@ZFTWARNING what is your read on what happened here John (see comments for unconfirmed details)https://twitter.com/rklueber28/status/1202722185690914817 …
That sounds like solid due process to my non-expert ears but it does seem like public trust in such processes has plummeted for a reason. The perception is that somehow these investigations never seem to either lead to changed tactics or find law enforcement at fault.
-
-
There’s a principal-agent institutional problem here I suppose, where the only people competent to investigate are also the people with most at stake in the outcomes being in a particular direction. Unclear how to create public trust in the process.
-
That depends on the jurisdiction and agencies involved. It is common to have a non-involved agency conduct complex use of force reviews. In many cases office involved shootings are reviewed and investigated by district attorneys or prosecutors offices. 1/
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, public trust has eroded in many cases. These after action reviews do yield accountability and refinement of tactics and training. The lessons learned are routinely incorporated into law enforcement training and future oversight and have been for decades. 1/
-
These reviews also result in discipline when warranted. Enhanced transparency is needed to ensure public confidence and trust. This is always a challenge for police-community relations. 2/2
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.