Ed Indictment in Breonna Taylor case.

shuttlt said:
That isn't what the warrant says. It says that a postal inspector confirmed she was receiving packages for Glover. It doesn't say anything about suspicious packages.


Like you, the postal inspector adds in a qualifier to what is being denied over and above what the police claim.


It depends what part of the claim you are talking about. The police saw Glover collect at least one package from there. He had registered her address as his mailing address in multiple different places. Glover says he picked up packages there. The police claim that somebody a postal inspector validated the fact that Glover was receiving packages there. The postal service has confirmed that somebody asked them to monitor the mail at Breonna's apartment, presumably that is connected to the raid or it would be a very odd coincidence.

It seems to me that we have the following possibilities:
1. Glover was not receiving packages to the apartment, in which case we have a conflict with Glover's testimony, the police surveillance, and him registering her apartment as his mailing address.
2. Glover was receiving packages, but not during that period. In that case, the police are either wrong or lying. By the sound of it they may have been communicating with the postal inspector indirectly.
3. Glover was receiving packages there, but they were not packages of interest. In that case, nobody is lying.


I don't know about "believe", but it's not clear that anything the postal inspector has said contradicts what the police claimed. What I object to is people saying that the police lied. We don't know that.
Click to expand...

From the warrant: “Affiant verified through a US Postal Inspector that Jamarcus Glover has been receiving packages at [Breonna Taylor’s home]”.

The U.S. Postal Inspector stated that police did not in fact use his office to make such a determination. Furthermore, he stated “There’s no packages of interest going [to Breonna Taylor’s home]”.

In light of this, what reason do you have to believe what the police claimed in the warrant, as quoted above?
 
Mumbles said:
False - he claimed that the two heard "a banging noise" at the door, which sounds to me like the battering ram they used to bash the door in,
Click to expand...
Of course you would think that.

Mumbles said:
and not some polite rapping at the door followed by a clear announcement.
Click to expand...
He says there was "a loud knock at the door" as well as "a loud banging at the door" and a loud "boom at the door". They respond "whose there" to it. They get up and start dressing. "Another knock at the door". She shouts "who is it". He picks up his gun thinking it might be the drug dealer. There is another "knock" at the door. She yells again "who is it?". They frantically put on clothing to "go see who is knocking on the door so late at night". As they are walking towards the door, the door comes off the hinges. All the lights are off. He fires before he can see who it is. There are lots of shots and he realises it's the police. He says that it is a long hall and all you can hear is the knock on the door, even if there was somebody on the other side did identify themselves as police you probably couldn't have heard them from the bedroom. He believes the volume they were shouting "who is it" the police should have heard.

The second time he tells the story. He says the first lot of banging was like "boom boom boom boom boom" indicating maybe 5 bangs on the door over a period of a second or so. The next lot of banging is the same. They are trying to "get decent to answer the door whoever it may be".

It sounds a lot more like pounding on the door to me. Do you go "boom boom boom boom boom" quickly like that with a battering ram to open a door? He interchangeably describes it as knocking and banging. He describes their intentions in going down the corridor to be to find out who is knocking on the door.

There is nothing in there that contradicts the police claim. Nowhere in there does he claim that he thought somebody was trying to break down the door before it flew off its hinges. Are you claiming that the police used the battering ram around 15 times on their front door before it gave on the 16th try? The front door must be very strong.
 
Bikewer said:
Just announced, one of the officers was indicted for “reckless endangerment” for apparently shooting into adjacent apartments.
None of the officers actually involved in the shooting were charged, the investigation showed they were acting properly.

This has been pretty apparent from the time that fairly detailed accounts of the incident became public.... The death of Taylor was a tragic accident but not criminal. The officers did not go to the wrong address, they were looking for Taylor’s boyfriend.
They did have a “no knock” warrant, and the boyfriend did open fire on them as they forced their way in.
They returned fire and Taylor caught a bullet. Tragedy, but no “murder”...

Nonetheless, various activists interviewed, including one of the state representatives, continue to call for “justice” and believe there must be some way to charge the other officers.
Demonstrations and protests are already occurring.
Click to expand...
What's "tragic" is that the boyfriend wasn't a better shot and didn't kill the armed intruders first.
And I do *love* your repeated use of "Taylor" to deliberately belittle the deceased.
:rolleyes:
 
Thermal said:
Still don't get this. The cops shot blindly into the dark in a residential area. No idea if there were children in there, or how many. If that's not reckless endangerment I don't know what is.
Click to expand...
They're USAian cope, the concept of "care", "restraint" and "common sense" are alien to them.
 
johnny karate said:
From the warrant: “Affiant verified through a US Postal Inspector that Jamarcus Glover has been receiving packages at [Breonna Taylor’s home]”.

The U.S. Postal Inspector stated that police did not in fact use his office to make such a determination. Furthermore, he stated “There’s no packages of interest going [to Breonna Taylor’s home]”.

In light of this, what reason do you have to believe what the police claimed in the warrant, as quoted above?
Click to expand...
Maybe you have access to better information than I do, but I'll stick my neck out again based on what I've read.

The Postal Inspector said that "Postal inspector Tony Gooden told WDRB that a different agency had asked in January to look into whether Taylor's home was receiving suspicious mail, but that the office had concluded it wasn't." Does he say that no mail from Glover was going to her address, he does not. Does he deny that this "different agency" were told by the Postal Inspector that mail from Glover was going to the address, he does not. Does he say that the police didn't get their information about the mail via this other agency, he does not.
 
catsmate said:
What's "tragic" is that the boyfriend wasn't a better shot and didn't kill the armed intruders first.
And I do *love* your repeated use of "Taylor" to deliberately belittle the deceased.
:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
He claims it was "a warning shot".
 
shuttlt said:
Maybe you have access to better information than I do, but I'll stick my neck out again based on what I've read.

The Postal Inspector said that "Postal inspector Tony Gooden told WDRB that a different agency had asked in January to look into whether Taylor's home was receiving suspicious mail, but that the office had concluded it wasn't." Does he say that no mail from Glover was going to her address, he does not. Does he deny that this "different agency" were told by the Postal Inspector that mail from Glover was going to the address, he does not. Does he say that the police didn't get their information about the mail via this other agency, he does not.
Click to expand...

The police specifically claim in the warrant that they received the information from the U.S. Postal Inspector.

The U.S. Postal Inspector refutes this claim.

The U.S. Postal Inspector further states that there were in fact no packages of interest going to Breonna Taylor’s home.

Again, on what basis do we believe the police regarding these claims?
 
johnny karate said:
The U.S. Postal Inspector further states that there were in fact no packages of interest going to Breonna Taylor’s home.

Again, on what basis do we believe the police regarding these claims?
Click to expand...

Maybe because they have photos of him going to her place and exiting with a package? They had observed him directly doing it.

This was his "ex"girlfriend. He still used her address. He still called her many times. He still stopped there many times. He is in a photo getting a package from there.
What is the 'other' reason for it?
I mean...he had his own address 10 miles away for mailing things.

This guy was a terrible user and liar. Breonna was a pawn in his scheme to hide illegal activities. Even she admits as much in their conversations. He smooth talked her into dangerous situations. And now she is dead.
 
Sherkeu said:
Maybe because they have photos of him going to her place and exiting with a package? They had observed him directly doing it.

This was his "ex"girlfriend. He still used her address. He still called her many times. He still stopped there many times. He is in a photo getting a package from there.
What is the 'other' reason for it?
I mean...he had his own address 10 miles away for mailing things.

This guy was a terrible user and liar. Breonna was a pawn in his scheme to hide illegal activities. Even she admits as much in their conversations. He smooth talked her into dangerous situations. And now she is dead.
Click to expand...

To what photos are you referring?
 
johnny karate said:
The police specifically claim in the warrant that they received the information from the U.S. Postal Inspector.
Click to expand...
No, it says they verified it through them. It doesn't say that the particular office the postal inspector restricts his denial to directly supplied the information directly to the LMPD.

johnny karate said:
The U.S. Postal Inspector refutes this claim.
Click to expand...
Again, you are making the claim more specific than it is.

johnny karate said:
The U.S. Postal Inspector further states that there were in fact no packages of interest going to Breonna Taylor’s home.
Click to expand...
The police don't claim that the USPI said there were packages of interest going to Taylor's home. They say they verified via the USPI that there were packages for Glover going to Taylor's home. The USPI don't say that no packages for Glover were going to Taylor's home. The USPI don't say that they didn't tell this "other agency" that packages for Glover were going to Taylor's home.

johnny karate said:
Again, on what basis do we believe the police regarding these claims?
Click to expand...
Because nobody has yet directly contradicted them, they have just contradicted things that aren't what the cops claimed, and because it is a side issue to the aspect of the case that everybody is interested in?
 
It is amazing that Kenneth Walker could shoot the cop in self defense, and the cop shoot Breonna Taylor in self-defense, with neither side being indicted.
 
johnny karate said:
To what photos are you referring?
Click to expand...
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?
 
shuttlt said:
No, it says they verified it through them. It doesn't say that the particular office the postal inspector restricts his denial to directly supplied the information directly to the LMPD.
Click to expand...

Which office did they verify it through?

Again, you are making the claim more specific than it is.
Click to expand...

I quoted the warrant.

The police don't claim that the USPI said there were packages of interest going to Taylor's home. They say they verified via the USPI that there were packages for Glover going to Taylor's home. The USPI don't say that no packages for Glover were going to Taylor's home. The USPI don't say that they didn't tell this "other agency" that packages for Glover were going to Taylor's home.
Click to expand...

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?

Because nobody has yet directly contradicted them, they have just contradicted things that aren't what the cops claimed, and because it is a side issue to the aspect of the case that everybody is interested in?
Click to expand...

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

That aside, why is your starting position on this claim to take the police at their word?
 
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?
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
It is amazing that Kenneth Walker could shoot the cop in self defense, and the cop shoot Breonna Taylor in self-defense, with neither side being indicted.
Click to expand...

The Second Ammendment clearly states "Why permit packing heat if you can't light a mother ****** up at will? Amirite, Founding Brothers?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom