Sentencing hearing set for ex-Kentucky officer convicted in Breonna Taylor raid
Brett Hankison fired his weapon the night of the March 2020 botched drug raid. His shots didn't hit or injure anyone, though they flew through Taylor's walls into a neighboring apartment.
The 26-year-old's death, along with the May 2020 police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, sparked racial injustice protests nationwide that year.
Though the sentence could amount to several years, if U.S. District Judge Grady Jennings heeds the Justice Department's request, it would mean none of the Louisville police officers involved in the raid would face prison time.
Last week, the U.S. Justice Department recommended no prison time for Hankison, an abrupt about-face by federal prosecutors that has angered critics after the department spent years prosecuting the former detective.
The Justice Department, which has changed leadership under President Donald Trump since Hankison's conviction, said in a sentencing memo last week that 'there is no need for a prison sentence to protect the public' from Hankison. Federal prosecutors suggested time already served, which amounts to one day, and three years of supervised probation.
Prosecutors at his previous federal trials aggressively pursued a conviction against Hankison, 49, arguing that he blindly fired 10 shots into Taylor's windows without identifying a target. Taylor was shot in her hallway by two other officers after her boyfriend fired from inside the apartment, striking an officer in the leg. Neither of the other officers was charged in state or federal court after prosecutors deemed they were justified in returning fire into the apartment. Louisville police used a drug warrant to enter the apartment, but found no drugs or cash inside.
A separate jury deadlocked on federal charges against Hankison in 2023, and he was acquitted on state charges of wanton endangerment in 2022.
In their recent sentencing memo, federal prosecutors wrote that though Hankison's 'response in these fraught circumstances was unreasonable given the benefit of hindsight, that unreasonable response did not kill or wound Breonna Taylor, her boyfriend, her neighbors, defendant's fellow officers, or anyone else.'
Civil rights attorney Ben Crump, who helped Taylor's family secure a $12 million wrongful death settlement against the city of Louisville, has called the Justice Department recommendation 'an insult to the life of Breonna Taylor and a blatant betrayal of the jury's decision' and said in a social media statement that it 'sends the unmistakable message that white officers can violate the civil rights of Black Americans with near-total impunity.'
A U.S. Probation Office presentencing report said Hankison should face a range of 135 to 168 months imprisonment on the excessive force conviction, according to the memo. But federal prosecutors said multiple factors — including that Hankison's two other trials ended with no convictions — should greatly reduce the potential punishment.
The memorandum was submitted by Harmeet Dhillon, chief of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and a Trump political appointee who in May moved to cancel settlements with Louisville and Minneapolis that had called for overhauling their police departments.
In the Taylor case, three other ex-Louisville police officers have been charged with crafting a falsified warrant, but have not gone to trial. None were at the scene when Taylor was shot.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Hands off — Trump's off-base attack on NYC's sanctuary immigration policy
Intentionally misstating New York City's sanctuary immigration policy as thwarting the prosecution of violent criminals, the Trump administration continued its war on local government by filing suit in federal court last week, one of a number of similar lawsuits across the country that conflate civil noncooperation with active criminal interference and attempt to conscript local officials into President Donald Trump's destructive crackdown. This should prove to Mayor Mayor Adams and other state and city leaders that no amount of appeasement is going to forestall the targeting from Trump. Adams met multiple times with immigration coordinator Tom Homan, insisting that the two men had 'the same goal,' making concessions like signing off on the opening up of an ICE office on Rikers Island years after a city sanctuary law had kicked them out. It's clear that Trump and Homan were not and probably could not be placated to the extent that they would leave Adams and New York City alone. The reality is that this is a totalizing project; Stephen Miller and the rest of the White House want to rid the country almost entirely of immigrants, with or without legal status, and regardless of where they are or what effect that will have on our economy and society. They've been routinely violating the law to do so. It's worth noting once more that Trump's is a political movement that often proclaimed itself a defender of state rights and local control, but apparently that only extended to allowing local officials to detain immigrants, pull books from school shelves, limit access to abortion, curb labor and environmental protections and drive LGBTQ people from public life. When it comes to a refusal to participate in federal operations that have so far involved masked and unidentified agents shoving people into unmarked vehicles — just the sort of thing that we would call authoritarianism and tyranny anywhere else — then states and localities get no say beyond being extensions of a central government. We're not particularly worried that any competent judge would accept these nonsensical claims. A day after the New York case was filed, a federal judge in Chicago dismissed the Trump lawsuit against that city's sanctuary immigration policy. We just want to remind readers that sanctuary is not immunity from prosecution, especially prosecution for violent crimes. What it is however is that when someone is treated at a city health clinic for TB or enrolls a child in school or reports a crime to the police as a victim or a witness, the person's civil immigration status is irrelevant. We want everyone in the city to get treated when sick, we want all children to be in school, we want all crime victims and witnesses to come forward to the cops. The idea of anti-commandeering — the notion that the federal government can't force state and local governments to carry out its own agenda and enforcement functions — has been foundational from the genesis of our country's federalized system. The right of jurisdictions to enact sanctuary provisions that block the use of local resources for this federal function has been litigated over and over again, and always found to be on solid legal footing. We are, however, more worried about the U.S. Supreme Court, which has in the past several months taken it upon itself to sign off on Trump's expansive power grabs. It has allowed among other things Trump to fire federal employees and independent agency members in direct contravention of statute, allowed the limiting of a nationwide order blocking Trump's attempt to overturn the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship provisions and allowed parents to impose religious beliefs on whole school curricula. If these questions get up to that high court level, we hope that the justices will exercise some of their independent power, as they did on other absolutely egregious instances like Trump's efforts to remove people without due process under the Alien Enemies Act proclamation. Anything else will destroy the trust of people in their own local officials and governments and strike at the very foundation of this country's system of government. _____
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What's in the US-EU trade deal depends on who is doing the talking
President Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen shook hands Sunday over a trade agreement touted as being largely concluded, but days later, there are still plenty of disagreements about exactly what is in the pact. Perhaps nowhere is the divide more stark than in the summaries published by each side — one from the White House and another from the European Commission. They depart in at least five areas, both in terms of the deal and the firmness of the commitments. In just one example, the White House summary touts "historic structural reforms and strategic commitments," while the Europeans call the handshake deal "not legally binding," with more negotiations to come. Trump quipped Sunday that a deal would be "the end of it" and that it would be a number of years "before we have to even discuss it again." That is unlikely to be the case, which even Trump's aides acknowledge. The difference is likely to come to a head quickly as negotiations continue between the US and Europe over legally binding text and as trade watchers wait for a formal joint statement on the deal that the teams still hope to unveil this week. A range of areas of disagreement Clarity on at least one headline area is clear: an agreement for 15% tariffs on nearly all EU goods, including autos, semiconductors, and pharmaceuticals, that will be exempt from separate Trump plans there. But the divides are evident once you go deeper. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick acknowledged that a lot remains to be worked out when he told CNBC on Tuesday that "there's plenty of horse trading still to do," even as he argued that the "fundamentals" are set. Read more: What Trump's tariffs mean for the economy and your wallet Trump has also already set a pattern of fuzzy initial details on his deals, including a recent pact with Japan, but a comparison of the two documents summarizing the Europe deal underlines differences on many of the key aspects. On the issue of new investments by Europe — $750 billion in US energy and additional corporate investments of $600 billion — the summary from the US side described them as firm commitments. The European language is much less solid, saying it "intends to procure" additional energy and that European companies "have expressed interest" in additional investments. More differences are seen on whether the deal will mean European markets are "totally open," as Trump has said. The European summary of provisions around fish says they will allow "limited quantities" and only "certain non-sensitive" agricultural products. Another highly touted part of the agreement from the US side is a provision for Europe to purchase military equipment. As Trump said on Sunday, "They're going to be purchasing hundreds of billions of dollars worth of military equipment." That part isn't even mentioned in the European summary. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Guns are the problem: Four are dead in New York because a gullible public laps up the same toxic myth about guns
This time, the gun death came to New York. The same ridiculous fiction is being sold to a gullible public that was trotted out after Sandy Hook, Las Vegas, Parkland, Buffalo and all the others: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. What's more pathetic than those who keep selling that myth is the ease with which so many Americans buy it. Four New Yorkers, Didarul Islam, Wesley LePatner, Aland Etienne and Julia Hyman, went to work in Midtown on a broiling hot Monday and were murdered. Mental illness didn't kill these four. CTE didn't kill these four. A supposed aggrievement in a suicide note didn't kill these four. A semiautomatic assault rifle, identified as either an AR-15 or an M4, killed these four and wounded a fifth, Craig Clementi. The motive of the dead assailant was not what destroyed four lives and ripped apart surviving families and friends. It was a high-powered rifle rapidly firing bullets. Absent the gun, and the victims would all be alive today. But there was a gun, a big gun, with lots of bullets and we are left with grief and the funerals for the four New Yorkers who were taken from us. But it wasn't only the gun, or the gunmakers, or the politicians who peddle the fatal myth. It's the people across our fraying nation who believe that there is somehow something patriotic about having the power to fire off 45 rounds a minute. The Second Amendment says nothing about unstable or sick people having weapons of war. How is that a constitutional right? New York has strong gun control laws, but we don't search people at the border bringing in guns from other states with more lax regulations. Only federal law can bring this insanity to an end, but politicians will decry the killing and do nothing. And tomorrow more people will die. And the day after that. Again. Again. Again. This time the gun death came to New York. Islam was a cop, a 36-year-old Bangladeshi immigrant, pulling in some extra money for his wife and two boys and another baby on the way in a few weeks on what is called paid detail where a private business pays for off-duty uniformed NYPD officers to provide additional security. His wife is now a widow, his two sons fatherless and his new baby is coming into a world without a dad, because of a gun. The gun then killed LePatner, an executive at the big financial firm Blackstone, who was in the lobby at 6:30 likely heading home to her own husband, teen daughter and seventh grader son. Besides being a business whiz, LePatner was a philanthropist helping her kids' school and other charitable causes. She was on the Board of Trustees of the Metropolitan Museum of Art for not even six months. Now her life is over at age 43, because of a gun. Also murdered in the lobby was Etienne, one of the building's private security officers, a member of 32BJ, the union that staffs New York's commercial buildings. He was just 46 and had two school-aged children. Etienne went to work on Monday and never came home, because of a gun. Clementi was struck with a bullet, but would survive and help cops identify the man wielding the gun. The killer then took an elevator to the 33rd floor and killed one more victim, Hyman, who only graduated college five years ago. Her whole life was ahead of her. No more. Because of a gun. Monday morning, as the city got back to work, Didarul Islam, Wesley LePatner, Aland Etienne and Julia Hyman all converged at 345 Park Ave, at 52nd St., between St. Bart's and the Seagram Building. They all had a purpose for being there. But as the day ended, the gun arrived. It also had a purpose. Its purpose was to kill people quickly. And only the gun fulfilled its purpose on Monday evening. ___
