[GiRTh]

Just found out that the police offered the guy they were looking for a deal but he had to claim Breonna Taylor was part of his drug operation. Thankfully he rejected the deal. Thing is, why would they do that if it was a righteous shoot?

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Just found out that the police offered the guy they were looking for a deal but he had to claim Breonna Taylor was part of his drug operation. Thankfully he rejected the deal. Thing is, why would they do that if it was a righteous shoot?

Lol he'd have been dead in a week in prison. That's some Gotham-level corruption right there though

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Just found out that the police offered the guy they were looking for a deal but he had to claim Breonna Taylor was part of his drug operation. Thankfully he rejected the deal. Thing is, why would they do that if it was a righteous shoot?

From who?

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

From who?

Oh do you want evidence do you? Go and find it.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Oh do you want evidence do you? Go and find it.

If you post info

We post links

Its how this works

[Josy]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

Oh do you want evidence do you? Go and find it.

Tbf girth posting something like that with no links or sources etc is going to encourage members to question it

[GiRTh]

I've found it in loads of places including the Daily Mail. It wasnt included in the final deal but in a draft version Breonna Taylor was named as a co-defendant in his case.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by GiRTh

I've found it in loads of places including the Daily Mail. It wasnt included in the final deal but in a draft version Breonna Taylor was named as a co-defendant in his case.

Then post . Have you not poured scorn on the DM in the past??

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Then post . Have you not poured scorn on the DM in the past??

Its a fine publication,

[LeatherTrumpet]

As are the people who comment

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

So should the cops have just rolled over and taken the bullets fired at them?

They wouldn't have had bullets fired at them had they announced who they were upon breaking the door down.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

The guy was a drug dealer so when his door gets done in in the night he knows exactly who it is. He knew they would fire back, he knew his girlfreind was there.....

Her EX boyfriend was the drug dealer, who wasn't even in the house. I love how that's one fact you can't seem to register.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

They wouldn't have had bullets fired at them had they announced who they were upon breaking the door down.

Evidence?

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Evidence?

Where's your evidence that the boyfriend who fired at the officers was a drug dealer and not a scared citizen as you stated earlier in the thread?

[Marsh.]

Contrary Mary at it again. So boring.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

Where's your evidence that the boyfriend who fired at the officers was a drug dealer and not a scared citizen as you stated earlier in the thread?

And your evidence he isn't!
?

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

And your evidence he isn't!
?

One of many articles

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.was...outputType=amp

From the article:

Taylor’s ex-boyfriend was dealing drugs. That man, Jamarcus Glover, was the main focus of the police investigation. Walker, Taylor’s boyfriend at the time of her death, was not named in any investigation

Now you show me one that proves he was a drug dealer. Don't worry, I'll wait

[Liam-]

She got you there pal, take the L

[LeatherTrumpet]

Not named in the investigation does not mean he wasn't. Where is the evidence he wasnt?

[LeatherTrumpet]

And not a left wing source

[Liam-]

I think you’ll find that as the person insisting on it being true, the onus to prove it, falls onto you, unfortunately for you

[AnnieK]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Not named in the investigation does not mean he wasn't. Where is the evidence he wasnt?

Surely this is your time to show me evidence he was....I can post multiple articles....can you? Just one???

[LeatherTrumpet]

[QUOTE=AnnieK;10922827]Surely this is your time to show me evidence he was....I can post multiple articles....can you? Just one???[/QUOTypu posE]
Surely isn't evidence

[AnnieK]

Ah...so it's a no then....ok LT. Good chat

[GiRTh]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Not named in the investigation does not mean he wasn't. Where is the evidence he wasnt?

Good one