More news about the Breonna Taylor (pictured left) case continues to develop after a grand jury failed to hand down any form of homicide charges against the officers who shot her six times.

On September 23, a Jefferson County, Kentucky grand jury only brought charges against one of the three officers who were involved in Taylor’s killing. Brett Hankison, the former Louisville city police officer, was charged with wanton endangerment for firing shots into the apartment right next to Taylor’s. Critics say the disappointing no-file, in Taylor’s case, was due to the poor presentation prosecutors gave to the grand jury.

Daniel Cameron (pictured right) is Kentucky’s Attorney General. It was his office, which was responsible for presenting evidence and recommending charges for the grand jury so that a reasonable indictment could be handed down. At the least, under Kentucky law, charges of involuntary manslaughter could have been recommended even if there was not a “no-knock” warrant being served, as Cameron has said.

The facts did show that Taylor was not the suspect targeted in the warrant and additionally, the true suspect was already in custody.

The fact that three officers appeared to serve a warrant at Taylor’s residence in error is evidence of wanton negligence, which is an ingredient needed for charging involuntary manslaughter. Though not a murder charge, the evidence was suffice to hand down charges of involuntary manslaughter against the negligent officers involved in Taylor’s unjustified killing.

However, there was not even a recommendation made by prosecutors to bring a lesser homicide charge (such as involuntary manslaughter) in this case. Cameron has been hit hard for the shoddy job his office did before a grand jury. Some have said that he is prejudiced against his own race.

Cameron appeared recently on FOX’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” to respond to his critics.

“It is so unfortunate that because I have a different political philosophy and because of my role as the attorney general and as the special prosecutor in the Breonna Taylor investigation, because I led with the facts and the truth and had that lead to the conclusion, somehow I betrayed my race,” Cameron told Carlson on the FOX News Network.

“It is repugnant, it is so disappointing, but it’s par for the course…enough is enough,” he continued.

Enough certainly has not been enough when it comes to the additional media reports, which have suggested that Cameron and his team used deception and lies to sway grand jurors into doing what he wanted them to do. A September 30th report by New York Magazine’s Intelligencer points out the questionable claims Cameron’s prosecution team made during grand jury proceedings.

“[Cameron] said that the grand jury agreed that Taylor’s death was justified. But the grand jury may not have actually agreed. On [September 28], one of the jurors took the extraordinary step of filing a court motion to make transcripts of the grand jury deliberations public and allow its members to speak publicly about how they unfolded, according to the New York Times,” reads the Intelligencer report.

“Grand jury deliberations are subject to strict secrecy, and the evidence they consider usually only becomes public in court if there’s prosecution,” the report goes on to read.

“The unnamed juror claimed that Cameron had misrepresented the jury’s case to the public, and that the jurors were never given the option to indict [the two other officers involved]. If true, this would appear to undermine Cameron’s claim that the jury was unanimous that Taylor’s death was legally justified,” the report also reads.

But that is not all. The Daily Beast published another report, which claimed that audio clips of grand jury proceedings have been made public. This October 2 report by The Daily Beast also claims that Cameron released these audio recordings himself. He believes that once the public hears the audio recordings, people will come around to admitting that his office did everything the right way.

However, The Daily Beast’s report also shows that the recordings have elements that poke gaping holes in this case.

“Detective Herman Hall, who works in the attorney general’s office, told the grand jury that officers did not have a detailed plan for their search of Taylor’s home. When asked why officers directly involved in the raid were not wearing body cameras, Hall said he didn’t know,” the report reads.

Cameron vehemently claims that the search operation conducted on Taylor’s apartment was not a “no-knock” warrant, which is now a banned practice in the city of Louisville, Kentucky. If this is the truth, how can he prove it if all three of the officers were not wearing body cameras before approaching Taylor’s door to serve the search warrant?

Unbacked claims that come from members of the public are classified in court as hearsay. The officers may have told their superiors on the record that they did not deliver a “no-knock” search warrant. However, without the existence of body camera footage to prove this, any claim made on or off the record by officers should also be considered hearsay.

Cameron has used the words “facts” and “truth” consistently throughout his public attempts to save face. What he apparently has not learned is that facts and the truth need irrefutable evidence to validate them. Hearsay is hearsay; whether a member of law enforcement is using it or a member of the public is.

Without the solid evidence, which law enforcers never had the capacity to produce, the truth cannot prevail, in this case.