Who Killed Breonna Taylor? Were Laws Broken?

On March 13, 2020, 26-year-old Breonna Taylor was shot and killed by police officers in her Louisville, Kentucky apartment during a botched raid. No officer has been charged with shooting Taylor, but four current and former police officers have been charged with federal civil rights violations, including lying to obtain a search warrant for her apartment. One of the officers, Brett Hankison, was also charged with endangering Taylor's neighbours by firing bullets into their apartment. A judge dismissed some of the charges, and a retrial is scheduled for October.

Did the officers identify themselves?

The question of whether the officers identified themselves before entering Breonna Taylor's apartment is a contentious one. The police officers involved have testified that they announced themselves multiple times before using a battering ram to enter the apartment. However, Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, contends that Taylor asked, "Who is it?" several times after hearing a loud bang at the door, and that he decided to call his mother instead of the police as he heard no answer. Walker has also stated that he did not hear any announcement and thought the officers were intruders. He fired his gun in the direction of the officers, wounding one of them, Jonathan Mattingly, in the leg.

According to a statement by Attorney General Cameron, an independent investigation concluded that the no-knock warrant was served as a knock-and-announce warrant, which was corroborated by a single independent witness who was near Taylor's apartment. However, on September 30, this witness's lawyer said that the police announced themselves "only in passing", implying that the witness was quoted out of context or that video footage was deceptively spliced. According to VICE News, the witness originally said "nobody identified themselves" when interviewed by police a week after the shooting, but when the police called him two months later, he said he heard, "This is the cops."

The New York Times interviewed roughly a dozen neighbours and reported that only one of them, who was on the exterior staircase immediately above Taylor's apartment, heard the officers shout "Police!" once and knock at least three times, while the other interviewed neighbours heard no announcement, including one who was outside smoking a cigarette.

In conclusion, while the officers involved in the raid insist that they identified themselves, this has been disputed by several witnesses, including Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, and some of Taylor's neighbours. The single witness cited by Attorney General Cameron as corroborating the officers' account has since been called into question, with their lawyer implying that their words were taken out of context or that video footage was deceptively edited.

Was the search warrant legal?

The search warrant that led to the death of Breonna Taylor has been the subject of intense scrutiny and has raised questions about the process by which it was obtained and the information used to justify it.

The warrant was applied for by Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) detective Joshua Jaynes and was one of five warrants approved within 12 minutes by Jefferson County Circuit Judge Mary Shaw. The warrant included Taylor's residence because it was suspected that a suspect in a drug investigation, Jamarcus Glover, had received packages containing drugs there, and because a car registered to Taylor had been seen parked outside Glover's house several times.

However, the validity of the information used to obtain the warrant has been called into question. In May 2020, the U.S. postal inspector in Louisville publicly announced that the purported collaboration with law enforcement, as stated in the warrant, had never occurred. The postal office said it was asked by a different agency to monitor packages going to Taylor's apartment, but after doing so, it concluded, "There's [sic] no packages of interest going there." This revelation resulted in an internal investigation by the LMPD.

In November 2020, Jaynes admitted in court documents that some of the language in the affidavit was "incorrect," with his attorneys claiming it was an "honest mistake." However, Judge Shaw told the Louisville Courier-Journal that she was concerned Jaynes had lied to obtain the warrant. The LMPD's internal investigation also concluded that the affidavit included "misleading" information and suggested considering criminal charges against Jaynes.

In August 2022, former LMPD detective Kelly Goodlett pleaded guilty to federal charges for helping falsify the warrant. Goodlett admitted to falsely stating in the warrant affidavit that Jaynes had verified that the target of the investigation, Glover, had received packages at Taylor's address. Goodlett, Jaynes, and another officer, Kyle Meany, were also charged with conspiracy, obstruction of justice, and civil rights violations for allegedly conspiring to mislead the judge who approved the warrant.

The case has highlighted the issue of police perjury in warrant affidavits, which, according to research by law professor emeritus Stephen Gard, is common but rarely caught. The Taylor case demonstrates that officers can be criminally charged when there is evidence they willfully lied to obtain a search warrant, setting a precedent for future cases.

Were the officers charged?

The killing of Breonna Taylor sparked protests against police brutality and racism, concurrent with the Black Lives Matter movement across the United States. Despite this, none of the officers involved in her death have been charged with shooting her.

Federal Charges

On 4 August 2022, the Justice Department charged four current and former police officers with federal civil rights violations, including lying to obtain a search warrant for her apartment. These officers were:

• Kelly Goodlett, a detective
• Kyle Meany
• Brett Hankison
• Joshua Jaynes

Goodlett retired from the Louisville Police Department and pleaded guilty at a hearing. Meany was fired by the department.

State Charges

Brett Hankison was the only officer to face state criminal charges in connection with the raid. He was accused of endangering Taylor's neighbours by firing 10 bullets through a covered window and a sliding glass door. Some of these bullets passed through Taylor's apartment and into a neighbouring apartment where a family was sleeping.

In March 2022, a state jury found him not guilty.

Outcome of Trials

In November 2023, Hankison was tried in federal court on charges of violating the rights of Taylor and her neighbours with his shooting. However, the jury deadlocked, resulting in a mistrial. The case was scheduled to be retried in October 2024.

On 22 August 2024, U.S. District Judge Charles Simpson dismissed two felony deprivation of rights charges against Jaynes and Meany, effectively reducing the civil rights violation charges against them to misdemeanours.

Were the officers disciplined?

The officers involved in Breonna Taylor's shooting—Sergeant Jonathan Mattingly and officers Brett Hankison and Myles Cosgrove—were initially placed on administrative reassignment until the Louisville Metro Police Department's Public Integrity Unit completed its investigation.

In June 2020, three months after Taylor's killing, Louisville Metro Police interim chief Robert Schroeder sent a letter to Hankison notifying him of the commencement of termination proceedings against him. The letter accused Hankison of violating departmental policies on the use of deadly force by "wantonly and blindly" firing into Taylor's apartment without determining whether any person presented "an immediate threat" or whether there were any innocent persons present. Hankison was formally fired four days later.

In January 2021, nine months after Taylor's killing, the department also terminated Cosgrove and another officer connected to the incident, Detective Joshua Jaynes, who secured the warrant for the raid on Taylor's home. Both Cosgrove and Jaynes were found to have violated department protocols, according to the termination letters made public on 6 January 2021. Cosgrove was found to have violated the department's protocols on the use of deadly force and failed to activate his officer-worn body camera. Jaynes was found to have shown "sustained untruthfulness" in the affidavit he completed and submitted to a judge to obtain the search warrant.

Mattingly was exonerated on both counts of violating department procedures on the use of deadly force and de-escalation. No disciplinary action was taken, and the complaint was dismissed.

In addition to the above disciplinary actions, at least three officers with connections to the raid were terminated from the force.

Did the officers use excessive force?

The question of whether the officers used excessive force in the killing of Breonna Taylor is a complex one and has been the subject of much debate and legal analysis.

Taylor, a 26-year-old Black medical worker, was shot and killed by police officers from the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) who forced entry into her home in March 2020. The officers were executing a "'no-knock'" search warrant as part of a narcotics investigation. Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, fired a warning shot, mistaking the police for intruders, and wounded officer Jonathan Mattingly. In response, Mattingly and two other LMPD officers, Brett Hankison and Myles Cosgrove, opened fire, discharging a total of 32 rounds. Taylor was hit by six bullets and died. Cosgrove fired the fatal shot, and none of Hankison's shots hit anyone.

The killing of Taylor sparked widespread protests and fuelled ongoing demonstrations against police brutality, racial injustice, and the Black Lives Matter movement in the United States. The case has raised questions about the use of excessive force by police and the legality of "no-knock" warrants.

In terms of the use of excessive force, there are several key points to consider. Firstly, the number of shots fired by the officers has been widely criticised as disproportionate and reckless. The officers fired more than 25 bullets, with some even entering neighbouring apartments and endangering residents. This included 10 shots fired by Hankison through a covered window and sliding glass door, which were deemed reckless and in violation of LMPD policies.

Secondly, the decision to execute a "no-knock" warrant has been scrutinised. While the officers claimed they announced themselves as police before forcing entry, this has been disputed by Walker and some neighbours. The absence of body camera footage has further complicated the matter, as it relies solely on witness accounts. The use of "no-knock" warrants has been banned in Louisville following Taylor's death, and there have been calls for similar bans in other jurisdictions.

Thirdly, the justification for the use of force has been questioned. Prosecutors initially argued that the officers' use of force was justified as Walker fired first. However, this has been contested, with some arguing that Walker acted in self-defence, believing the officers to be intruders. The concept of "castle doctrine", which gives people the right to use deadly force against intruders in their homes, has been invoked in this debate.

Finally, the role of each officer has been examined. While Cosgrove fired the fatal shot, the actions of all three officers have been scrutinised. Hankison was the only officer to face state criminal charges, accused of endangering Taylor's neighbours with his shots. However, he was acquitted by a jury. All three officers were placed on administrative reassignment, and Hankison and Cosgrove were later terminated from the LMPD for violating departmental policies.

In conclusion, the question of whether the officers used excessive force in the killing of Breonna Taylor is a highly contested issue. While some argue that the number of shots fired and the conduct of the officers constituted excessive force, others justify their actions as a lawful response to the perceived threat. The legal system has grappled with these complexities, resulting in mixed outcomes. The case has undoubtedly sparked a broader conversation about police accountability and the need for reforms to address excessive force and the use of "no-knock" warrants.

Frequently asked questions