A Kentucky judge has permitted grand jurors in the Breonna Taylor case to speak publicly about the grand jury’s proceedings that led to charges against one of the officers involved in her March killing. The move comes after the release of redacted recordings prompting further speculation on the handling of the case by the state’s attorney general.
Jefferson Circuit Court Judge Annie O’Connell announced in a Tuesday court filing that grand jurors in the case related to Taylor’s killing by police “may disclose such information, subject to the trial court’s order regarding information to be redacted.”
“[A]ny grand juror who chooses to disclose their identity to do so with extreme caution, for to do so may result in a level of public attention and scrutiny over which this Court will have no control,” she wrote, as reported by ABC News.
O’Connell noted the order “merely grants one grand juror’s request to do so and gives others the option … any one grand juror’s memory, options, perceptions are their own. No one grand juror speaks for the others, nor does one’s statement carry any more weight than another’s.”
Ballistics reports, body camera footage and the grand jury recordings released thus far have brought into question the handling of the case by Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron and the authorities following the raid on the night of March 13 during which Louisville Metro Police Department Officers Brett Hankison, Myles Cosgrove and Jonathan Mattingly fired 32 bullets into Taylor’s apartment.
Hankison was later fired by the department.
A bullet fired by Cosgrove has been identified as the one which killed Taylor in minutes after striking her pulmonary artery, which connects the heart and lungs. However, the bullet that reportedly struck Mattingly has not been linked to a police firearm or one belonging to Kenneth Walker, Taylor’s boyfriend.
However, the only charges levied by the grand jury were reckless endangerment by Hankison for the bullets that missed Taylor – the 26-year-old’s killing was deemed justified.
A Republican, Cameron’s experience and possible political agenda have been brought into question since his nomination in 2019. A failed September 2019 lawsuit sought to have Cameron removed from the ballot in the race for Kentucky attorney general because he did not meet the state constitutional requirement to have “been a practicing lawyer eight years before his election,” the Courier-Journal highlighted in July.
While Cameron lacked the mandated eight years of experience practicing law, he did have connections after serving as legal counsel for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for over two years. He was also endorsed by US President Donald Trump, as well as the Kentucky Fraternal Order of Police.