Young black woman gunned down in her own home by police. No charges made against police.

[Trausti]

Try to focus. No one argued that no knock warrants were not a problem. Trausti argued that because they are a problem in general, this specific one had nothing to do with race. Which is illogical.

So you're saying that when White people are killed during no-knock raids it's because of their race?

As I said earlier in the thread, your argument ignores potential facts unique to a specific event, so it is not applicable to a specific event. But to put answer your stupid straw man in terms that are less likely to be misinterpreted by you - No fucking way.

What particular facts? Help us understand your double standard.

 

[laughing dog]

As I said earlier in the thread, your argument ignores potential facts unique to a specific event, so it is not applicable to a specific event. But to put answer your stupid straw man in terms that are less likely to be misinterpreted by you - No fucking way.

What particular facts?

Whether or not racism played a part in this particular tragedy cannot be determined by the no knock warrant but by the history and social conditions of Louisville at that time and the attitudes of the officers. I have none at hand, and neither do you. So, at this point in time, whether racism was a factor or not is basically an assumption on the part of a poster.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Of course police should face charges for murdering people in their own homes without any just cause.

Even if it's just black people.

You're not addressing my point at all.

The real problem here is the drug raids. If you have drug raids you will have occasional cases like this. The officers involved are victims of being ordered to do the impossible.

How are the officers "victims"? They are not dead nor even charged. And they have apologists blaming everything and one except them for their actions.

After all, not every no knock raid ends up like this. So how can you use the "system" as an excuse while denying that analogous argument whenever someone brings up poverty as reason for poor decision-making?

They're victims of an impossible situation.

There simply is no way to avoid incidents like this other than to not have no-knock raids in the first place. The problem isn't with the officers, it's with the system.

 

[laughing dog]

How are the officers "victims"? They are not dead nor even charged. And they have apologists blaming everything and one except them for their actions.

After all, not every no knock raid ends up like this. So how can you use the "system" as an excuse while denying that analogous argument whenever someone brings up poverty as reason for poor decision-making?

They're victims of an impossible situation.

There simply is no way to avoid incidents like this other than to not have no-knock raids in the first place. The problem isn't with the officers, it's with the system.

Since most no knock warrants do not involve deaths, it obviously is not an impossible situation. Certainly not more impossible than being a child living in deep poverty. Yet here you are, allowing the situation to excuse police making poor decisions and killing innocent civilians but not allowing poverty to excuse poor decision making by blacks. It is a blatant and bigoted double standard.

 

[Derec]

If you think that there aren't black police, as well as other black folks, who don't have bigoted feelings toward those who are also black, I think you are wrong.

I think there probably are such people, but they are rare. Certainly compared to black folks who are racist and bigoted against white people, the type of racism systematically ignored by those on the left.

I've personally known one of them myself.

Based on what have you concluded he or she was bigoted against their own people?

And, no, racism isn't my go to explanation for everything.

Then why do you assume, without evidence, that the police in the Taylor case were racist?

And, it's possible that this had more to do with class than race. Either way, it was wrong, and the police who killed the young woman should be prosecuted, while the charges against the young man who shot at the intruders should be dropped.

I do not think you should be prosecuted for returning fire when shot at.
I do think the circumstances of the raid should be carefully investigated, and if similar fraud to one in Trausti's article is found, those responsible should be dealt likewise.
I also think that, unlike most police shootings that result in millionaire family members, the city/county does have plenty of liability and should be paying up.

Even if I'm wrong and racism/prejudice had nothing to do with the reaction of the police, the police officers should be prosecuted and the charges against the young man dropped.

I agree with you with dropping charges unless the police identified themselves before he shot.
I disagree with you on persecuting police officers for returning fire when shot upon.

He was simply defending himself at home. Do you honestly think that a white person from a higher socioeconomic class would be subjected to the same charges as this young black man? I am highly skeptical of that, especially when far more innocent black men are wrongly charged with crimes that they did't commit.

I disagree with your automatic assumption that race plays a role in charging decisions.

Of course there are times, when white people are victims of police injustice. The police are often out of control in many cities, imo. It's wrong regardless of the race of the victims, but black folks are targeted by the police a lot more often than white folks are and sadly, the race of the police officers doesn't always make a bit of difference.

Well black people commit more crimes on a per capita basis. So it is understandable that police will target them more often as long as that is true.

 

[Derec]

It can be murder--if you do not have the right of self defense at that point. A burglar breaks in, the homeowner shoots at the burglar--self defense. The burglar shoots back--murder.

True. But unless the police officers in question were involved in falsifying grounds for the raid they did nothing wrong and thus had the right to return fire.

 

[laughing dog]

It can be murder--if you do not have the right of self defense at that point. A burglar breaks in, the homeowner shoots at the burglar--self defense. The burglar shoots back--murder.

True. But unless the police officers in question were involved in falsifying grounds for the raid they did nothing wrong and thus had the right to return fire.

They had no right to kill an innocent bystander.

 

[lpetrich]

I'd mentioned the case in this post in the Ahmaud Arbery thread, because it seemed similar to that case.

 

[southernhybrid]

There seems to be some confusion here. Maybe I misunderstood an earlier post, but there were three police officers who shot the innocent black woman and all three of them were white. I had the impression that some of you were claiming that it was two black officers who were guilty of shooting this woman. Again, it might be that I didn't read all of the links as I had not been here when the thread heated up, but some of the things on this thread gave me the impression that some of you were claiming that this couldn't have a thing to do with race because the officers were black and black people would never be biased against one of their own. I blame myself for not doing my own research before posting my last comment.

NBC Nightly News reported on this story last night, complete with photos of the officers. All three of them are white males. So, are those who are claiming that there is no evidence that race never entered into this shooting still sure of themselves? I"m guessing there were still be denial that this had a thing to do with racial prejudice. To me, it seems pretty evident that three white police officers likely had some racial bias when they entered that home with a no knock warrant and killed an innocent black woman. Plus, they are now lying, and claiming that they did knock and yell that they were the police. Meanwhile, several neighbors said that they never heard anyone knocking or making any noice until the multiple rounds of gunfire began. One would expect that in an apartment complex, where people are living close together, that others would hear a loud consistent knock on a neighbor's door. Since the warrant was a no knock warrant, it's unlikely that the officers are telling the truth here. That's all I have to say. There is no point in arguing any further about this obvious misuse of police authority that resulted in yet one more unjustified killing of an innocent black person, along with the unwarranted arrest of a young black man who was simply attempting to defend himself and his partner.

 

[Jokodo]

Of course police should face charges for murdering people in their own homes without any just cause.

Returning fire when fired upon (and one of you is wounded) is NOT murder.

The bigger question should be why the house was raided at that time. Was fraud involved? Then go after that, instead of throwing innocent cops defending themselves under the bus.

Even if it's just black people.

Race should not play a role.

Returning fire when the other side legitimately believes they're acting in self defence because you barge into their home without identifying yourself should be a crime, even if it isn't in that jurisdiction (which I somehow doubt).

Allowing so basically nullified the right to self defense - if you can't shoot at an unidentified intruder without risking a murder charge or being legally shot, that leaves only very situations where you can claim self defense at all.

 

[Emily Lake]

There seems to be some confusion here. Maybe I misunderstood an earlier post, but there were three police officers who shot the innocent black woman and all three of them were white. I had the impression that some of you were claiming that it was two black officers who were guilty of shooting this woman. Again, it might be that I didn't read all of the links as I had not been here when the thread heated up, but some of the things on this thread gave me the impression that some of you were claiming that this couldn't have a thing to do with race because the officers were black and black people would never be biased against one of their own. I blame myself for not doing my own research before posting my last comment.

NBC Nightly News reported on this story last night, complete with photos of the officers. All three of them are white males. So, are those who are claiming that there is no evidence that race never entered into this shooting still sure of themselves? I"m guessing there were still be denial that this had a thing to do with racial prejudice. To me, it seems pretty evident that three white police officers likely had some racial bias when they entered that home with a no knock warrant and killed an innocent black woman. Plus, they are now lying, and claiming that they did knock and yell that they were the police. Meanwhile, several neighbors said that they never heard anyone knocking or making any noice until the multiple rounds of gunfire began. One would expect that in an apartment complex, where people are living close together, that others would hear a loud consistent knock on a neighbor's door. Since the warrant was a no knock warrant, it's unlikely that the officers are telling the truth here. That's all I have to say. There is no point in arguing any further about this obvious misuse of police authority that resulted in yet one more unjustified killing of an innocent black person, along with the unwarranted arrest of a young black man who was simply attempting to defend himself and his partner.

I'm less inclined to view this as a racial incident than many other incidents. Unless you believe that the policemen knew ahead of time that the two people in the apartment were black, even though they weren't who the cops were looking for? Or unless you're assuming that they had no intention of returning fire until after they saw that the residents were black? Neither of those seems like reasonable assumptions to me.

Where I am curious, however, is with respect to the judge who approved the no-knock warrant in the first place. If the target of the raid was black (I don't actually know) then I would be inclined to suspect racial bias on the part of the judge for approving the raid in the first place.

There's no question that this was some ridiculous incompetence, as well as an attempt at covering it up. I just don't currently see that there was a racial motivation on the part of the cops in this specific case.

 

[Derec]

NBC Nightly News reported on this story last night, complete with photos of the officers. All three of them are white males. So, are those who are claiming that there is no evidence that race never entered into this shooting still sure of themselves?

The fact that the police officers were white and male is not evidence that the incident was in any way racial.

You show a lot of prejudice against white males here.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How are the officers "victims"? They are not dead nor even charged. And they have apologists blaming everything and one except them for their actions.

After all, not every no knock raid ends up like this. So how can you use the "system" as an excuse while denying that analogous argument whenever someone brings up poverty as reason for poor decision-making?

They're victims of an impossible situation.

There simply is no way to avoid incidents like this other than to not have no-knock raids in the first place. The problem isn't with the officers, it's with the system.

Since most no knock warrants do not involve deaths, it obviously is not an impossible situation. Certainly not more impossible than being a child living in deep poverty. Yet here you are, allowing the situation to excuse police making poor decisions and killing innocent civilians but not allowing poverty to excuse poor decision making by blacks. It is a blatant and bigoted double standard.

Put a bullet in a revolver, spin the cylinder, put it to your head and pull the trigger. Most of the time you'll be fine, so obviously it's not a dangerous thing to do.

While the odds of a no-knock warrant going seriously bad are a lot lower it's a matter of chance whether they do, not something the police can control.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It can be murder--if you do not have the right of self defense at that point. A burglar breaks in, the homeowner shoots at the burglar--self defense. The burglar shoots back--murder.

True. But unless the police officers in question were involved in falsifying grounds for the raid they did nothing wrong and thus had the right to return fire.

Agreed--but that's why I'm saying the whole situation shouldn't happen. Such tactics should be reserved for rescue situations.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

NBC Nightly News reported on this story last night, complete with photos of the officers. All three of them are white males. So, are those who are claiming that there is no evidence that race never entered into this shooting still sure of themselves? I"m guessing there were still be denial that this had a thing to do with racial prejudice. To me, it seems pretty evident that three white police officers likely had some racial bias when they entered that home with a no knock warrant and killed an innocent black woman. Plus, they are now lying, and claiming that they did knock and yell that they were the police. Meanwhile, several neighbors said that they never heard anyone knocking or making any noice until the multiple rounds of gunfire began. One would expect that in an apartment complex, where people are living close together, that others would hear a loud consistent knock on a neighbor's door. Since the warrant was a no knock warrant, it's unlikely that the officers are telling the truth here. That's all I have to say. There is no point in arguing any further about this obvious misuse of police authority that resulted in yet one more unjustified killing of an innocent black person, along with the unwarranted arrest of a young black man who was simply attempting to defend himself and his partner.

Why are you obsessed with making this racial?

We have a very clear reason for their actions--they were taking fire. There's no need to look for anything else.

I do agree they are probably lying but that's simply to distract from the fundamental problem: no-knock means sometimes a defender won't realize they're shooting at the police.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Where I am curious, however, is with respect to the judge who approved the no-knock warrant in the first place. If the target of the raid was black (I don't actually know) then I would be inclined to suspect racial bias on the part of the judge for approving the raid in the first place.

Why would he even know the race of the person targeted?

There's no question that this was some ridiculous incompetence, as well as an attempt at covering it up. I just don't currently see that there was a racial motivation on the part of the cops in this specific case.

While there is some fog of war here I don't think it's ridiculous incompetence. They're not the ones who picked the guy up, why should they particularly know that the guy had been picked up?

Besides, that's a secondary issue. The real issue is that such incidents will sometimes happen with no-knocks. The only solution is to avoid the situation in the first place.

 

[laughing dog]

Since most no knock warrants do not involve deaths, it obviously is not an impossible situation. Certainly not more impossible than being a child living in deep poverty. Yet here you are, allowing the situation to excuse police making poor decisions and killing innocent civilians but not allowing poverty to excuse poor decision making by blacks. It is a blatant and bigoted double standard.

Put a bullet in a revolver, spin the cylinder, put it to your head and pull the trigger. Most of the time you'll be fine, so obviously it's not a dangerous thing to do.

Irrelevant to the issue that it is an impossible situation.

While the odds of a no-knock warrant going seriously bad are a lot lower it's a matter of chance whether they do, not something the police can control.

The police make choices on how they enter, whether or when they announce themselves and how they react to situations. Your response is your usual knee-jerk apologia for the police whenever they kill someone. It is disgraceful.

 

[Emily Lake]

While there is some fog of war here I don't think it's ridiculous incompetence. They're not the ones who picked the guy up, why should they particularly know that the guy had been picked up?

Besides, that's a secondary issue. The real issue is that such incidents will sometimes happen with no-knocks. The only solution is to avoid the situation in the first place.

I think it's ridiculous incompetence that someone approved a no-knock warrant for a house that the target did not live at, which occurred while the target was already in custody.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

While there is some fog of war here I don't think it's ridiculous incompetence. They're not the ones who picked the guy up, why should they particularly know that the guy had been picked up?

Besides, that's a secondary issue. The real issue is that such incidents will sometimes happen with no-knocks. The only solution is to avoid the situation in the first place.

Bull fucking shit.

A reasonable person knows that if you don't explicitly identify people (like by knocking, asking for proof of identity) there is a significant risk to getting the wrong person.

Like nearly all things in the universe, there is a continuum between A and B: doing no-knock warrants the way they did and "avoiding them." One can execute warrants but mitigate risk when one is competent and cares about innocent people. So, given they know there is increased risk of injury to innocents, they could implement policy to triple check the address and/or look up if a registered gun owner resides at the address.

Your claim is like saying we should either operate on comatose people after not checking their identity or not operate at all on them. I'm saying you can first be extra careful about their identity and the procedure before operating. One can mitigate risk if one cares and is competent.

No fallacy of excluded middle necessary!

 

[Arctish]

While there is some fog of war here I don't think it's ridiculous incompetence. They're not the ones who picked the guy up, why should they particularly know that the guy had been picked up?

Besides, that's a secondary issue. The real issue is that such incidents will sometimes happen with no-knocks. The only solution is to avoid the situation in the first place.

I think it's ridiculous incompetence that someone approved a no-knock warrant for a house that the target did not live at, which occurred while the target was already in custody.

I think this is a crucial point. Why was a no-knock warrant issued for that address?

What did the police expect to find there? Who did they think was inside the house? What sort of criminal activity did they suspect the residents were engaged in that would justify such an extreme course of action with the attendant risk to both the suspect and the police?

The OP report says it was a drug raid. Well, just how much were they expecting to find? Did they think it was a major distribution center? Or did they think someone in the house bought Valium without a prescription?