Who Was Responsible For Breonna Taylor's Death?

The tragic death of Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old African-American medical worker, at the hands of police officers in Louisville, Kentucky, sparked protests against police brutality and racism across the United States. The case also brought attention to the controversial use of no-knock warrants and raised questions about police accountability and training. On the night of March 13, 2020, Taylor was fatally shot by police officers who forced entry into her apartment as part of a narcotics investigation. While the officers claimed they had announced themselves before entering, this was disputed by Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, and several neighbours. The subsequent legal proceedings and investigations have led to conflicting opinions and outcomes, with no officer charged directly for Taylor's death.

Was the no-knock warrant justified?

On March 13, 2020, Breonna Taylor, a 26-year-old African-American medical worker, was shot and killed by Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) officers in her apartment. The officers involved were Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison, and Myles Cosgrove.

The LMPD officers were serving a search warrant as part of a drug investigation. It was widely reported that the officers were executing a 'no-knock' warrant, which does not require officers to identify themselves. However, Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron stated that the officers knocked on Taylor's door and announced themselves before entering. Cameron based this conclusion on the officers' statements and a statement from a neighbor that corroborated their account.

The basis for requesting a no-knock warrant was the claim that the main subject of the investigation, Jamarcus Glover, had a history of fleeing from law enforcement and attempting to destroy evidence. Additionally, the warrant application suggested that a no-knock warrant was appropriate due to the presence of cameras at the location that could compromise the operation.

However, there are disputes regarding the validity of the no-knock warrant. Stanford Law Professor David Sklansky argues that the warrant was improperly obtained, as warrants obtained through intentional or reckless misrepresentations are invalid under the Fourth Amendment. He further questions whether the police satisfied the legal requirement for a no-knock warrant, which necessitates reasonable suspicion that knocking and announcing their presence would pose a danger, hinder the investigation, or result in the destruction of evidence.

The New York Times interviewed Taylor's neighbors, and only one of them recalled hearing the officers announce themselves. Kenneth Walker, Taylor's boyfriend, who was present in the apartment, stated that he only heard pounding on the door and did not hear any announcement.

The question of whether the no-knock warrant was justified is a matter of ongoing debate and investigation. While Cameron and the LMPD assert that the officers followed the appropriate protocols, critics argue that the warrant may have been obtained through misrepresentations and that the use of a no-knock warrant in this particular case was not justified.

Did the police announce themselves?

The question of whether the police announced themselves before entering Breonna Taylor's apartment is a contentious one.

Kenneth Walker, Taylor's boyfriend, who was with her inside the apartment, has said he heard pounding at the door, but did not hear anyone announce they were police. Several neighbours also said they did not hear police announce themselves before forcing entry to the apartment. One person in the building at the time of the shooting initially said he didn't hear the police, but later said he did.

The police officers involved have testified that they announced themselves multiple times before using a battering ram to enter the apartment. 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.

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 one independent witness who was near Taylor's apartment. However, on September 30, this witness's lawyer said that police announced themselves "only in passing" and implied that the witness was quoted out of context or that video was deceptively spliced. According to VICE News, the witness originally said "nobody identified themselves" when he was 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."

In a police interview played for the grand jury, Lt. Shawn Hoover said the officers announced themselves as police and knocked three times. He estimated they waited 45 seconds to a minute before going through the door. Another officer said they waited as much as two minutes.

Was the use of force justified?

The use of force by the police in the Breonna Taylor case has been a subject of intense debate and controversy. While some argue that the officers' actions were justified due to the presence of a search warrant and the potential threat posed by the suspects, others contend that the level of force employed was excessive and unwarranted.

On the one hand, it is important to recognize that the Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) officers involved in the raid—Jonathan Mattingly, Brett Hankison, and Myles Cosgrove—were acting under the authority of a valid search warrant approved by a judge. This warrant, known as a "no-knock" warrant, authorized the officers to force entry into Taylor's apartment without prior announcement. The warrant was obtained based on suspicions that Taylor's ex-boyfriend, Jamarcus Glover, was involved in drug trafficking and had used her address to mail drugs.

However, critics argue that the use of a no-knock warrant in this case was unnecessary and contributed to the tragic outcome. They contend that the LMPD failed to adequately assess the situation and consider the potential presence of an armed occupant in the apartment, namely Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker. Walker, legally armed, fired a warning shot when the officers forced entry, mistaking them for intruders. This triggered a response from the officers, who returned fire with more than 25 bullets, ultimately killing Taylor.

The decision to employ a no-knock warrant has been scrutinized, with experts questioning whether the circumstances justified such an aggressive tactic. Additionally, there are conflicting accounts about whether the officers properly identified themselves as police before entering. While the officers claim they announced themselves, Walker and some neighbors refute this, stating they did not hear any such announcement.

In the aftermath of the incident, Hankison was fired from the LMPD for his role in the shooting, with the department citing his violation of deadly force policies. However, a grand jury declined to indict Mattingly and Cosgrove, concluding that their use of force was justified as they returned fire after being shot at by Walker. This decision sparked further outrage and protests, with critics arguing that the grand jury did not consider potential charges beyond wanton endangerment.

The case of Breonna Taylor has highlighted the complexities and challenges of determining the justification for the use of force by law enforcement. While the presence of a search warrant and the potential threat posed by the suspects may have been factors in the officers' decision-making, the tragic outcome and subsequent investigations have led to questions about the appropriateness and proportionality of the force used.

Was the shooting reckless?

The shooting of Breonna Taylor by Louisville police officers has been described as reckless and tragic. The police officers involved were Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly, and detectives Brett Hankison and Myles Cosgrove.

The police officers were serving a "no-knock" search warrant on Taylor's home as part of a narcotics investigation. Taylor's boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, was inside the apartment with her when the plainclothes officers knocked on the door and then forced entry. Walker fired his gun in the direction of the officers, in what he said was a warning shot. The shot hit Mattingly in the leg, and the officers fired 32 shots in return. Walker was unhurt, but Taylor was hit by six bullets and died. During the incident, Hankison moved to the side of the apartment and shot 10 bullets through a covered window and glass door. According to police, Taylor's home was never searched.

A review by CNN found that a key miscalculation by police, who assumed Taylor was home alone, coupled with the decision to press forward with a high-risk, forced entry, contributed to the deadly outcome. Louisville's police chief accused Hankison of blindly firing 10 rounds into Taylor’s apartment through a covered patio door and window that prevented him from assessing any threat posed by the occupants before opening fire. Some of his rounds penetrated a neighbouring apartment and endangered the lives of three of its occupants.

A New York Times examination of video footage from the scene, witness accounts, statements by the police officers and forensics reports showed that the raid was compromised by poor planning and reckless execution. It found that the only support for a grand jury’s conclusion that the officers had announced themselves before bursting into Ms. Taylor’s apartment—beyond the assertions of the officers themselves—was the account of a single witness who had given inconsistent statements.

The Louisville Courier Journal raised questions about whether the grand jury had been allowed to decide whether charges should be pressed against Mattingly and Cosgrove, or whether prosecutors decided that the officers acted in self-defence without submitting the issue to the grand jury.

In a letter to Hankison, Louisville Police Chief Robert Schroeder accused him of "wantonly and blindly" firing 10 shots into Taylor's apartment without determining whether any person presented "an immediate threat" or whether there were any innocent persons present.

In an interview with ABC News and Louisville's Courier Journal, Mattingly said that he wished the police had not given Taylor so much time to answer the door, and that he believed she would still be alive if they had not done so.

Should the officers be charged?

The tragic killing of Breonna Taylor has sparked protests and widespread condemnation, with many calling for the officers involved to be charged. The case is legally complex, and there are differing views on whether the officers should be charged and, if so, what for.

The case for charging the officers

Taylor, a 26-year-old emergency medical technician, was shot and killed by Louisville police officers during a "no-knock" search of her home in the middle of the night. No drugs were found in her apartment, and the only shot fired by her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, was a warning shot as he believed the officers were intruders. In response, the officers fired over 25 bullets, with Taylor being hit at least five or six times and dying as a result. The officers' bullets also entered a neighbouring apartment, endangering a family with a young child.

Some legal experts argue that the officers can and should be charged with a crime. Colin Miller, a professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law, notes that "probable cause" is "an exceedingly low bar" and that "if you have a shooting death, it's going to be pretty difficult to argue you can't at least charge some type of crime". Miller suggests that Kentucky law on "wanton" behaviour could be used to argue for an indictment, as it states that even if a person has a valid self-defence justification, this does not extend to behaviour that is extremely dangerous and reckless.

The case against charging the officers

Other legal experts argue that the case is more legally ambiguous. Seth Stoughton, a professor at the University of South Carolina School of Law, notes that "most states don't allow someone to claim self-defence when they are an aggressor" but that "when police are acting in their official capacity, they can't be aggressors for purposes of self-defence law". This creates a kind of self-defence stalemate that makes it difficult to determine what charges could be brought against the officers.

Outcome of legal proceedings to date

To date, no officer has been charged with shooting Taylor. However, four current and former officers have been charged with federal civil rights violations, including lying to obtain a search warrant for her apartment. One of these officers, Kelly Goodlett, pleaded guilty, and another, Kyle Meany, was fired by the Louisville Police Department. A third officer, Brett Hankison, was charged with federal civil rights violations and wanton endangerment for endangering Taylor's neighbours with his shots. He was acquitted of the endangerment charges and the jury deadlocked on the civil rights charges, resulting in a mistrial.

While the killing of Breonna Taylor is undeniably tragic, the legal complexities of the case make it difficult to determine whether the officers involved should be charged. The outcome of the legal proceedings to date has been mixed, with some charges dismissed or resulting in acquittals, while other charges are still pending.

Frequently asked questions