Multiple questions and inconsistencies re: the grand jury.
(Thread)

1) The warrant wasn't no-knock. Fair enough, but how was it served? Police have been known to battering ram a door shouting "police" at the same time. This qualifies as an announcement. Knocking just before that

is technically a "knock." And why serve a standard warrant in the middle of the night?

2) A witness claims the cops announced. Fair enough, but how did they do so? See above.

3) On the subject of witnesses, what was the context in which this witness was able to know what was

going on? Were they another person from the apartment? Were they another cop?

4) Also, on the subject of witnesses, what happened to the boyfriend's testimony? He was the only person witness to the event inside the apartment who was left alive. Was he called to testify?

5) How

did the prosecutor handle it? What did they say to the jury? They'd go after you or me with venom and bile, did they do the same here? Or did they sandbag this to the grand jury?

6) What was the makeup of the grand jury? I don't mean race. Ultimately, I'm asking if any were LEOs

(very common).

7) Ultimately, grand juries are a black box. Any information we have about the hearing(s) got out for a reason. Who released into, and why?

*info.

The fact that no one is asking these questions is concerning.

To be clear, when I say "fair enough," I'm accepting the premise, not conceding the points. Multiple witnesses say there was no knock or announcement. Even if the warrant was standard (which it probably was), the bulk of the witnesses say it was served as a no-knock.