Breonna killers not charged.

[onlinebiker]

I mean besides  notion that someone ought to be satisfyingly punished for killing an innocent person in her home, Therefore something wrong must be found with the cop who pulled the trigger,   what else is there to indicate the cop did anything that is wrong?

I’m not an authority on US law, but if blindly firing into an occupied dwelling doesn’t qualify as ‘something wrong’, then it probably should.

Boru

And that is why the one cop IS being charged.

He fired blindly. Which is against the law.

The cop who shot the woman was NOT firing blindly, but for center mass of a target percieved as a threat - and therefore legal.

Don't shit on me about it - it's the way the law is there.

[The Grand Nudger]

The notion that the officers innocence on any possible count is a brute fact of "the law out there" is dubious - and it's not as if a prosecutor has never indicted or tried an innocent man.

The charges are an example of minimum exit. The state has decided that it couldn't get away with nothing, and hope that token action combined with a settlement and promises of future change will be enough to put this behind them. They have every reason to believe that it will be.

[Brian37]

SARCASM 



"Oopps" is what you say as a restaurant worker. It is not an excuse when your job is to try to detain someone, who has not been convicted. And even worse, when your  target is based on bad info.

Not sarcasm...another of your inane comparisons.

From now on I will just say - It could have been worse...you could have gotten cold fries.

---

SARCASM 



"Oopps" is what you say as a restaurant worker. It is not an excuse when your job is to try to detain someone, who has not been convicted. And even worse, when your  target is based on bad info.

Not sarcasm...another of your inane comparisons.

From now on I will just say - It could have been worse...you could have gotten cold fries.

THE POINT of my sarcasm, was to point out that the state AG's decision not to prosecute the officers whose 6 bullets hit Breonna, who were not charged, but charged the one cop, whose bullets went through a wall into the next apartment BUT HIT NOBODY, AND DIDN'T KILL ANYONE, why was he charged but not the officers who actually killed a human being?

This AG made an extremely pathetic attempt to split the baby.

[onlinebiker]

Not sarcasm...another of your inane comparisons.

From now on I will just say - It could have been worse...you could have gotten cold fries.

---

Not sarcasm...another of your inane comparisons.

From now on I will just say - It could have been worse...you could have gotten cold fries.

THE POINT of my sarcasm, was to point out that the state AG's decision not to prosecute the officers whose 6 bullets hit Breonna, who were not charged, but charged the one cop, whose bullets went through a wall into the next apartment BUT HIT NOBODY, AND DIDN'T KILL ANYONE, why was he charged but not the officers who actually killed a human being?

This AG made an extremely pathetic attempt to split the baby.

And you will just keep right on ignoring what is - and bitching because things aren't the way YOU think they should be.


Did your momma ever teach you the meaning of "no"?

[The Architect Of Fate]

And that is why the one cop IS being charged.

He fired blindly. Which is against the law.

The cop who shot the woman was NOT firing blindly, but for center mass of a target percieved as a threat - and therefore legal.

Don't shit on me about it - it's the way the law is there

And that is fucked up

---

And you will just keep right on ignoring what is - and bitching because things aren't the way YOU think they should be.


Did your momma ever teach you the meaning of "no"?

And you keep ignoring what should be by any sane standard of justice 


You mommy clearly never taught you right from wrong .

[Anomalocaris]

that is not.  it is a consistent application of culpability and it should not be influenced by public sentiment.

if would be more fundamentally fucked up if whether a action in keeping with accepted practice is regarded as punishable depending on whether its consequences upsets the public in each particular circumstance.    due process will have no meaning if that situation were to pervail.  it is not suppose to be unbridled mob rule after all.

[The Architect Of Fate]

that is not.  it is a consistent application of culpability and it should not be influenced by public sentiment.

if would be more fundamentally fucked up if whether a action in keeping with accepted practice is regarded as punishable depending on whether its consequences upsets the public in each particular circumstance.    due process will have no meaning if that situation were to pervail.  it is not suppose to be unbridled mob rule after all.

Again nothing to do with public sentiment or "mob rule " how you got either of those from my statement i'll never know .

[Brian37]

And that is why the one cop IS being charged.

He fired blindly. Which is against the law.

The cop who shot the woman was NOT firing blindly, but for center mass of a target percieved as a threat - and therefore legal.

Don't shit on me about it - it's the way the law is there

And that is fucked up

---

And you will just keep right on ignoring what is - and bitching because things aren't the way YOU think they should be.


Did your momma ever teach you the meaning of "no"?

And you keep ignoring what should be by any sane standard of justice 


You mommy clearly never taught you right from wrong .

This makes no sense.

If the cop who "fired blindly"  who was RIGHTFULLY charged with "wanton endangerment" for bullets that went through a wall into the next apartment but did not kill anyone. How the fuck does the 6 bullets that hit Breonna anD killed her not constitute a crime? 

I don't get this logic. Basically the AG is saying, "You can murder someone as long as you kill them as long as you have a badge." But, "If they are alive, then we actually have to spend money to defend you."

[onlinebiker]

And that is fucked up

---

And you keep ignoring what should be by any sane standard of justice 


You mommy clearly never taught you right from wrong .

This makes no sense.

If the cop who "fired blindly"  who was RIGHTFULLY charged with "wanton endangerment" for bullets that went through a wall into the next apartment but did not kill anyone. How the fuck does the 6 bullets that hit Breonna anD killed her not constitute a crime? 

I don't get this logic. Basically the AG is saying, "You can murder someone as long as you kill them as long as you have a badge." But, "If they are alive, then we actually have to spend money to defend you."

Yup... Internal combustion and a woodchuck......


Actually - I'd like to change that to squirrel. A brain damaged squirrel.

[arewethereyet]

And that is why the one cop IS being charged.

He fired blindly. Which is against the law.

The cop who shot the woman was NOT firing blindly, but for center mass of a target percieved as a threat - and therefore legal.

Don't shit on me about it - it's the way the law is there

And that is fucked up

---

And you will just keep right on ignoring what is - and bitching because things aren't the way YOU think they should be.


Did your momma ever teach you the meaning of "no"?

And you keep ignoring what should be by any sane standard of justice 


You mommy clearly never taught you right from wrong .

And your mama didn't teach you not to be a stalker...at least your spelling has improved - points for that.