评论: 警察杀黑人女急救员 川普要求判一天 法官判了三年

只有登录用户才能发表评论,点击此处登录    返回新闻帖
变法维新 发表评论于 2025-07-23 05:27:54
这个警察太冤枉。
天涯散客 发表评论于 2025-07-23 04:19:06
黑人和白左遇到这种案子就往种族对立方面扯。这个警察没有射杀人,还要背锅被判刑,实在是冤枉的。
搦战 发表评论于 2025-07-23 02:53:15
这个案子我支持法官,你警察穿着便衣破门而入,屋内人当然要反抗,开枪属于正常反应,难道坐以待毙吗?
这个情况下,警察应该退出屋外,并表明身份,而不应该立刻开枪还击。
sce 发表评论于 2025-07-22 18:37:30
凯利·古德莱特的量刑应该比韩基森重的多。
毕纳到拉猛琴 发表评论于 2025-07-22 18:36:04
如果是受害者是东欧女,
这警察就一辈子也别想着出来,家人的钱财则全部赔上。
偶偶地来一发 发表评论于 2025-07-22 18:19:33
死者的肤色很重要
历史的回声 发表评论于 2025-07-22 17:52:19
向来都是警匪一家,好笑的是几年前很多华女捐款反对defund警察,她们对警察暴力视而不见,天真的以为警察是她们的保护神,哈哈,等碰到事,她们会知道警察的厉害
laokanrenao 发表评论于 2025-07-22 16:39:00
華人到了美國老實就是因為大陸和臺灣的警察執法太拘束!
true? 发表评论于 2025-07-22 15:46:08
The ex-boyfriend had already been arrested earlier that day, before the raid on her apartment took place — meaning the justification for urgency was gone.
true? 发表评论于 2025-07-22 15:45:19
1. ???? The warrant was based on false or misleading information
• Police claimed that Breonna Taylor’s ex-boyfriend, Jamarcus Glover, a suspected drug dealer, was using her apartment to receive packages related to drug trafficking.
• That turned out to be unsupported or fabricated.
• Former detective Kelly Goodlett admitted in federal court that she and another officer lied on the warrant application to link Taylor’s home to Glover.

2. ???? Taylor wasn’t the target of the investigation
• She had no criminal record and wasn’t under investigation.
• The ex-boyfriend had already been arrested earlier that day, before the raid on her apartment took place — meaning the justification for urgency was gone.

3. ???? No-knock vs. knock-and-announce confusion
• Though the warrant authorized no-knock entry, Louisville Metro Police claimed they knocked and announced themselves.
• Multiple neighbors and Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, said they did not hear any announcement — leading Walker to believe it was a break-in and fire in self-defense.
• A judge later said there was conflicting evidence, and this uncertainty was central to the public outrage.



???? Summary:
• Police had a no-knock warrant, but it was based on false information.
• Taylor was not the criminal target.
• Officers possibly never identified themselves before breaking in.
• One officer later admitted to falsifying evidence to get the warrant.
• Because of this, many legal experts argue the warrant was effectively invalid, making the raid unjustified.
每天都来看看 发表评论于 2025-07-22 15:22:14
这个案子和那个人渣弗洛伊德的案子一样
警察被诬陷
fonsony 发表评论于 2025-07-22 15:20:47
注册怎么这么难 发表评论于 2025-07-22 14:05:55也就随便聊聊 发表评论于 2025-07-22 13:57:09
警察受到枪击了,就可以开枪还击。不应该判刑。
-------------------------------------------
判他三年是因为这一条‘违反了使用致命武力的基本原则之一:“如果看不到目标,就不能开枪。” ’,警察莽撞乱开枪,判三年算合理
受枪击了就四处乱射、你认为这有道理?
====================================
當時對方開槍打傷了同事。警方還擊,不能說胡亂沒目標開槍,因突發,有誰能像練槍時那麼從容?要怪也只能怪那同居男。但關鍵沒有法庭的搜索令。
总有王里 发表评论于 2025-07-22 15:19:38
有人说警察解救人质的时候,你千万别跑。警察会射击一切移动的目标,直到目标不动为止。别指望他们现场会去区分谁是人质,谁是罪犯。一律干倒。
总有王里 发表评论于 2025-07-22 15:14:52
警察也是潦草的很。2年前,休斯顿有人报警家里进人了。(远程监控误报,其实家里没有进人)。警察在室内找了一圈,看另一个屋子有个人影,胡乱开枪,结果吧自己人给打死了。
蓝靛厂 发表评论于 2025-07-22 14:47:10
为什么要穿便衣?
注册怎么这么难 发表评论于 2025-07-22 14:05:55
也就随便聊聊 发表评论于 2025-07-22 13:57:09
警察受到枪击了,就可以开枪还击。不应该判刑。
-------------------------------------------
判他三年是因为这一条‘违反了使用致命武力的基本原则之一:“如果看不到目标,就不能开枪。” ’,警察莽撞乱开枪,判三年算合理
受枪击了就四处乱射、你认为这有道理?
也就随便聊聊 发表评论于 2025-07-22 13:57:09
警察受到枪击了,就可以开枪还击。不应该判刑。
van1 发表评论于 2025-07-22 13:42:00
川普命令州长特赦
页次:1/1 每页50条记录, 本页显示118, 共18  分页:  [1]