Officials spar over Breonna Taylor case: 'Let people see' evidence

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

With protests flaring in his state and nationwide and some turning violent overnight, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear on Thursday affirmed his call for state Attorney General Daniel Cameron to release evidence in the fatal police shooting of Breonna Taylor after a grand jury declined to directly charge the officers involved.

"It's time to post all the information," Beshear, a Democrat, said on MSNBC. "All the facts, all the interviews, all the evidence, all the ballistics, to truly let people look at the information."

"One of the problems we've had over the last six months is a total lack of explanation and information," he added. "And the vacuum that's created there — our emotions, frustrations — can truly fill that. It's time for people ... to be able to come to their own conclusions about justice."

During Cameron's announcement Wednesday that a grand jury had chosen to charge only a single officer in the police raid that led to the death of Taylor, a Black woman killed in March inside her Louisville apartment, the attorney general said he wasn't ready to release evidence because of a pending trial as well as an ongoing FBI investigation.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/officials-spar-over-breonna-taylor-case-let-people-see-evidence/ar-BB19owzL?li=BBnb7Kz

[Igel]

1. Politicians.

Either Beshear knows better and he's posturing or he's unaware of something important in KY rules of proceeding: grand jury secrecy.

https://govt.westlaw.com/kyrules/Document/N56A9FBD0A91C11DA8F5EE32367A250AE?viewType=FullText&originationContext=documenttoc&transitionType=CategoryPageItem&contextData=(sc.Default)

"Current with amendments received through August 1, 2020" doesn't mean it was last amended then; the last amendment was in 1981, the history is at the bottom of the rule.

This is far from being a secret carefully kept from the governor: https://www.whas11.com/article/news/local/whas-up/grand-jury-how-does-it-work/417-595df6c4-7ad3-4f44-bb87-17d58a216e95

Since he was attorney general, you'd think maybe he *did* know. But let's not judge.


The judge can rule to release it, but there has to be a good reason for it. This should be familiar from a recent case that went to SCOTUS that might have made the news. Every state I've checked on has a similar rule, for good reason: GJ testimony is to be unconstrained by fear of reprisal or embarrassment, which is why certain privileges are denied defendants.