Ed Indictment in Breonna Taylor case.

[johnny karate]

I'm assuming it's the surveillance photos of him collecting a white package from her apartment. He says he collected packages from her place anyway. Are we really going to argue this point?

Which point should I not be arguing? The one where it’s been claimed without evidence what certain photos depict? Or the one where you seem to uncritically accept the word of a criminal as fact?

 

[Sherkeu]

Why air quotes around "ex?"

People have exes. People continue interacting with exes sometimes.

Do we have Breonna's version of their relationship or his version of things she purportedly said (a.k.a. hearsay)?

Is that a package of illegal goods received by parcel at her address or some of his clothes she's tired of seeing in the closet after reminding him a dozen times he needs to come get them or she'll use them as reagents in a backyard ceremony to cleanse bad energy?

I airquoted the 'ex' part because in reading through some of the jailhouse recorded conversations it seems 'ex' doesnt necessarily mean he still did not sleep with her...and others. And lie about it. A lot.

And about his stuff. C'mon. Please do not be so naive. These dealers knew how to try and cover tracks by not using their 'trap' addresses. But this Glover guy was, as Breonna said 'messy'. And it made her nervous.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

I airquoted the 'ex' part because in reading through some of the jailhouse recorded conversations it seems 'ex' doesnt necessarily mean he still did not sleep with her...and others. And lie about it. A lot.

And about his stuff. C'mon. Please do not be so naive. These dealers knew how to try and cover tracks by not using their 'trap' addresses. But this Glover guy was, as Breonna said 'messy'. And it made her nervous.

Jailhouse gossip is now accepted without credulity.

"A thing is known to happen" =/= "that exact thing happened"

ETA: don't call me naive for pointing out you've not met your burden of proof and I won't call you a lying sack of **** who makes weak excuses for murder. Deal?

 

[johnny karate]

I airquoted the 'ex' part because in reading through some of the jailhouse recorded conversations it seems 'ex' doesnt necessarily mean he still did not sleep with her...and others. And lie about it. A lot.

And about his stuff. C'mon. Please do not be so naive. These dealers knew how to try and cover tracks by not using their 'trap' addresses. But this Glover guy was, as Breonna said 'messy'. And it made her nervous.

U.S. Postal Inspector: “There’s no packages of interest going there”.

Also, nothing illegal was found in Breonna Taylor’s home.

It’s not naive to doubt a claim for which no evidence exists to corroborate and, in fact, evidence contradicts.

That’s called critical thinking.

 

[johnny karate]

Jailhouse gossip is now accepted without credulity.

"A thing is known to happen" =/= "that exact thing happened"

ETA: don't call me naive for pointing out you've not met your burden of proof and I won't call you a lying sack of **** who makes weak excuses for murder. Deal?

Sorry, but Sherkeu quite clearly said “C’mon. Please do not be so naive”.

Check and mate.

 

[shuttlt]

Why air quotes around "ex?"

People have exes. People continue interacting with exes sometimes.

Do we have Breonna's version of their relationship or his version of things she purportedly said (a.k.a. hearsay)?

The boyfriend who shot the cop says that he had been with her on and off for years and she'd also been with Glover on and off for years. He thought it might be Glover at the door. It seems like an "it's complicated" situation.

 

[johnny karate]

The boyfriend who shot the cop says that he had been with her on and off for years and she'd also been with Glover on and off for years. He thought it might be Glover at the door. It seems like an "it's complicated" situation.

And therefore, drug packages were being delivered to her home. Sound reasoning.

 

[shuttlt]

Which point should I not be arguing? The one where it’s been claimed without evidence what certain photos depict? Or the one where you seem to uncritically accept the word of a criminal as fact?

Given that Glover says he was using her house for his mail, his bank account was registered to her address, he had other stuff registered to her address, the police have him collecting a parcel from the address (you want to dispute it, fine).... it seems like a bit of a reach to argue that he wasn't using her house to collect mail.

 

[shuttlt]

And therefore, drug packages were being delivered to her home. Sound reasoning.

Pardon? I was replying to another poster about whether or not Glover was her "ex". You can't just take my responses to one question and complain they are unreasonable when applied to another.

 

[Sherkeu]

Jailhouse gossip is now accepted without credulity.

"A thing is known to happen" =/= "that exact thing happened"

ETA: don't call me naive for pointing out you've not met your burden of proof and I won't call you a lying sack of **** who makes weak excuses for murder. Deal?

Excuses? For murder? I go by intention. I do not think anyone 'intended' to murder anyone that night, unlike those who put a dead dealer in Breonnas rental car years before.

I am not a lawyer or a judge. I just opine realistic scenarios as I see them.
Tell me where I have 'lied'.
These are humans, and not a Hollywood script with good and bad guys.
ymmv.

I also am not emotionally tied to any outcome. Cops can be big bastards. We had some local ones here who did horrible things and went to prison for it. For a looong time. Good, I said. They deserved it for what they did.

Cops need better training...and higher standards in hiring. But that is not the direction it will go I am afraid. Who wants to be a cop now?

 

[shuttlt]

Which office did they verify it through?

I don't know. Neither do you. Why on Earth would we expect to have this level of detail? You are the one asserting that they lied. If you know so much, you tell me!

I quoted the warrant.

No you didn't. You inaccurately summarized the warrant in the post I was responding to.

Of what interest were any of these alleged packages to the police for the purposes of attaining a warrant if the postal inspector explicitly stated that there were in fact no packages of interest going to Breonna Taylor’s home?

The police claimed that the packages were addressed to Glover in the warrant. They would further prove she was handling Glover's mail. Glover admits that there were packages. The police make no claim that the packages had any remarkable or interesting properties other than that they were addressed to Glover. Obviously if something illegal had been found in the mail, that would have been nice for the police, but they don't claim to have proof of that. You can't call them liars based on claims they didn't make.

It absolutely was contradicted. I’ve repeatedly provided evidence for that contradiction.

No it isn't and no you haven't. The Postal Inspector had been asked to monitor Taylor's mail. The postal inspector says no packages of interest were found. The postal inspector does not say that no packages to Glover were found. It could be that packages of interest = packages for Glover, but unfortunately the Postal Inspector doesn't clarify this. The postal inspector does not say that who ever asked for the monitoring of Taylor's mail wasn't informed about packages for Glover. Glover tells us that there were indeed packages. The police do not claim that they personally were the ones in contact with the Postal Inspector. There isn't necessarily a contradiction here between all the statements.

That aside, why is your starting position on this claim to take the police at their word?

It's not a question of taking them at their word, but until somebody dumps the contents of the case file and/or the internal investigation online, people's word is basically all we have in a lot of the case. Since nobody is contradicting the cops on this point, the fact that she was receiving Glovers mail seems to be confirmed by several sources, and it in any case doesn't seem like the most critical point, I don't see that the default stance should be that they lied.

 

[Minoosh]

Some of the people jumping through hoops to make Breonna look as bad as possible based on information from LMPD are avowed white supremacist.

Some of them, though, presumably aren't. I don't know what their motives are. Just liking a good argument maybe. The thing is, these techniques of throwing shade at her, or of trying to pretend the police did not screw up as badly as they did, are so similar to the arguments of actual white supremacists that the recreational arguers are in effect carrying water for the white supremacists. Tons of innuendo. She must be a thug because he used her address on paperwork. She must be a thug because he picked up a package at her place - once, as far as I can determine. There were pole cams galore and if they had evidence of more than one pickup they would have released it by now.

Back in July Glover was offered a preliminary plea deal under which Brionna would be named a co-defendant with him in the case against him. A dead woman. Called on it, prosecutor says it was an opening salvo, not a serious offer. Glover refused.

Looking at what has been released in this case, and what I haven't been able to find in the public domain, it's clear that police are making a systematic effort to withhold information related to this case - unless it makes Breonna Taylor look bad. What has been released is wildly inaccurate. She wasn't injured? They didn't break down a door? They won't release her autopsy report; won't release ballistics reports and their thin veneer of cover is this is an ongoing investigation. At this point all that should be over. They're going to have to tell the defense for the one indicted cop everything soon. So how about a show of good faith instead of desperately trying to bury the truth so ******* hard that no one will ever be able to put the pieces together? I suspect they don't show good faith because they don't have any. And that IMO is something that feeds the rage of protesters.

I said Breonna was beyond the reach of justice. I believe that. But I still want to know the truth as well as it can be determined. LMPD has been involved in a systematic coverup. They may have some thin fig leaf of justification for withholding information, but it's gone now.

I'm fairly convinced now that they were aiming at Breonna, because they believed she was alone, hence she must have been the shooter, and even cops must have better aim than to fire 30 shots that completely missed Walker.

LMPD's lack of transparency and the hasty $12M payout scream "consciousness of guilt." Hence I do not take in good faith anything they said to get the warrant, or their subsequent, well-documented efforts to spread talking points that are embraced by white supremacists, as well as presumed non-racists whose basic point is, "But what about Breonna?"

 

[shuttlt]

I'm fairly convinced now that they were aiming at Breonna, because they believed she was alone, hence she must have been the shooter, and even cops must have better aim than to fire 30 shots that completely missed Walker.

In some versions of what happened, he was shielded by a doorway off the corridor. All the lights were off in the apartment. He says he fired his "warning shot" before he had seen the cops more or less as an immediate reaction to the door being smashed off its hinges. Why is it difficult to believe he wasn't hit if he'd ducked into cover?

 

[johnny karate]

Given that Glover says he was using her house for his mail, his bank account was registered to her address, he had other stuff registered to her address, the police have him collecting a parcel from the address (you want to dispute it, fine).... it seems like a bit of a reach to argue that he wasn't using her house to collect mail.

U.S. Postal Inspector: “There’s no packages of interest going there”.

Nothing illegal was found in Breonna Taylor’s home.

 

[johnny karate]

Pardon? I was replying to another poster about whether or not Glover was her "ex". You can't just take my responses to one question and complain they are unreasonable when applied to another.

If you have better reasoning for believing that drug packages were being sent to Breonna Taylor’s home, you haven’t offered it.

 

[shuttlt]

I suspect they don't show good faith because they don't have any. And that IMO is something that feeds the rage of protesters.

We probably differ he in how much we think the protesters know or care about the facts of the case.

 

[shuttlt]

If you have better reasoning for believing that drug packages were being sent to Breonna Taylor’s home, you haven’t offered it.

I haven't said that they were. You are taking my comment in response to an unrelated question and claiming it doesn't prove a different assertion that I haven't made.

 

[shuttlt]

U.S. Postal Inspector: “There’s no packages of interest going there”.

Nothing illegal was found in Breonna Taylor’s home.

Yes, and the police didn't say that the postal inspector had said they had found anything illegal going to her home. The police didn't say they could prove anything illegal had gone to her home. I have not said that they had proof anything illegal had been mailed to her home. You keep gleefully disproving claims that nobody has made.

 

[Minoosh]

In some versions of what happened, he was shielded by a doorway off the corridor. All the lights were off in the apartment. He says he fired his "warning shot" before he had seen the cops more or less as an immediate reaction to the door being smashed off its hinges. Why is it difficult to believe he wasn't hit if he'd ducked into cover?

It’s not that it’s so hard to believe - it’s that the one agency that might be able to piece things together with ballistics reports, analyses of angles etc. has steadfastly refused to release any information that might shed light on the situation and help clear up questions of fact. Almost everything I know about this case I’ve only learned yesterday or today, and the more I know, really the more effed-up the situation seems. Somewhere along the way I’ve seen it suggested that cops thought Breonna was the shooter. I do hope FOIA requests have already been filed to pry some of facts of the case loose.

 

[johnny karate]

I haven't said that they were. You are taking my comment in response to an unrelated question and claiming it doesn't prove a different assertion that I haven't made.

Yes, and the police didn't say that the postal inspector had said they had found anything illegal going to her home. The police didn't say they could prove anything illegal had gone to her home. I have not said that they had proof anything illegal had been mailed to her home. You keep gleefully disproving claims that nobody has made.

If the alleged packages were not believed to be criminal in nature, why were they of interest to the police and mentioned in the search warrant?