea that there is a reason for the 4th amendment, and the judges might consider reviewing the evidence and thinking about—nay, judging, even—whether the situation warrants granting what should be an extraordinary request by the police. And that we the people, and the press, especially, should consider it proper to hold them to account, especially when…

You seem to be changing the subject. Upthread, you argued that the judge bore a "large portion" of the blame for this shooting. Here you're just saying that judges need to be better.

I agree. But I still don't see how, if I ask you to let me commit a crime, and you say yes, that makes you more culpable than me. The word for that is "accessory", and it's by definition a lesser crime.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#284

Post by leephillips » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 12:37 AM UTC

newacct583 wrote: post #283

leephillips wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course; that’s the way it works. But I’m proposing the radical idea that there is a reason for the 4th amendment, and the judges might consider reviewing the evidence and thinking about—nay, judging, even—whether the situation warrants granting what should be an extraordinary request by the police. And that we the people, and the press, especially, should consider it proper to hold them to account, especially when…

You seem to be changing the subject. Upthread, you argued that the judge bore a "large portion" of the blame for this shooting. Here you're just saying that judges need to be better. I agree. But I still don't see how, if I ask you to let me commit a crime, and you say yes, that makes you more culpable than me. The word for that is "accessory", and it's by definition a lesser crime.

I think you’re confusing the expression “large portion” with something like “most”.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#285

Post by newacct583 » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 1:19 AM UTC

JamesBarney wrote: post #257

arrrg wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is "not returning fire" really an impossible standard to you? How about: If you do something that could be met with justified self defense and you encounter that self defense your first instinct as police should be to retreat and clarify the situation? Why is it reasonable to have the first instinct to shoot back?

Do you think that a blanket policy that all officers retreat when fired upon without returning fire wouldn't be exploitable by criminals?

Do you think trading innocent people's lives to prevent criminal exploits is an acceptable strategy?

I mean, there weren't any criminals here at all, but let's pretend they were dealing out of the apartment, as the reporting has suggested was the impetus. How many escaped drug dealers are worth one Breonna Taylor?

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#286

Post by JamesBarney » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 2:29 AM UTC

newacct583 wrote: post #285

JamesBarney wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that a blanket policy that all officers retreat when fired upon without returning fire wouldn't be exploitable by criminals?

Do you think trading innocent people's lives to prevent criminal exploits is an acceptable strategy? I mean, there weren't any criminals here at all, but let's pretend they were dealing out of the apartment, as the reporting has suggested was the impetus. How many escaped drug dealers are worth one Breonna Taylor?

At some ratio yes. Otherwise we shouldn't enforce any laws, and I don't think a state without any laws enforced is a viable one.

How many escaped drug dealers are worth one Breonna Taylor, depends completely on how violet the drug dealer is. Non-violent drug dealers, there isn't a number. But as the drug dealer gets more violent it requires fewer.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#287

Post by JamesBarney » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 4:56 AM UTC

ncallaway wrote: post #269

JamesBarney wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I totally agree this incident should be investigated by a third party. And if they committed a crime they should be charged. But my understanding is that leading up to the death of Taylor no laws were broken.

Taking negligent actions that lead to the death of another person is often a crime of manslaugter. Manslaughter usually doesn't require any other crime to be committed. Therefore, "no laws were broken" ... "leading up to the death of Tayor" isn't relevant to at least some of the relevant charges. In Kentucky, KRS 507.040 defines "Manslaughter in the second degree" ( https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statut…

You're basically arguing that serving a no-knock warrant is inherently a wanton act.

I think it's unreasonable to argue that police disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk when a Judge literally signed a piece of paper that said it was a justified risk.

And I don't think doing your job in a way that judges sign off 40,000 times a year is a "gross deviation from the standard of conduct".

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#288

Post by ncallaway » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 5:07 AM UTC

JamesBarney wrote: post #287

ncallaway wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking negligent actions that lead to the death of another person is often a crime of manslaugter. Manslaughter usually doesn't require any other crime to be committed. Therefore, "no laws were broken" ... "leading up to the death of Tayor" isn't relevant to at least some of the relevant charges. In Kentucky, KRS 507.040 defines "Manslaughter in the second degree" ( https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statut…

You're basically arguing that serving a no-knock warrant is inherently a wanton act. I think it's unreasonable to argue that police disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk when a Judge literally signed a piece of paper that said it was a justified risk. And I don't think doing your job in a way that judges sign off 40,000 times a year is a "gross deviation from the standard of conduct".

I'm arguing that serving a no knock warrant, in the middle of the night, in plain clothes, without announcing that you are police, is an inherently wanton act.

If all no knock warrants are conducted that way, then I would indeed say that they are all wanton acts.

I don't care if they were following orders, or had permission from the state. Crime is still crime, and getting your boss to tell you to commit a crime is still a crime. Even if your boss wears blue.

Note also you've shifted the law slightly by saying executing the no-knock warrant how it's typicality done cannot be a gross deviation of standard conduct. Yet that's not what the law says.

The law does not say: "...disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a police officer conducting a no-knock warrant would observe".

It says "...disregard thereof constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of conduct that a reasonable person would observe in the situation".

So let me ask you this: if you went down to Kentucky, and loudly broke into a house in the middle of the night" do you think it's likely that someone (yourself or the people in the house) could come to harm from this?

I think no-knock warrants are typically conducted by uniformed officers who loudly declare that they are the police, That's a very different fact pattern than what I said would merit manslaughter.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#289

Post by JamesBarney » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 7:18 AM UTC

ncallaway wrote: post #288

JamesBarney wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're basically arguing that serving a no-knock warrant is inherently a wanton act. I think it's unreasonable to argue that police disregarded a substantial and unjustifiable risk when a Judge literally signed a piece of paper that said it was a justified risk. And I don't think doing your job in a way that judges sign off 40,000 times a year is a "gross deviation from the standard of conduct".

I'm arguing that serving a no knock warrant, in the middle of the night, in plain clothes, without announcing that you are police, is an inherently wanton act. If all no knock warrants are conducted that way, then I would indeed say that they are all wanton acts. I don't care if they were following orders, or had permission from the state. Crime is still crime, and getting your boss to tell you to commit a crime is s…

The whole point of a no knock warrant, being plain clothes, not announcing (disputed), and serving in the middle of the night is to not let the suspected perpetrator know the cops are serving him a warrant.

Each of these decisions trades some risk of death and injury for an increased likelihood that the police officers will find drugs.

I don't think this is a good trade-off, I don't think any amount of drugs you can flush down a toilet in a minute is worth the loss of life or violation of individual rights that a no knock warrant entails.

> So let me ask you this: if you went down to Kentucky, and loudly broke into a house in the middle of the night" do you think it's likely that someone (yourself or the people in the house) could come to harm from this?

Likely, no, possible yes.

Re: Breonna Taylor case: Louisville police nearly blank incident report

#290

Post by DagAgren » Fri, Jun 12, 2020, 8:56 AM UTC

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #245

DagAgren wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> He made it very clear he was talking about rioters and looters, not protestors People actually killing protesters always, without fail, claim to be trying to stop "rioters and looters". This is not a phrase to be taken at face value, ever.

Yes it is. We can’t make up things that people did not say and get mad at them for it. That’s absurd.

Nobody's made anything up?