Ex-LMPD Detective Brett Hankison testifies in federal trial over Breonna Taylor shooting

Former Louisville Metro Police Detective Brett Hankison testified Thursday in his federal civil rights trial, saying he feared for fellow officers’ lives and was trying to survive when he fired 10 rounds into Breonna Taylor’s apartment.

“It’s hard for me to explain the feeling of helplessness I had,” Hankison said, narrating how he stood outside Taylor’s apartment after the gunfire had ceased and kept a careful eye out for the shooter.

Taylor, a 26-year-old emergency room technician, had been inside her South End apartment when she was fatally shot by plainclothes officers attempting to serve a search warrant at 12:40 a.m. March 13, 2020, as a part of a botched narcotics investigation.

Hankison is charged with violating Taylor’s civil rights, as well as those of her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, and three neighbors who were in an adjacent apartment. He fired through a covered bedroom window and sliding glass door, and some of his shots went through a common wall into the other apartment. The government contends he willfully used unconstitutionally excessive force.

Though seven officers were on scene to serve the warrant, only two others besides Hankison fired their weapons: Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly and Detective Myles Cosgrove. The three fired a combined 32 rounds.

Here’s what Hankison said on the stand:

Defense, prosecution argue over ‘rifle’ in Hankison’s trial

Throughout the trial, a slew of firearms specialists and forensic scientists have been called to testify, with the prosecution and defense going toe to toe about whether a rifle could have been present at the time of the shooting.

At the time of the shooting and in a subsequent interview with investigators, Hankison said he saw an AR-15 rifle and the muzzle flashes from it. He knew another officer had been shot and believed they were being “executed,” he said.

Hankison echoed these statements in federal court Thursday. While it was initially dark inside the apartment when police first kicked open the front door, Hankison said the room was soon illuminated by a muzzle flash from Walker’s handgun. With that light, Hankison said he saw a large figure toward the end of the hallway, in a shooter stance.

The muzzle light and noise looked and sounded “just like an AR-15,” Hankison said.

Mattingly, who was at the front of the group and was shot by Walker, testified he identified the weapon clearly in the moment as a handgun and not a rifle.

No rifle was found at the scene. Only one gun – a handgun owned by Walker – was recovered.

Two rifle casings were later found – one inside the bedroom of Taylor’s sister, and another in the apartment complex’s parking lot.

Federal and state prosecutors have asserted there is no evidence that a rifle was fired in the apartment that night. Multiple LMPD officers who were at the scene have testified this week to say they could not see anything through the covered glass door and window.

But Hankison’s defense continues to cast doubt with rifle-associated questions to several witnesses, alluding to the possibility that a rifle may have been missed by investigators during weapons collection.

Michael Van Arsdale, a forensic scientist and firearms examiner, was called to testify about his work on a scene reconstruction of the shooting, which included each officer’s bullet trajectory. In a graphic, Van Arsdale showed the trajectory of Hankison’s bullets, including those that struck the common wall between Taylor’s apartment and the neighbors’.

When Van Arsdale’s graphic was brought up, Hankison said those shots where he intended his bullets to go. He said he did not fire “blindly,” which the prosecution claims.

Hankison testified he had no prior knowledge about the existence of the adjoining apartment.

Hankison on deadly use of force, target identification

Hankison testified he did not think about LMPD’s deadly force policy when he discharged his weapon. Rather, he was thinking about “surviving” and getting his fellow officers out of harm’s way.

Earlier in the trial, at least four current or former LMPD officers have said they would not have fired rounds into Taylor’s apartment window and sliding glass door, which they said were covered and provided no view. According to these officers, it is against LMPD’s policy and training for an officer to fire their weapon if they do not have “positive target identification,” where they can clearly see an imminent threat to human life.

Hankison said he had target identification when he saw Walker’s illuminated figure from that initial muzzle flash. Federal prosecutors have refuted this, saying Hankinson left the position where he had a visual of Walker. When he subsequently fired, the government says, his vision was obscured at the glass door and window.

After Walker fired his gun, Mattingly and Cosgrove began firing their weapons. Hankison said he couldn’t shoot through the door at Walker, whom he called an active aggressive target, because he did not have a clear shot beyond his fellow officers.

Hankison emphasized the tight space that several officers were squeezed into outside Taylor’s door and said he ran out toward the parking lot to escape being trapped in the breezeway. He reiterated his concern at that time that Walker was using a rifle and he was “executing” Mattingly and others.

Earlier this week, Chris Kitchen, who served on LMPD’s SWAT team and responded to the scene, told the jury he remembers seeing Hankison in the parking lot with other officers after the gunfire ceased. Kitchen said Hankison was bouncing up and down, pointing at his chest and then gesturing to the curtained glass door and window. He said it seemed as if Hankison was boasting.

“I was not boasting,” Hankison testified Thursday. “I was relaying information about the situation.”

More key witness testimony: Prosecution rests in Brett Hankison civil rights trial. Here’s what key witnesses said

During cross-examination, prosecutor Michael Songer referenced Hankison’s firearms training during the police academy in addition to mandatory re-certification training twice a year over Hankison’s approximately 20-year law enforcement career. The prosecution has said Hankison’s rounds did not meet basic firearms training standards by LMPD.

The prosecution is expected to resume cross-examination on Monday.

Reach reporter Rachel Smith at rksmith@courierjournal.com or @RachelSmithNews on X, formerly known as Twitter.

This article originally appeared on Louisville Courier Journal: Brett Hankison testifies in federal trial over Breonna Taylor shooting