October 28, 2020 Office of the Prosecutors Advisory Counci l 1024 Capital Center Drive Frankfort, KY 4060 I PA C@prosecutors.ky .gov ATTN: Prosecutor Appointees Hon. Courtney Baxter 115 West Main Street Lagrange, KY 4003 1 cbaxter@prosecutors.ky .gov Hon. Chris Cohron 1001 Center Street, Su ite 205 Bowling Green, KY 42101 ctcohron@prosecutors.ky.gov Hon. Martin Hatfie ld 103 South Maple Street P.O . Box 5 Somerset, KY 42502 mlhatfield@p rosecutors.ky .gov Hon. Joseph Ross 200 West 4th Street, P.O. Box 905 Russellville, KY 42276 j ross@prosecutors.ky .gov Hon. John Soyars 209 E. 14th St. Hopkinsville, KY 42240 jtsoyars.christiancoatty@gmail.com Hon. Shane Young 54 Public Square Elizabethtown, KY 42702 syoung@ prosecutors.ky .gov ATTN: Citizen Appointees Mr. Aaron Dail Ms . Margaret Daniel Dear Counci l Members, My name is Tamika Palmer. Thank you a ll for your public service. If not for our prosecutors, there would be no effective system of justice. It is my unde rstanding that in situations where a dul y appointed prosecutor responsible for a case is unable or unwilling to prosecute, the Counci l wi ll see that a legitimate prosecution goes forward in the hands of a public prosecutor who is ready, w illing and able to represent the Commonwealth appropriately. 1 As s uch, in accordance with KRS 15.7 15, I hereby respectfully request that the Council afford re lief in the form of appointing a competent and capable prosecutor willing to hand le the case involving the death of my daughter, Breonna Taylor. Admittedly, it is nerve racking to even bring you thi s request for re lief. l understand and appreciate that each of you, as prosecutors, must establish and mainta in a collaborative and positive relationship w ith law enforcement. Yet here, I am asking for each of you to evaluate the unwillingness and refusal of Kentucky 's h ighest-ranking prosecutor to present charges against law enforcement officers. It is my humble request to each of you that, while reviewing this application for relief, any relationships you may have with law enforcement, along with any potential ideals a nd preconceived notio ns regarding cases of this nature, please be set aside. On March 13 of this year, Breanna was killed when police officers forc ibly entered her ho me with a battering ram and shot her several times. Breanna was unarmed a nd posed no threat. Nearly all the shots fired at her were while she was di sabled and o n the ground. 1 "The aggrieved citizen should apply for relief to the ' prosecutors advisory council' created by KRS I 5.705, which has the responsibility to see that any legitimate prosecution goes forward in the hands of a public prosecutor ready, willing and able to represent the Commonwealth appropriately. It provides a system for replacement of a prosecutor in the event of " incapacity," "refusal" or "failure" to act in any certain case or cases "without sufficient grounds," " inability," or "confl ict of interest." Commom11ealth v. Hubbard, 777 S. W.2d 882, 885 (Ky. 1989) (Liebson, dissenting on other grounds). From September 21 -23, evidence surrounding Breonna's death was presented to a Jefferson County grand jury. Fo llowing the proceedings, Attorney General Daniel Cameron had me drive nearly an hour to his office in Frankfort, where he p roceeded to tell me that his prosecution team was only able to obtain an indictment against LMPD officer Brett Hankison. The Attorney General advised me that the grand jury declined to indict other officers and that his team had done the best they could. 2 A.G. Cameron and one of his prosecutors then advised me that I should consider finding peace through the Lord and watched as I sobbed uncontrollably. While I was riding back to Louisville, stopping and getting sick o n the side of the highway along the way, A.G. Cameron was being shuffled across town to make a national press conference. There, he announced to a worldwide audience that his prosecutors walked the grand jury through every homicide offense, that the grand jury applied the facts to the law and that the grand jury, upon reviewing the evidence, determined that the officers were justified in killing Breonna. 3 These statements were flat out lies. The Attorney General proceeded to repeat these lies in follow-up media interviews. Multiple grand jurors, upon hearing what A.G. Cameron had to say, pursued legal action to obtain the right to clear the record. I am aware of the concerns expressed by the Commonwealth Attorneys Association in response to the grand j urors' request to speak out. While several of you supported the arguments to prohibit the grand jurors from speaking, hopefully we at least agree that a prosecutor should not mi srepresent important facts surrounding a grand jury presentation and then be permitted to rely upon secrecy rules to preclude the truth from being disclosed. Neither 2 Attorney General Cameron never adv ised me that the wanton endangerment charges were unrelated to Breonna; he also never advised me that his office had not presented or recommended any other charges to grand jurors. 3 See Exhibit I, transcript of Daniel Cameron' s conference and interview. a victim nor a suspect should have to endure a lifetime of being misled about the events giving rise to the outcome of the grand jury proceeding. When the court denied the Attorney General's efforts to block the grand jurors from speaking, the truth was finally revealed: "The grand jury did not have homicide offenses explained to them. The grand jury never heard anything about those laws. Self-defense or justification was never explained either. Questions were asked about additional charges and the grand jury was told there would be none because the prosecutors didn 't fee l they could make them stick. The grandjury didn't agree that certain actions were justified, nor did it decide the indictment should be the only charges in the Breanna Tay lor case. The grandjury was never given the opportunity to deliberate on those charges and deliberated only on what was presented to them." 4 "The grand jury was only allowed to consider the three wanton endangerment charges against detective Hankison. No opportunity to consider anything else was permitted." 5 Had multiple grand jurors not come fo rward, placing themselves and their freedom in jeopardy, my family would have re ma ined in the dark as to these lies expressed by A.G. Ca meron follow ing the proceedings. It is incredible to think that the grand jurors were more co mpassionate and truthful about m y daughter' s case than the state's highest-ranking prosecutor. The Attorney General 's unwillingness and refusal to prosecute Breonna's case, despite grand jurors confirming that they fo und probable cause to indict the officers o n multiple offenses, calls into question whether we face a "stacked deck" when the perpetrators are members of law enforcement. 4 5 Exhib it 2, Statement from Grand Juror I. Exhibit 3, Statement from Grand Juror 2. A.G. Cameron' s actions assured that the grand jury was deprived of the right to indict officers on crimes associated with gunshots into my daughter's home, into her body and into the homes of the black neighbors living above her and behind her. A.G. Cameron' s actions also assured that an indictment would be rendered in association with the gunshots fired into the home of the white neighbors living beside Breonna. Relief is wan-anted and necessary. The Attorney General 's conduct undermines the trust and integrity of the entire process. Despite A.G. Cameron's efforts to try and pawn decisions on the grand jury, the fact remains that he refuses to prosecute a case in which multiple grand jurors found that probable cause existed to indict all the officers. Grand jurors did not believe officers were justified in killing my daughter, yet A.G. Cameron denied them of their right to render a decision reflecting the same. At a minimum, my daughter deserves, as do all aggrieved victims, a competent and capable prosecution team which is committed to properly investigating the case, evaluating the law from an unbiased lens, presenting the evidence and allowing the grand jurors to perform the functions guaranteed to them under the law. Thank you for all consideration of this request. No mother should be deprived of justice and trnth smTOunding her child's death simply because the perpetrators were police officers. With Respect and Gratitude, Tamika Palmer ARGUMENT "The jury system calls on the lawyer to have faith in the common man - that the average dtizen can be relied on, when given an adequate explanation, to understand a problem, apply reason to it, and arrive at a wise solution. This faith in the common man to solve his problems by his own reason is of the essence of a democracy. In the few cases in which the [prosecutorJ is unable to persuade the grand jury and the Attorney General disagrees with its action, his recourse is not to prevent the grand jury from finding and returning an effective indictment." 1 Prosecutors maintain uniform and efficient enforcement of crimina l justice throughout the Commonwea lth. 2 They have the responsibil ity to serve the public as impartial advocates in a criminal prosecution to ensure " that justice shall be done." 3 When presenting a case to a grand jury, prosecutors shall do so with ful l vigor, regardless of the status of the defendants in the case. 4 Prosecutors shall provide the grand jury with accurate explanations of the law and assist with drafting indi ctments. 5 As the grand jury acts as the " conscience of the community,'' prosec utors must a llow the grand jury to fully consider a case and render a decision reflecting a "conscientious conclusion." 6 It wou ld be "grossly wrong" for a prosecutor to usurp the exclusive power of grand jurors to determine whether indictments should be found and returned in cases." 7 In Breanna Tay lor's case, Attorney General Danie l Cameron abdicated these duties. On March 13 of this year, unannounced police officers forc ibly entered Breanna Taylor's home with a battering ram and, when confronted with one lawful warning shot from Breonna's boyfriend, fired at least 32 bullets in response. Six bullets struck and killed Breanna. T hroughout this time, Breanna was unarmed a nd posed no threat; nearly all the shots fired at her came after 1 United States v. Cox, 342 F .2d 167, 169-170 (5th Cir. 1965) (quoting in part Colonel E.R. Mattoon, The Lawyer as a Social Force, 15 Ala. Law, 55, 64 ( 1954)). 2 See KY Const. §81 3 Young v. United States ex rel. Vuillon et. Fils SA., 481 U.S. 787, 803 (1987). 4 See Hoskins v. Miracle, 150 S.W.3d I, 18 (Ky. 2004). 5 RCr5. 14. 6 United States v. Cox, 342 F.2d 167, 169- 170 (5th Cir. 1965). 7 Id. she 'd been disabled and gone to the ground. A finder of fact and investigative body could determine that the police officers acted wantonly and recklessly, thereby e lim inating their right to se lf-defense; that the officers, upon forc ing entry into the home without announcing, were the initial aggressors and, thus, had a duty to retreat; and that the officer gunfire continued well beyond the presence of any threat. 8 In September of thi s year, evidence surrounding Breonna's death was presented to a Jefferson County grand jury. Following the proceedings, Daniel Cameron publicly announced that the prosecutors walked the grand jury through every homicide offense, allowed the grand jury to apply the facts to the law and that the grand jury, upon reviewing the evidence, determined that the officers were justified in killing Breonna. 9 Since Cameron' s announcement, an extraordinary series of events have made clear that he, to put it bluntly, lied repeatedly to Breonna's family and the public. In fact, these lies were made to such an offensive degree that multiple grand jurors, upon hearing them, retained counsel and fought legal battles to obtain the right to clear the record . 10 The first grand juror to speak out stated the following: "The grand jury did not have homicide offenses explained to them. The grandjwy never heard anything about those laws. Seif-defense or justification was never explained either. Questions were asked about additional charges and the grand jury was told there would be none because the prosecutors didn 't feel they could make them stick. The grand jury didn't agree that certain actions were justified, nor did it decide the indictment should be the only charges in the Breonna Taylor case. The grand jury was never given the opportunity to deliberate on those charges and deliberated only on what was presented to them." 11 8 See KRS § 503. 120, KRS 503.055(2)(d) and KRS 503 .055(4). To add insult to injury, Cameron only permitted the grand jury to deliberate on counts of wanton endangerment for three rounds which passed into a neighl5oring apartment occupied by three white residents. Cameron