breonna taylor

Louisville Moves to Fire Police Officer Involved in Breonna Taylor Shooting

The department says the officer "displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life" when he "blindly fired 10 rounds" into Taylor's apartment.

|

The Louisville Metro Police Department (LMPD) will fire one of the officers involved in the fatal shooting of Breonna Taylor during a botched nighttime no-knock raid, Mayor Greg Fischer announced today.

In a termination letter obtained by local news outlet WDRB, Acting Police Chief Robert Schroeder wrote that Det. Brett Hankison, one of the three officers involved in the fatal March raid, "displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life" and violated the department's deadly force policy when he "blindly fired 10 rounds" into Taylor's apartment.

Lawyers for Taylor's family say she was asleep in bed with her boyfriend Kenneth Walker on the night of March 13, when LMPD officers serving a no-knock narcotics warrant broke down their door with a battering ram. Walker, a registered gun owner, shot at the officers believing it was a home invasion, hitting one officer in the leg. The officers fired back and hit Taylor eight times, killing her.

The search warrant was illegal. No drugs were found in Taylor's apartment, and the main suspect that LMPD narcotics officers were pursuing, Jamarcus Glover, was already in custody when police broke down Taylor's door. As of yet, no officers have been criminally charged for Taylor's death.

The incident sparked national outrage, which boiled over into protests across the country following the May police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

In the termination letter, Schroeder writes that he was "alarmed and stunned" by Hankison's recklessness.

"In fact the 10 rounds you fired were into a patio door and window which were covered with material that completely prevented you from verifying any person as an immediate threat or more importantly any innocent persons present," Schroeder writes. "You further failed to be cognizant of the direction in which your firearm was discharged. Some of the rounds you fired actually travelled into the apartment next to Ms. Taylor's endangering the three lives in that apartment."

In the wake of Taylor's death, LMPD Chief Steve Conrad announced that he would retire. Before that could happen, he was unceremoniously fired after police fatally shot another Louisville resident during the protests. During that shooting, none of the LMPD officers on the scene had their body cameras activated. 

The Louisville Metro Council has also banned no-knock raids in legislation named after Taylor. The FBI is currently investigating her death.

According to the termination letter, Hankison was disciplined last year for for "reckless conduct that injured an innocent person."

Advertisement

NEXT: Armed Agents of the State Shouldn't Be Enforcing Traffic Laws

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wow! Atlanta cop fired and possibly facing death row. Louisville cop fired. Georgia cop fired.

    Those police unions man.

    1. Just wait until 2 years from now when they are reinstated with back pay.

    2. Your comment implies that you think these decisions are evidence that police unions are not the problem others here keep claiming they are.

      If that’s a correct interpretation, I will counter with:
      1. The fact that these are news should tell you how exceptionally rare it is to actually hold police accountable. If this were the norm instead of the very rare exception, people would have a lot less problem.
      2. Let’s see if the firings stick before you exonerate the unions here. Some of the most egregious examples of union work to frustrate accountability have long come after the initial decision. Unions used lawsuits and other processes to get even some obviously incompetent and abusive cops returned to duty. Usually with back pay.

      1. The fact that these are news should tell you how exceptionally rare

        The fact that something is in the news tells you what the news wants you to think, and nothing else.

        1. Well, you know, the news also tells you the news.

          If you’re smart these days, you read about the event in news sources of various biases, because they will emphasize different parts of the story.

          If you’re smart these days, you know that everything gets misreported at first, so you wait at least a week for all the facts to come out before you draw any conclusions.

          1. Hear, hear. I recommend allsides.com. For each news item, they post a left, a center, and a right source.

      2. I believe my comment is more to the point that there might be a bit (just a bit mind you) of overstatement as to the authority of unions, and is incredibly naive to think the problems reside even mostly there and not even just a smidge with executive staff who, surprise, aren’t covered by unions, and in fact might be antagonistic to them and want them removed.

        Blaming unions is an excellent way to deflect from more systemic corruption.

        And much like how “libertarians” don’t scream and yell to end public defenders because the get guilty people off, the curious ferocity reserved for police having right to association and bargaining rights (as if working for the government means the loss of citizenship). Still waiting for the outrage over the Federalist Society. I mean an association of judges advocating for changes to law. Preposterous!

        And as far as reinstatement, couldn’t possibly be due to the fact there aren’t hordes of people lining up to eat donuts and take a bullet. Market forces applying to labor? Naw, better to go with half-cocked theories from the uninformed.

        1. Good points.
          You can’t stop people from unionizing, though you can prohibit collective bargaining.
          What annoys me is how easy it is to distract some people as Reason runs interference for the ruling caste.
          Must get rid of unions and QI! Don’t look at the legislators who pass laws, bureaucrats who create regulations, judges who sign off on warrants, or prosecutors who decline to press charges – nothing to see there!

          1. It’s not just Reason types. Fox News AFAICT has barely mentioned FISA judges in their thousands of hours of Russiagate coverage. There’s something deeper at play here.

        2. “And much like how “libertarians” don’t scream and yell to end public defenders because the get guilty people off”

          That’s because that’s what a public defender is supposed to do in our adversarial criminal justice system.

          “the curious ferocity reserved for police having right to association and bargaining rights (as if working for the government means the loss of citizenship)”

          It’s not just the police, it’s all public sector unions.

          “Still waiting for the outrage over the Federalist Society. I mean an association of judges advocating for changes to law.”

          The Federalist Society is not an association of judges and it does not advocate for changes to law. But other than those minor qubbles, great point.

          “And as far as reinstatement, couldn’t possibly be due to the fact there aren’t hordes of people lining up to eat donuts and take a bullet.”

          No, it really couldn’t. Reinstatement doesn’t mean rehired.

  2. “Any protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes who are going to Oklahoma please understand, you will not be treated like you have been in New York, Seattle, or Minneapolis. It will be a much different scene!”
    https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1273972301156016130

    Notice “protestors” in the list of people Trump is afraid of? Maybe he can bring his bunker with him to Tulsa.

    Donald Trump once again caught unaware of the first amendment.

    1. Time and time again, President Trump has shown the first amendment the same due respect the democratic party continually shows to the second amendment.

    2. He’s just following the example of MSM calling riots “mostly peaceful protests”.

  3. “displayed an extreme indifference to the value of human life”

    Isn’t that, uhm, illegal? If you already determined this is what he did, where are the handcuffs?

  4. Why don’t we ever hear about the judges that rubber stamp these warrants? Theories: 1)journalists as a social class hate cop types and like judge types. b)The ‘neo-liberal’ moment has deified judges as the democratic bulwark against voters. iii)”Name of judge” is a fact that takes some time to lookup and 95% of journalism now is clickbait.

  5. It’s amazing (not really) how many of these raids gone wrong end up being based on illegal warrants. Of course we only find out the warrant was illegal because the fatal shooting brought it into the spotlight. So how many other warrants are also illegal, but never reported as such because everything went according to plan (ie. someone was deprived of liberty and property for a victimless crime)?

Please to post comments