In a highly unusual legal move amidst the ongoing unraveling of law enforcement's dubious narrative about the murder of Breonna Taylor, a judge has granted the request of an anonymous juror in the case that their Grand Jury proceedings be made public - a demand Taylor's family has also made - because "certain questions were left unanswered" and Kentucky Attorney General David Cameron is allegedly using the jury "as a shield." Cameron, who argued the cops involved were justified and keeps changing his story about what they and he did, says he opposes the order but will comply; the judge hasn't yet ruled on another request by the juror to be legally allowed to speak openly about the case, because the public should know "the full story and absolute truth of how this matter was handled." This matter, of course, is the March murder of Taylor, 26, a black EMT asleep in her own bed who was shot five times by three white Louisville plainclothes cops on a botched drug raid. Following the lead of Cameron, a grand jury bafflingly declined to indict officers Myles Cosgrove and Jonathan Mattingly for her death; they did, however, charge Brett Hankison with "wanton endangerment" after wildly shooting into the apartment of Taylor's white neighbors, whose lives evidently matter more than hers did. Despite widespread outrage and protests, police claimed there was no body cam footage; when it surfaced on social media and VICE News from 45 body cameras because so many American cops are pathological liars, it showed multiple violations of police policies, from messing with the crime scene to hysterically assaulting and threatening to sic a police dog on Taylor's boyfriend to failing to pair up with a mandated escort. “I’ve never seen anything like this," said a former LMPD narcotics cop who viewed the footage. “This is not how it’s supposed to work.”
The questions don't end there. Cameron, the state's first black A.G. and a Republican protege of Mitch McConnell so what else do we need to know, at first claimed he and the 12 members of the jury agreed there were no grounds for homicide charges against police; at a news conference, he said he'd presented the grand jury with “every homicide offense (and) all of the information that was available.” The next day, he acknowledged he'd never offered that option to jury members, and only recommended the wanton endangerment charge. In a later interview, he doubled down on several questionable claims: He believed one eye witness who said police announced themselves, though 12 other neighbors said police never did; without evidence, he called the suggestion Mattingly was wounded, not by Taylor's boyfriend, but by his frantic comrades "silly"; he argued a murder charge was inappropriate because ballistics tests on Taylor were inconclusive and besides she "passed pretty quickly"; and the grand jury on their own could have suggested a murder charge - "They're an independent body - they could have done that" - though experts say a grand jury will never "go beyond the statutes presented to them by the prosecutor." In truth, alleges Benjamin Crump, Taylor's family's attorney, Cameron apparently "put his thumb on the scales of justice" in a charging statement that somehow left out the fact that jurors could indict police for the death. Kevin Glogower, who represents the unidentified juror, concurs: “If you watched the press conference after the reading of the indictment, the Attorney General laid a lot of responsibility at the grand jurors’ feet" - and then later walked it back when caught in a lie. Legal experts have called the juror's motion "an amazing declaration." Notes one, "Grand juries are said to be able to indict a ham sandwich, but apparently not if it’s killed an unarmed Black person. This will be clarifying."
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Never Miss a Beat.
Get our best delivered to your inbox.
Cops charging into Taylor's apartment.
Breonna's mother Tamika Palmer