LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Federal prosecutors want to introduce evidence to show Brett Hankison, one officer involved in the deadly raid on Breonna Taylor’s apartment, had a history of “responding aggressively and recklessly” during search warrant operations. 


What You Need To Know

  • Federal prosecutors say Brett Hankison had a history of aggressive behavior during search warrant operations before the deadly raid on Breonna Taylor's apartment 

  • They want to introduce evidence of his reckless response in two incidents during his retrial

  • They argued Hankison’s actions were reckless and counter to his training, indicating prior knowledge

  • The federal trial is scheduled for Oct. 15 in Louisville

To do so, they are asking the court to introduce evidence from two events in which Hankison responded recklessly during the execution of a search warrant and was reprimanded for his actions.

“On at least two occasions prior to the shooting at Ms. Taylor’s apartment, the defendant placed his fellow officers and civilians at risk by responding aggressively and recklessly to unexpected developments during search warrant operations, disregarding his training and policy and injecting himself into the middle of an unfolding incident with his weapon drawn in an attempt to address a suspect,” prosecutors said in a U.S. District Court motion filed Aug. 29, 2024. 

The first incident happened Oct. 19, 2016, the motion said, when Hankison and other Louisville Metro Police Department officers observed a drug deal near Hale Avenue in Louisville. When SWAT officers approached the suspect, he ran into the back of the property, locked the back door and climbed onto the roof of the building, Hankison ignored department protocol while other officers secured the scene. He drew his handgun, yelled “he’s on the roof!” and ran between the suspect and SWAT officers. 

The actions did not result in crossfire, and SWAT officers were able to take the suspect into custody with no one sustaining injuries. However, the motion said officers told prosecutors Hankison’s actions interfered with SWAT’s processes, distracted their attention away from arresting the suspect and placed everyone in the immediate surroundings at greater risk. A SWAT commander then spoke with Hankison’s supervisor, and his concerns were relayed to Hankison shortly thereafter.

A second incident occurred May 31, 2017, when SWAT officers were executing a search warrant at a barbershop on the east side of Dixie Highway. When officers hid on the side of the building waiting for customers to leave the barbershop, the motion said Hankison aggressively entered the scene and got in his car as one customer left the shop. Hankison then sped the wrong way down Dixie Highway, driving southbound in the northbound lanes, with his gun pointed out of his open car window. He cut in front of the customer, blocked him in, and yelled and cursed at him. 

The motion said Hankison’s actions forced SWAT officers to enter the shop while multiple people remained inside, with his reckless conduct forcing SWAT to escalate their tactics. This included using explosive flash bang devices inside a business with innocent customers inside, contrary to the plan of letting customers leave the shop before entering.

At least one SWAT officer approached Hankison’s supervisor, telling him he needed to “reel [Hankison] in,” before the supervisor recounted he urged Hankison to slow down during dangerous incidents and follow proper protocol.

Federal prosecutors argue these instances show Hankison knew his prior actions were reckless when he acted counter to his training and fired into Taylor’s apartment, showing his intent to act aggressively.

“Both prior incidents are highly relevant to establishing the defendant’s motive, intent, knowledge, absence of mistake and lack of accident — permissible purposes under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) that are central to proving that the defendant acted willfully — and pose little, if any, risk of unfair prejudice,” the motion said. 

This is the second attempt to retry Hankison after a mistrial was declared last year in the case over his role in the botched raid on Taylor’s apartment. He was previously found not guilty of three counts of wanton endangerment in March 2022.

Hankison is the only officer who fired his weapon the night of the raid to be criminally charged. Prosecutors determined two other officers were justified in returning fire after one was shot in the leg by Taylor’s boyfriend.

Hankison fired 10 shots the night of the deadly raid but did not strike anyone. His shots went into Taylor’s apartment and into a neighboring unit, where a child was sleeping.

The federal trial is scheduled to begin Oct. 15 in Louisville. 

-

Facebook Twitter