The title of this blog has come to haunt me. Its application in the investigation of the violent death of Louisville’s Breonna Taylor is curiously inappropriate. And yet it so captures the state of America at this time in its history.

First, how did our justice system handle this heinous crime in Louisville? The killing of Breonna Taylor, we are told, was not “wanton endangerment.” Nor was it classified as murder, manslaughter, or wrongful death. But the bullets that passed so innocently through her apartment were found guilty of wanton endangerment when they entered a neighbor’s apartment. Louisville authorities have thereby exonerated the barrage of bullets fired into her apartment, including the five or six that entered her body. Those bullets were justified as return fire—like “freebies”. Breonna’s boyfriend, it was determined, did fire a single shot to defend himself, his girlfriend, and their home against violent intruders who broke through their front door. What other possible motive could he have had for firing his weapon, other than self-defense? He did not know the intruders were police. And if he had been forewarned—which only one unnamed witness claimed out of the several so interviewed—he would have had no reason to fire his gun. For he had done nothing to merit arrest. In fact, the no-knock warrant had been issued in error.

Here is the most instructive irony: the policeman indicted for wanton endangerment would not have been so charged if his stray bullet had entered Breonna’s body—even if it was the fatal shot.

Of course, I recognize that Breonna’s death will be adjudicated under existing laws. But it is well past the time for Americans to admit that laws do not always define justice. Remember when slavery was legal—along with Jim Crow laws, red-lining, school segregation, and so on. Although Lady Justice holds up a beacon of hope, she can only light the way to the justice we must create. For justice is not a fait accompli. Our Lady Justice may well look askance at the term “wanton endangerment.” There are many synonyms for “wanton,” but they derive from the Old English wan, “deficient,” and towen, “drawn,” “trained,” “disciplined.” Regardless of how the law is interpreted, the clear meaning here implies some officers endangered others “wantonly,” that is, because of a deficiency in act, training, and/or discipline. How can the death of Breonna not be considered a result of the wanton endangerment perpetrated by the officers who obliterated her apartment with a barrage of gunfire? Well, welcome to the concept of systemic racism.

I am not a lawyer. And the actual evidence in this case has not yet been made public. So, my assessment can only be preliminary, based upon what has been reported. But I do have some experience under fire. As a Vietnam vet, I served contemporaneously with the infamous My Lai Massacre for which Lt. Calley was convicted in military court of the premeditated killing of 22 unarmed civilians. Of course, the Calley case differs from Breonna’s murder. The latter was not premeditated. But it was predetermined by an unlawful arrest warrant and an undisciplined, poorly trained officer corp. Also, it was not totally defenseless, though effectively made so by an overwhelming onslaught of police return-fire. The pictures of the murder scene recall the mob style obliterations of rival gangs’ hideouts. One officer alone is reported to have unloaded 16 bullets into Breonna’s bedroom. Frankly, a well-trained soldier would never have unloaded a full clip in the direction of a single shot fired in his/her direction. He/she would have first determined where to aim return-fire most effectively while simultaneously seeking cover. Any kneejerk response of overwhelming return fire would be indiscriminate and could potentially endanger innocents—like Breonna. A more sensible response was available. Just four words could have precluded the assault altogether and prevented the loss of Breonna’s life. Why did not the lead detective call out “Police, hold your fire?” A single shot from a 9mm. Glock would not have scared a soldier in a real combat situation. And it would not have unnerved a well-trained police unit into a massive response of gun fire. Even in war, soldiers are prohibited from endangering the lives of civilians and have been held accountable for the loss of innocent lives.

Of course, police deaths are tragic too. Fortunately, the officer shot by Breonna’s boyfriend is recovering from a near fatal wound. But he was shot in apparent self-defense. Until the result of a thorough, unbiased investigation is made public, we cannot be certain of the guilt or innocence of those involved. But those found guilty should face prosecution. And police practices must be subject to the same laws and face the same sanctions that apply to all Americans.

Like soldiers in war, police face the risks of death or injury, though not as frequently. But they should not succumb to fear and panic or show disrespect and/or loathing towards the community they are meant to protect and serve. Soldiers can walk through actual minefields and amongst enemy noncombatants without killing indiscriminately. The reason they can do so is training, discipline, and mindfulness of why they wear the uniform. There was a time, some six decades ago, when some black communities felt besieged and police felt at war with them. I would like to think that past is ancient history. But systemic racism endangers us with the reliving of that history. We must repair this rent in the fabric of our society.

No civilian police force deserves protection of the law when it fails to “protect and serve.” And, perhaps regrettably, individual police need to be held accountable whenever found failing in his/her mission of public service. Fortunately, the vast number of police are upright public servants. Therefore, who would argue against hiring men/women of character, training them adequately for public service, instilling the discipline required in dangerous situations, and making them well-versed in the restraints required in difficult circumstances? And finally, why not review and strengthen those federal laws that protect the civil rights of all citizens and that define how policing should assure those rights are respected.

Secondly, how else should Breonna Taylor’s death resonant with Americans? There is a strange coincidence arising from this Louisville incidence of wanton endangerment. We Americans are not only being introduced to the term but to its reality in our day-to-day lives. Because of an incompetent and compassionless President, we are all victims of wanton endangerment. As the Covid-19 pandemic threatens our health and lives, the consequent economic depression risks the security of our jobs and the prospects for our future. President Trump not only failed to develop a national plan to address the pandemic, he repeatedly, in his own words, “downplayed” it, claiming “it will just disappear.” Further, he now endangers a free election and the very democracy America has evolved over the past 244 years. Again, in his own words, “Get rid of the ballots and you will have a very peaceful – there won’t be a transfer, frankly. There will be a continuation.” With those words, he sets the stage for a possible Constitutional crisis. No democracy can exist without a peaceful transfer of power after a national election.

All Americans can now identify with Ms. Taylor, as unwitting victims of indiscriminate and reckless behavior. Like the Louisville police claim of self-defense, Donald Trump says he is protecting his presidency against a rigged election—a blatant projection of his own attempts to rigg his reelection. And, just as Breonna Taylor was wantonly endangered, he is putting Americans in wanton endangerment of losing their democracy, as he has endangered lives and fortune with his reckless response to Covid-19. Whereas Breonna Taylor’s death is just one more cautionary tale of racial injustice, Donald Trump would detour America’s forward progress in history. Not only would our progress towards racial justice end, but the death knell of our Constitutional Democracy would begin.

Although President Trump has not specifically addressed Breonna Taylor’s death, he has commented extensively about the countrywide protests over systemic racism. Rather than focusing on the issue, he has resurrected the “law and order” bromide of racist provocateurs like George Wallace. He threatens peaceful protesters, attacks mayors and governors for failing to escalate their response, and even threatens to defund cities and states of their lawfully mandated Federal remuneration should they fail to follow his “no-holds-barred” dictum (as he instructed, “you must dominate the space”). His constant roiling of elected state and city officials is also an act of wanton endangerment for it stirs up divisiveness, even the possible insurrection of his white supremacist followers. He is breaking down the doors of our democracy to bend the nation to serve only his interests. No altruistic restraint or adherence to laws and social norms will stop his assault . . . unless he is held accountable.

I do not know whether our justice system will adjudicate Breonna Taylor’s murder fairly. But I do know that in the era of John Lewis and Ruth Bader Ginsberg, America does have the wherewithal to correct its course towards liberty and justice for all. Regarding the criminal attempt to rigg an election, I know Americans have the power to hold President Trump accountable. Once again, we are faced with Lincoln’s challenge that “this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom.”

We cannot fall victim to wanton endangerment and to its destructive consequences. America has been and can be more resilient than its failings. We can rid America of systemic racism and restore the moral power of our founding ideals. November 3rd is both a reckoning and a promise. It is time to vote our future.

_____________________________________________
Still my question of the day: is it possible to reform our economy and our government without serious campaign reform that honors voting rights and replaces unlimited fund raising with equitably disbursed public funding? Or is there another way to return sovereignty to the American people?