Judge Simpson said that "there is no direct link between the warrantless entry and Taylor's death."
What?! How does that make any sense? If the cops didn’t illegally enter her apartment without a warrant, Breonna would still be alive today. Cause meet effect. How is that not a direct link?
I think the opinion (as bad as it is) is that if the warrant was good the judge thinks the exact same thing would have happened. So the fact that these assholes knowingly lied to get the warrant isn't a "direct link".
To me making that argument kind of signals that no-knock warrants shouldn't be a thing at all if you accept that an innocent would die either way because it's so fucked up....and on top of that the cops still clearly caused this by lying because this isn't a case of good warrant vs bad warrant - this is a case of bad warrant vs no warrant and Breonna still being alive.
I think the legal principle here is that of a superseding cause. The case law on this matter is really complex and I, as someone who is NOT a lawyer, cannot comment on the merit of the judge's decision. However, the case described in that Wikipedia article is illustrative:
if a defendant had carelessly spilled gasoline near a pile of cigarette butts in an alley behind a bar, the fact that a bar patron later carelessly threw a cigarette butt into the gasoline would be deemed a foreseeable intervening cause, and would not absolve the defendant of tort liability. However, if the bar patron intentionally threw the cigarette butt into the gasoline because he wanted to see it ignite, this intentional act would likely be deemed unforeseeable, and therefore superseding.
Wow that hurt my head. I read the rest of the Wikipedia page and I think I understand, but damn, I’ll need to read the judge’s full opinion to see just how creatively he applied that principle. Tort law is not for me.
That’s an awfully misleading situation. They state that her boyfriend’s gunshot caused her death, which I think most people would reasonably interpret to mean that her boyfriend shot her in the moment, but what they really mean is that if he hadn’t opened fire on police officers entering their home without prior warning, they wouldn’t have returned fire and killed her.
Edit: Never mind, I found it. Note that this is the newspaper's phrasing. Apparently what the judge actually wrote is more technical and less misleading:
In his ruling, Judge Simpson wrote that the gunshot fired by Walker "became the proximate, or legal, cause of Taylor's death."
It’s still the same concept. The exciting incident is breaking and entering by the cops. Judge is still stating them entering illegally is not the cause which it is.
They state that her boyfriend’s gunshot caused her death, which I think most people would reasonably interpret to mean that her boyfriend shot her in the moment, but what they really mean is that if he hadn’t opened fire on police officers entering their home without prior warning, they wouldn’t have returned fire and killed her.
Holy shit that's beyond fucked. How can a judge rule that?
edit: Oh nvm, I just saw who appointed that judge, wow.
That’s amazing. The bullet that struck the victim was not the cause of death, but the bullet before?
So if an LAPD officer goes to raid someone’s home, and a gangster kills a bystander, the officer is responsible? If he hadn’t gone out for the raid, the gangster would not have fired the weapon?
Wait but if the officers in Taylor’ case didn’t show up to the door, her boyfriend wouldn’t have fired the bullet. So it’s the police fault
Charges dismissed does not mean he was found not guilty. They could charge him again. Given what we know, the cops fucked this up. No-knock raids are a death sentence.
I read this and I was not surprise because since October they have been blaming Hamas for the genocide in Gaza, and it seems this form of gaslighting is engrave in USA politics.