What began as a hit and run turns into a wild road rage chase. Dive into the shocking case of Hannah Payne, who took justice into her own hands and chased after Kenneth Herring, leading to tragic consequences. In this video, we explore the dramatic events as they unfolded, from the initial accident to the courtroom. Was it self-defense or vigilante justice gone wrong? Uncover the truth behind the headlines and find out what really happened. Watch now and leave your thoughts in the comments below! The show that dissects 911 calls and emergency response video by two guys who have done both jobs. ______________________________ SUBSCRIBE on https://www.youtube.com/@thecommcenter?sub_confirmation=1 SUBSCRIBE on https://rumble.com/user/TheCommCenter/ FOLLOW & RATE on https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/thecommcenter FOLLOW & RATE on https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-comm-center-with-drew-breasy/id1715396970 FOLLOW on https://twitter.com/commcenterpod/ FOLLOW on https://www.instagram.com/the_comm_center/ FOLLOW on https://www.facebook.com/thecommcenter911/ _______________________________ Want to be part of the conversation? Call in and talk with the guys live OR leave a voicemail and we will play it on the show! *******(848) COMM-911******* *******(848) 266-6911*********

Police interrogation instructor Drew Breasy breaks down the detectives' questioning of Hannah Payne, the civilian-turned-vigilante who followed62-year-old Kenneth Herring, who fled the scene of a car accident-- before getting into an argument with him and firing the shot that killedhim. Does she show signs of deception? And how do the detectives handle themselves? Drew puts on a master class for entangling the criminal mind into a web of conviction. Jon also appears.

In the third installment of the Hannah Payne case, the first witness on the stand is the Clayton County 911 Professional Standards and Training Supervisor, who will be questioned under oath by the prosecutor-- did the dispatcher taking Hannah Payne's call correctly? When the defense attorney cross examines, will the fitness hold fast or crumble under pressure? And what will be the impact for Hannah Payne?

Drew Breasy breaks down the cross examination of a 911 dispatcher by Hannah Payne's attorney, Matt Tucker, who has asked her to give the courtroom a play-by-play of what happened leading up to her allegedly following, shooting and killing 62-year-old Kenneth Herring. Can Tucker make his case? Also in Hillsborough County, Drew's old beat-- deputies engaged an armed subject and watched in abject horror as the man killed his own mother in front of them. The gunfight was on, and a deputy was wounded. Drew and Jon stop to count the cost to both deputies and dispatchers in this terrible crime.

In Part 5, Drew Breasy breaks down defense attorney Matt Tucker's direct examination of Hannah Payne. Payne tells the jury how she got on scene, how she took direction from a "state officer" on scene, and how her belief in protecting the public took her down the road that ended with the shooting and killing 62-year-old Kenneth Herring. Both Herring and Payne walked up to the line, but who crossed it? You might be surprised your favorite podcast partners don't see eye to eye.

As Hannah Payne's pleading testimony to the jury comes to a close, we hear a story totally different from the 911 call-- a woman in danger and fighting for her life. But will the jury believe her? And in a last desperate move, can Hannah and her attorney Matt Tucker attempt to exploit anti-police sentiment in Atlanta and imply that the detectives who interrogated her did so improperly?

In the summation of the summer series, Jon and Drew bring home their big ideas about this great miscarriage of justice-- how a prosecutor bamboozled a jury, a judge allowed it, a defense was inept to stop it, and a young woman who called 911 and tried to stop a dangerous criminal in flight wound up learning a terrible lesson: you can do what you believe is right, do your best, and be condemned as a meddler and vigilante by a people who refuse to think more critically.