Force Science: Is It Police Jargon or Real Science?

Special guest Von Kliem from Force Science, co-host Banning Sweatland, and I are live in-studio. No agenda, just shooting the 💩. The line between what the Constitution allows, what policy prefers, and what humans can do under stress is where the mess—and the truth—lives. We go there. Starting with the Minnesota debate and Barnes v. Felix, we unpack how totality of the circumstances actually works, why “officer-created jeopardy” is a shaky legal anchor, and how courts weigh intrusion against government interests without turning tactics into constitutional mandates.

From street-level decisions to courtroom standards, we get precise about probable cause vs reasonable suspicion, consent during knock-and-talks, and how a single detail at a door can flip authority. Then we zoom into the human factor: why additional shots happen after a threat shifts, how fast the brain can—and can’t—stop, and why video evidence routinely misleads. If you’ve ever wondered why a freeze-frame can’t substitute for a first-person vantage point, this conversation spells it out.

We widen the lens to federal-state friction, ICE operations, and where the Insurrection Act and Posse Comitatus actually fit. Cooperation and deconfliction protect people; performative standoffs don’t. On the tactics front, we get painfully honest about LVNR, batons, OC/CS, and the training gaps that matter more than people admit. A rapid bodycam breakdown of a stolen-car pursuit and ramp gunfire tests everything we’ve discussed in real time—risk, cover, communication, and the gravity of closing distance under fire.

We close by looking ahead: drones and StarChase in pursuits, the trade-offs of remote tracking, and why clear, predictable standards plus human performance science are the foundation of honest accountability. If you’re a cop, a lawyer, or a curious citizen, you’ll leave with sharper tools to judge fast decisions fairly.

If this resonated, follow the show, share it with a friend who loves tough conversations, and drop a review with one tak

Peregrine.io: Turn your worst detectives into Sherlock Holmes, head to Peregrine.io tell them Two Cops One Donut sent you or direct message me and I'll get you directly connected and skip the salesmen.

Chapters

• 0:00 Live Stream Kickoff And Crew Banter
• 9:30 Viral “Shirtless Alan” Story And Community Vibe
• 16:45 Setting The Table: Minnesota Case And Barnes v. Felix
• 26:40 Probable Cause vs Reasonable Suspicion Confusions
• 38:20 Expert Witness Ethics And Officer-Created Jeopardy
• 55:30 Cars As Weapons, Policy vs Constitution, LAPD Lessons
• 1:10:14 Totality Of Circumstances Clarified In Barnes v. Felix
• 1:21:44 Federal vs Local Authority, ICE Stops, Jurisdiction
• 1:37:04 Insurrection Act, Posse Comitatus, Military Support
• 1:59:24 Video Evidence Limits And Human Perception
• 2:12:34 Auditors, First Amendment, And Real-Time Crime Centers
• 2:28:14 Knock-And-Talks, Legal Platforms, And Consent
• 2:42:24 Training Gaps: Stop-And-Frisk And Con Law For Cops
• 2:58:49 Force Options, LVNR, And Baton Realities
• 3:13:34 Pepper Spray, CS Gas, And Stress Responses

Transcript

SPEAKER_03: 0:00

Podcast The views and opinions expressed by guests on the podcast are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of two cops, one donor, its host or affiliate. The podcast is intended for entertainment and informational purposes only. We do not endorse any guests' opinions or actions discussed during the show. Any content provided by guests is of their own volition, and listeners are encouraged to form their own opinions. Furthermore, some content is graphic and has harsh language. Your discretion advised and is intended for mature audiences. Two cops when donut and its host do not accept any liability for statements or actions taken by guests. Thank you for listening. How are you, sir?

SPEAKER_04: 0:56

Hey, thank you for inviting me. This is a nice place you've set up here. I like that.

SPEAKER_03: 1:00

Yeah. Yeah. Thanks for having me. And I got the banning sweatland. What's up, buddy? What's up, guys? So we are, you see, no headset today. Uh I'm poor, so I only have two headsets because I've not used to having more than one person in at a time. And then the times that I do have more than one person in here, it's um it's just a recording. We don't do it live. So this is a first for us. We're going live. This is kind of the point. We wanted to be able to live stream and see it on here. We got Alan behind the scenes. Alan, go ahead and show your face, buddy. Somebody, Mr. Billfold, I sit with Alan. Alan's like, no, I'm not going to show my face, but that's okay. Uh, tonight's agenda. We don't have an agenda. It's gonna be fun. It's just gonna be the boys hanging out. Um, if you guys are not familiar with Von Cleem, I want you. Oh, there's Alan. Look at that little pun. What's up, buddy? You're muted.

SPEAKER_00: 1:54

You're welcome, sir. Oh, there we go. There we go. I I hit the button like five times, it just didn't work. Maybe I didn't pay you the money for the mouse.

SPEAKER_02: 2:03

You need to call IT. Yeah, I know, right? Sometimes the buttons in a different location. Where's our IT for?

SPEAKER_03: 2:10

Turned his computer off. Right. Yeah, don't Alan does have full control of my computer from where he's at, so I do have to be careful what I say. He could easily turn on us, be an insider threat. Uh Vaughn won't be lagging out this time, woot-woot, Mr. Billfold. Yeah, that was the problem last time. Alan has a face for radio. How dare you? He was shirtless one day. You don't remember that?

SPEAKER_02: 2:39

And he and he did that for all of you. It was actually we actually planned for that for months ahead.

SPEAKER_03: 2:43

Yeah, we we acted like that was an accident, but he's doing push-ups ahead of time.

SPEAKER_01: 2:51

He's got ice cubes on his nipples. Maybe weights rocking.

SPEAKER_04: 2:56

I don't know.

SPEAKER_03: 3:02

It was the largest audience we ever had in the 20 seconds that he was live.

SPEAKER_02: 3:07

You know, I'm part of the show, and I had to hear about it for my wife texted me, going, Did you realize that Alan's doing a solo show with no shirt on? I'm like, I'm on patrol. I'm like, what?

SPEAKER_00: 3:18

So the back wanted you to know that she was watching, buddy. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 3:22

Yeah, she was. I had some competition now. The uh the backstory for those that don't know is Alan was trying to work behind the scenes to get some live stream stuff figured out. Didn't realize he went live.

SPEAKER_02: 3:33

He didn't realize he was on our website.

SPEAKER_03: 3:35

Yeah. Didn't realize he was logged into all of our social media on the live, and everybody got about a 20-second show of Shirtless Alan, and it was probably up for what, 20 minutes, maybe?

unknown: 3:48

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 3:48

And then I found out somebody messaged me and they're like, uh, I was gonna leave it.

SPEAKER_02: 3:53

More reposts than you've ever had.

SPEAKER_03: 3:55

Yeah, right. I was gonna leave it.

SPEAKER_02: 3:56

And then I heard Alan's on about 200 different laptops as a screensaver. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 4:03

A buddy of mine let me use his house for a podcast. And so I was doing this, it was a class podcast, and I'm starting to get my phone's blowing up. And I'm like, what's going on? I'm in his office. Yeah. At his house. And I'm looking, and they go, look over your left shoulder. And so I look over, and there's a picture of his wife wearing a little cheerleader's outfit she clearly had taken for him. Right. And so I slowly push into camera, so it's just a little bit out. Subtle job.

SPEAKER_01: 4:30

Don't draw any attention to it. I'm like, I don't know.

SPEAKER_04: 4:32

Do we tell your wife? And he's like, I'm telling her right now. She was we made her famous, and she loved it. She was this one I was telling you about earlier. DA buddy. That's awesome. Oh, yeah. She was like, I want to see the I want to see the show. At least she's a good sport of show.

SPEAKER_03: 4:44

She was awesome, yeah. Oh shit. Um oh, you know what? Uh Mr. Billfold actually put in the in our Discord channel. I don't know if our mods are on. Yeah, I see Marine Blood's in the house, Harrison's in the house. Um for for those, because we may get on the Minnesota topic today, and I think Barnes v. Felix is going to be applicable to that. If it's not, I want to know what your opinion is.

SPEAKER_04: 5:11

First of all, I want to be corrected. I was on a podcast the other day and I kept saying twice. I said Barnes v. Phillips. Obviously, I know the case, but I was just talking, I'm like, yeah, the Barnes v. Phillips, blah, blah, blah. I didn't know till I watched it later. I was watching it back and I was like, ah, you sound like the authority on the case. You don't even know what the name of the case is. Yeah. So tonight everyone can correct me. It's Barnes v. Felix. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 5:32

Yes. And that brings up a good point, though. We fuck up with our words. It's not intentional. You can be in court and fuck up with your words, and the judge will he'll set it straight and he'll let the record show. You know, like I've had clerical errors, grammatical.

SPEAKER_04: 5:46

Or they take notes of group. I've never heard of that case. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 5:49

I've had one of the things in court. And the I had a good prosecutor who was like, he's like, now you wrote this. Can you tell us what you meant? I was like, oh, yeah, I meant this. So they let me clarify it. I always thought if you screwed up, you're done. Like there's no going back from it. That's what you put on paper. You can't recover. And that's not true. Um, for those listening, kind of wondering what we're talking about. Like, let's say um in my report, I'm like the the black gun, the black gun, the black gun. And then for some reason later on down there, I put the silver gun. And it was it was grammatical clerical error. I didn't mean to do that, but you now I have a contradiction. And the defense is gonna go after that. And well, you said here, but you said here. And the prosecutor can come through if he's doing his job and help you out and let you fix things that you mess up.

SPEAKER_04: 6:39

So I think one of the longest drawn-out discussions I had with another attorney, he was uh he was telling me I didn't know what I was talking about, I was dead wrong. And I was like, Mr. Belfold, is that you? Nobody's like, You don't know what you're talking about, you're dead wrong. And and I it's the opposite of that. Who is this guy? And I was like, and I was I was paid to consult with these guys. And I was like, I couldn't figure out what was happening. And so probable cause is often described as reasonable belief. So when you're talking about probable cause, Daniel, reasonable belief, fair probability, it's all the same thing. Well, in his head, he had switched reasonable belief with reasonable suspicion. Suspicion. So he's like just arguing, you don't know what you're talking about. It's reasonable. And I was like, I don't know what's happening right now. I'm pretty sure I know what I'm talking about. And then I go, Are you talking about reasonable suspicion? He goes, Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm like, okay, well, that changes the entire conversation, right? Right. And then he he was he was humbled. It was crazy humble. But man, I think it went off like 20 minutes, and I could not figure out like, hey, I'm pretty sure I'm right about this one.

SPEAKER_03: 7:39

At least you got him to walk back on it. Some people will double down. No.

SPEAKER_04: 7:43

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 7:43

Because they just they're so far in it.

SPEAKER_04: 7:45

It was the benefit of he was paying me. Yeah. And so yeah, it was okay.

SPEAKER_03: 7:50

So you bring up a good point about expert witnesses, okay, getting paid to come in and do a job. I was in a conversation with um Kingslayer, I think is the name he goes by on here, or something like that. Anyway, he we were talking, he he was posting something. I was telling people I was talking about taser, and I'm like, the taser isn't this if it hits you by the heart, it's gonna kill you thing. That's a liability statement. They just say that, but medically speaking, every doctor that I've talked to that's been involved in some of the stuff, they're like, it's not capable of killing you. Other factors can play into it, like being high on dope and having excited delirium, and all these different other factors play into it, but it isn't the taser itself. There's something about the way that you probably know this stuff. I don't, but the way that it works, I was explained that that's not gonna kill you. And I made the statement about the expert witness. I was like, well, yeah, they have to, they're getting paid. Like they have to protect their asset. And they're saying, Oh, so you're saying that they're not trustworthy? I'm like, that's not what I'm saying. I'm like, and so they went in on you and they're like, so when Vaughn talks, he's a paid expert witness, so should we not believe him? Like, no, that's not what I'm saying. And then I'm like, I don't know how to argue what I'm trying to argue.

SPEAKER_04: 9:03

Yeah, you know, here's the here's the best part of being a paid expert. They have to pay you before your opinion. I mean, that's one of the things the court will ask you, have you been paid in this case? Because your opinion can't be conditioned on payment. So most of the time you're getting your payment ahead of time, not always, sometimes they'll do it after, but it's never conditioned on your opinion. Because they get a hold of you early, you share your opinion with your client early. And one of the best experiences of an expert witness is to tell them what they do not want to hear, tell them things that are not helpful to their case, and they have to pay you for that.

SPEAKER_01: 9:36

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 9:36

And then they just don't put you on the stand, obviously. So, so yeah, you don't. I have never been put, well, that's not true. Twice I've been asked by clients to change my opinion, and and the answer is just no, and they they fire you, right? But they have to pay you. They asked you to change your opinion? There was a couple of times.

SPEAKER_03: 9:53

One guy says, um Did you hit him with the moral and ethical issues of that?

SPEAKER_04: 9:56

Nah, you know what was so funny? Well, it was a Texas guy, too, by the way. That's his people. Yeah, he's you're an importer, forgot. I am an import. I was like, well, and you know, whatever. This is just a quote. He said, We heard you're the best in the country, and we're paying you, so you need to come up with a a theory that that that gets this guy convicted, sort of thing. I, you know, end quote. And I was like, Yeah, I don't think you know what I do for a living. Because it's not that. It's not how this works. Yeah, yeah. One other guy, uh, one other guy just started, it was easy to talk him off. They're like, Well, could you say this? And I say, Well, I can't, but I can tell you who could. And I think I shared it with you guys, right? I told my client, like, here's my opinion. They'd already paid me. I said, if you want the opinion you're looking for, it's not gonna come from me, but here's who it'll come from. I could tell you this guy will say whatever you want to say. They hired him.

SPEAKER_03: 10:49

Oh, wow. Yeah, that would have been funny if the other people hired you afterwards and be like, I couldn't. I told them that. I was conflicted off. Oh, yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 10:57

So I was paid, I was paid to not testify because they came in, they didn't like my opinion, they paid me my fee plus, and then never called me back. And they actually hired the guy. I told him, if you want that opinion, this is a guy who give it to you. And he did. And the cops in prison now.

SPEAKER_03: 11:14

Holy cow.

SPEAKER_04: 11:15

Have you started a book yet? Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah, what's the from the street to the court and back? Not that I've thought about titles.

SPEAKER_03: 11:23

I think I think I was gonna say it's a damn good title. I think that it should be kind of like the whole uh 007 where it's down the barrel and you see Vaughn at the end. Yeah, the right thing with Vaughn at the end. Wait, that means I'm the target. What are we doing? I guess that's true. See, you got you already have a bad guy name.

SPEAKER_02: 11:41

Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 11:42

I mean, you're a you got a villain name. You know you got a villain name.

SPEAKER_02: 11:45

Prosecutors try, but they always miss.

SPEAKER_03: 11:47

Yeah. Oh my god. We could come up with a movie.

SPEAKER_02: 11:50

I'll be your voiceover for the audiobook.

SPEAKER_03: 11:54

That'd be great.

SPEAKER_02: 11:55

Good stuff.

SPEAKER_04: 11:55

Yeah, what would it be like? Just list all the things I can't do anymore. No longer benches 400 pounds. Yeah. No longer runs a 4440. But used to.

SPEAKER_03: 12:08

We need to create some sort of fake scar somewhere. Because they always have something that stands out about them, too. Like the one that bled from his eye duct. Like that was his signature. So weird.

SPEAKER_02: 12:19

Used to have situational awareness until he arrived before work today. Yeah, yeah. Oh, that's right. I showed up.

SPEAKER_04: 12:27

I showed up at the hotel and I literally walked out of my my Uber and I heard Vaughn. And I was like, what? Like, and here's here comes Bany walking. I was like, what did you like? Do lead surveillance? Like you got ahead of me? How does a 300-plus pound cowboy sneak up this? This is why I'm losing this. He did no longer runs a 4440 menu either.

SPEAKER_03: 12:44

I'm like, my countersurveillance sucks. Oh my God. You know what? I just thought about this. He named Mr. Billfold again by name. He did. He did. Mr. Billfold's gonna have a cigarette. He's gonna, yeah, he's gonna have a smoke and a pancake here in a second. He's gonna be out. First time Mr.

SPEAKER_02: 13:03

Billfold.

SPEAKER_03: 13:04

Somebody dropped some uh oh, Harrison dropped 10 memberships. Thank you very much, Harrison. Appreciate you guys. All of your donations, if you want your comments and all that stuff to have a good chance of being read by either me or Vaughn or Banning, please hit up the super chats and all that stuff. We are we are trying to get another set of headphones inside the studio, apparently, because this is getting more popular. The way that we're doing these live streams, um, we we gotta be able to support the show. We appreciate everything you guys are doing. Uh the memberships help. And um, yeah, that's that's how we're running things from here on out. Uh, we have our buy me a coffee. Uh as you can I dropped a camera the other day, by the way.

SPEAKER_02: 13:45

Oh, your private chat, Jerry Worms.

SPEAKER_03: 13:47

Oh, how did worms get in the private chat? Oh, I just kiddy's name. Oh, is that that was weird? It showed Jerry's name, but yeah, we got Jerry Worms in the in the chats. Uh Paul Edwards is in there. What's going on, guys? But yeah, thank you very much, Harrison. Appreciate you. Um, but yeah, okay. So topics. I want to anything going on these days? Anything going on in the country? I haven't heard anything in the news lately, so uh we did cover on our last live, we covered the Minnesota shooting thing. And I I guess the way that I left it was I said it's lawful but awful. It looks really bad. And I don't want to beat that dead horse which has been beaten a million times by everybody else. Uh I kind of want to see what your opinion is on what Barnes v. Felix will have, if anything. I feel like it will uh on this case. It'd be the first big case, in my opinion, that that we'll really touch on.

SPEAKER_04: 14:49

Do you what's your opinion? Yeah, I've written I've written articles. Barnes v. Felix didn't read your shit. It was always your the threat assessment at that moment is analyzed under the totality of circumstances. People were trying to expand officer created jeopardy under the umbrella of it it can neatly fit under totality of the circumstances. So if we're going to say all things considered, well then the officer's pre-seizure conduct should be considered as well, right? And they try to advance it. It's academic, it really didn't get much play. Supreme Court certainly has not endorsed it because the problem in the academic world with officer created jeopardy is it has no limiting principle. They'll say things like if the officer does anything to unreasonably increase the risk of violence, or some will even take off the word unreasonably, if they do anything to increase the risk of violence, then you go, then what? Then the person gets to kill them? Right? Then what? Then and and what is unreasonably increase the risk of violence because I stopped you. If if that increases the risk of violence, I confronted you, it increases the risk of violence, right? So there's no limiting principle in terms of is it is it negligence that we're looking at? Is it is it recklessness? And some will argue if they do something that's reckless that results in an imminent threat of death or serious bile injury. Those are some of the academic arguments. The other ones are anything the officer does that fails to mitigate intent, ability, means, or opportunity. So if I don't de-escalate well enough, if I should have restrained you but didn't, then if I gave you access to a weapon, like it lets you walk back into the kitchen, which we all know, like stay in the living room with me. You can't go in the kitchen, which we're always on really weird ground there, right? We're in your house, and it's like, at what point can I exert geographic control over you, right? Can I contain you, right? Limit you to a reasonable area of movement in your own home. And we know, well, at a minimum, you have to have reasonable suspicion. But how many times do we go into unknown trouble, right? Or knock and talks, and the people are doing things that are make it completely unsafe for us. And we want to be able to contain them and or limit them to a reasonable area of movement, but we don't have the authority to. And we see cops go, like, I need you hang out with me for a second. Like, no, I don't have to, not in my own house, not until you develop at least reasonable suspicion, right? And then finally, the big one for officer created jeopardy that they want to focus on is opportunity. So they have some academics who will literally say, if you leave cover, you cause them, you've provoked them to shoot at you. One of the examples was if you stand in front of a car, you cause them. Literally, they say the word provoked or cause them to accelerate into you. As though that somehow shifts the culpability from the suspect's behavior to the officer. So there is no limiting principle. Almost everything cops do to confront suspicious behavior, if not flat out evil, requires you to increase the risk of a confrontation. Otherwise, we wouldn't be doing it, right? We would just let you go every time and not do your not do your duties. So, with that said, there are certainly circumstances where we could all sit there and look at the tactics and say these tactics are reckless. These tactics are not gonna, they're not good for officer safety, right? What happened with Officer Created Jeopardy, though, is they said, look, here's the deal. We want to reduce the number of people in in terms of standing in front of cars specifically. We want to reduce the number of people the cops are shooting lawfully. Shooting lawfully, because these shootings that you call lawful but awful, and most people would argue almost all police shootings to somebody feel awful, right? So they said, okay, here's the deal. And I'll give you two examples of where also created jeopardy, it baffles even the academics. If you if we want to just reduce the number of people the police are shooting lawfully, and a high percentage of those are people who try to run cops over in the cars. And we investigate the case, we're like, yeah, the guy tried to run you over, but if we're gonna reduce it, we can't control people who try to run you over, either intentionally or negligently or recklessly. And in this case, who knows? Like, did she see him? Did she not see him? From a legal standpoint, it doesn't matter. Like the the question is was it reasonable for him to believe he was facing a threat of death or serious body injury? Her intent is irrelevant at that point because it's not an imminent threat he was dealing with, it was an immediate threat, right? So that's easy. Yes, cars kill people. That that part's easy. Um but police departments working with their communities were like, well, we want to reduce the number of people who get shot by police even lawfully. Well, one of them is we shoot an awful lot of people who try to run us over. How about we just prioritize getting out of the way of the car? So if the car is trying to run you over, just get out of the way. And sure enough, Greg Myers out in LA was one who wrote the policy for uh Bratton, Chief Bratton at the time, that really not just wrote policy, but they actually engaged in a lot of training out in LA on getting out of the way, getting out of the way. Because your impulse is sometimes to freeze and not know what am I supposed to go left or right? Because you don't know where they're. Car is going. Right. It and it and it doubles in size, like I don't know, every foot or something. I don't remember what it is exactly, but perceptually, there's this looming effect. It's getting huge fast. And you, before you even have time to make a decision, it's almost too late. Now you're just there stuck. So they did training in LAPD. Greg Meyer wrote the policy, then they followed the policy up with training, and they seriously reduced the number of shootings because officers were just getting out of the way. That was never supposed to shift the culpability for the officers who weren't able to get out of the way or didn't get out of the way. The officers are never legally required to get out of the way. They have a legal right to be there. The question was: if we want to reduce the number of people we lawfully shoot, let's prioritize getting out of the way. Because it also has the benefit of your bullets aren't necessarily going to stop the threat. So the practical side of it came into play. If we really want to increase officer safety and you're putting bullets into somebody's windshield, the car still runs you over in a lot of cases. So how about we train to get you out of the way from an officer safety standpoint? Well, good enough. You can always be more restrictive than the Constitution, but it never created a new constitutional right for officers not to stand in front of your car where they can stand lawfully and tell you do not move. And if you're willing to run them over, then you are putting, if you're willing to put them in threat of death or serious bodily injury to escape, then that's the only question relative to whether they can use deadly force to stop you. And a lot of people, well, the bullets aren't going to stop them anyway. I'm like, well, you're talking about effectiveness then, aren't you? Not legality. And sometimes the bullets do stop. And some of the cases LAPD found were uh they shot the people and the people immediately jerked the wheel one way or the other and missed the officer. So it was effective. So you got plenty of cases where it's effective. And you just don't know which one it's gonna be, right? So if you're standing in front of the car and the car accelerates into and you put bullets in it, it's either gonna stop it immediately or it's not, but that's about effectiveness, not lawfulness. Yeah. So that was the first one. So they said, let's let's reduce the number of people we shoot lawfully that are trying to run us over with cars. And then you get the cases where is the guy just trying to escape or is the guy trying to hit you, right?

SPEAKER_01: 22:13

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 22:13

And like we don't know. You never know the intent of the person who's accelerating into you. So we also reduced the number of people who did not have the intent to kill, but were just operating out of fear or out of, you know, trying to get out of their escape sort of thing, that were still putting officers in threat of death and shit by the injury. They just weren't intending to, which to your point means it was a lawful shooting. It was just terrible. It was horrible for the people involved. Yep. Well, that same logic falls down to you can look at some jurisdictions where they say, okay, we want to reduce the number of people that we legally shoot in America. It's roughly about a thousand a year, right? So we want to reduce the number of people we legally shoot. What's another situation that we shoot a lot of people? Well, when they pull a gun on us and they take off running, right? At the point of capture, you can reasonably expect there's going to be a high chance for violence. And so they said, by policy, if someone takes off running from you with a gun, do not chase them. Whatever the trade-off is, whatever the consequences of that are going to be, our only goal right now is not crime reduction. It's not capture, it's not law enforcement. Our goal is just to reduce the number of people we legally shoot. So don't chase bad guys who take off running from you with a gun. So that's the same thing of don't stand in front of the car because you're going to end up shooting people lawfully, and we'd like to lower that number. Now, with that being as the foundation, now we say, well, your tactics were bad, therefore the person gets to run you over. You know, or somehow the culpability has shifted from you trying to negligently or intentionally or recklessly place an officer in threat of death or serious body injury, and the officer has lost his right of self-defense. Like that was never the case. Right. And so Barnes v. Felix, when you talk about constitutional reasonableness, and this has not been discussed as far as I know anywhere, so this will be the first time it's discussed. All right. And exclusive. We're gonna break into some theory here. Think about this. The Fourth Amendment reasonable is something reasonable under the Fourth Amendment. Let's stay constitutional for a second, not criminal. Although they're pretty much marry each other. Most places marry each other pretty well. Reasonableness under the Constitution is a balancing test between the intrusion on the individual as balanced against the government interest being served, right? So what is my intrusion on you? So we're always talking under the Fourth Amendment, we're talking about a seizure of some level. Traffic stop, terry stop, arrest, right? And so was the was the intrusion on the individual during this Fourth Amendment detention unreasonable? Meaning, was the again, was the was the intrusion, did the sh did the intrusion substantially outweigh the government interest being served? What is standing in front of a car, even though we might think it's tactically, we'll say things like it's tactically unreasonable. What we're trying to say is it's not safe. They conflate that with constitutionally unreasonable. I'm like, well, where's the detention? Like, I how is what's where's the intrusion on the individual's privacy rights? I'm standing in front of your car legally, and you don't have a right to leave, right? So if it is a detention and I decide to stand in front of your car as part of the detention, what's my intrusion on you? There's not one.

SPEAKER_03: 25:33

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 25:33

And so the the reasonableness versus unreasonableness is being conflated in common usage versus legal usage. And we're seeing this now because now we're trying to weaponize tactics.

SPEAKER_03: 25:44

One of the arguments that I saw is that ICE doesn't they can't do a traffic stop on U.S. citizens. They don't have the lawful right to make that stop to begin with. That's not true.

SPEAKER_04: 26:00

Why was it it wasn't a traffic stop? It was a it was a terry stop. It was an investigative detention.

SPEAKER_03: 26:06

Well, I'm just from the outside looking in, that's that's going to be the look. They're gonna say, well, they weren't on, they were just driving down the road, they weren't doing anything official, they were patrolling whatever it is they were doing, and they were doing that on a U.S. citizen.

SPEAKER_02: 26:19

And to agree with some of that, not to interrupt what Bond's saying, on a on a federal standpoint, that is absolutely true. If they're behind a vehicle on a local roadway, let's say the city of Dallas, and you have a federal officer, be a Border Patrol, FBI behind him, they're not gonna make what's called a Class C uh motor vehicle violation stop on that vehicle. They're gonna leave that up to the local states uh to do that. Now, they can do an investigative stop, but they have to be able to articulate the fact of what that is, and it can't be based off turn signal, license plate, light, uh speeding, et cetera, because the federal statute doesn't allow that that I know of. Uh and correct me if I'm wrong if you know something different, but the local and state can, and they have used local and state for those uh to be able to make those stops for them, and then they would take over as the investigation.

SPEAKER_05: 27:11

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02: 27:11

But from what I'm from what I'm seeing and the same argument I'm hearing, people bounce the questions, why would they stop that vehicle anyway? Well, when it's a matter of the investigation, that's where it trumps, so to speak, pardon the term that has nothing to do with that. But they can do that. Now it's actually their investigation, regardless of if it's on a local road involving a vehicle. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 27:30

So I'm gonna play ignorance. I don't know. I don't, I'm not a Fed. I've never been a federal ICE or DEA or any of the three-letter agencies. I don't know.

SPEAKER_00: 27:40

But many times I like I've actually worked with the DEA locally here. We're you know, we'll have officers that are assigned over part of the fusion program where you know they're working in tandem. So they can enforce the local law enforcement laws for that agency. Um, and then on the federal side, the federal officers are there and they can actually uh you know enforce the federal side more efficiently than the local officers. And they're they're doing it in tandem. I can't speak for other states, but you know, I know around the West Texas area, we have two different uh opportunities where like the FBI runs an operation in the oil field uh with so they're doing big federal investigations on oil field theft because one theft can be a million dollars. And so local agencies are assigned over to that agency to assist with that because they have some you know interdepartmental things that the feds can't look into, and so they work as a team. And so if they can't go after federal law, they can go after state and local law to enforce that.

SPEAKER_03: 28:52

Yeah, I'm laughing at Mike Cucumbers saying that I'm a Fed. I'm not a Fed.

SPEAKER_04: 28:57

Um what you're seriously if you've been on task force, right? So there's a couple of different uh jurisdictional authorities just pop into my head, and I have not seen off the top of my head it I don't know that there's a uh reverse deputization, but you know why we why we swear in task force members, right? Right. So they can enforce federal law.

SPEAKER_05: 29:18

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 29:19

Well, can't a sheriff swear in as a deputy federal agent so they can enforce state laws? I don't see why they couldn't. Yeah, yeah, I don't know off the top of my head why they couldn't. I don't know that that's happening collectively, but I do know there's also um interestingly, uh it's too much of a side issue, but like in the military where we have assimilated crimes, like we'll we will assimilate the state fed the state traffic codes, right? And so whatever the state traffic codes are, the feds can enforce those when they've been assimilated, right? Right. And that's usually on federal lands where there's where there's uh basically joint jurisdiction, right?

SPEAKER_03: 29:54

So you've got um like me as an MP on the base. Like I get to enforce it.

SPEAKER_04: 29:59

And what people didn't realize is you know, those access roads that lead to the base are still under their control. They are still under their control. And so you're actually you have federal officers, MP types or federal officers actually enforcing civilian, what would be considered civilian traffic laws, but they become federalized traffic laws through virtue of that statute. So now that being the case, I do not have any information to believe that those federal agents in the Minneapolis case were enforcing traffic laws. I don't think that was their justification for the detention. And they can certainly have the authority to detain you for vi for obstruction, federal obstruction.

SPEAKER_02: 30:38

I I think it falls under, again, it's my opinion, it's interference with their investigation. Yeah, they're not there to mess with the people on the road, they are there to effect an arrest or go after a certain person or group of people that they set out to do that day. That's what they were doing. And now they have people interfering with their investigation on a public or local roadway.

unknown: 30:58

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02: 30:58

And so they're stopping them for the interference of that investigation. That's that's what where I see it as. Yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_00: 31:05

So I think you have uh, you know, several like that was an ongoing thing. So you have several hours of video that have not been seen. Yeah, I think you also are dealing with seconds of a video that is being shown to the public, you know, because the more that keeps coming out, there there's the totality of this whole situation. And like y'all are saying, it's doesn't look like a traffic stop or something like that. It's much more complex than than what we're giving it.

SPEAKER_04: 31:36

Well, think about the the how many things have you either as a task force agent or or uh drug enforcement, where people engage in what would be ordinarily absolutely legal, right? So your drug team is getting ready to hit a house, right? And you see them, you see them coming up the side of the building, they got their raid, they're in their stack, they're going to hit the corner so they can hit the house, and you get people start yelling and hooting like an owl. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, basically, yeah, hooting training day. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And they're flipping doves, yeah, yeah. But they're they're letting them know. And the question is, is that interference obstruction or somehow impeding lawful activity, right? Can you arrest the person for hooting like an owl? And I can tell you people have been arrested for hooting like an owl. People have been convicted for hooting like an owl because the conduct was done with the it's otherwise normal conduct. Think about any interference, right? It's normal conduct, except for the intent and the timing with which it's done, can make it criminal conduct.

SPEAKER_03: 32:34

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 32:35

Right. So I have a right to stand right here on this sidewalk. But if I'm making an arrest, the Supreme Court says that the police must maintain unquestioned command at the scene of investigation and would not let people come and go freely from the center of their investigation. So we know that, right? I'm on a traffic stop, it's become a terry stop, and people want to come walking up and I say, I need to hang out for a second until we get done here. Just hang out over there and they're like, F you, it's America. I can go where I want. No, they can be arrested for what, for standing on a spot of land that if we weren't there, would be perfectly legal to stand on and for saying things that they want to say. So if I if they're if they're reciting the Lord's Prayer in my ear loudly while I'm trying to make an arrest and they're splitting my attention, would we all agree that's obstruction or interference?

SPEAKER_05: 33:19

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 33:19

Yeah. But it's reciting the Lord's Prayer loudly in my ear. Otherwise, lawful conduct when done in a with the intent to interfere and in a manner that does, in fact, interfere. Um, and I say in a manner that does, in fact, I don't even mean that. It means whether it's reasonably believed to interfere. Yeah. Or if you reasonably suspect it's done with the intent and has has the purpose of interference. So yeah, it gets it's pretty easy to arrest people for interference and obstruction for otherwise lawful conduct, depending on the timing of it.

SPEAKER_03: 33:51

And the intent would be easy to backtrack because you've got footage of these people in their vehicles and blocking the roadway for minutes on end, they traveled four hours just to be out there. I mean, you start adding all that up, and that gets back to Barnes v. Felix, which is now on the totality versus moment of threat, right?

SPEAKER_04: 34:10

Uh so Barnes, Barnes v. Felix, again, I just so I don't I'm consistent on my position, Barnes v. Felix didn't change anything. Barnes v. Felix told the Fifth Circuit if you believe that you can only consider the information immediately preceding the threat in your analysis. That's not true. You get to consider under the totality of circumstances, all things considered. So, for example, and they specifically said, we're not talking about officer created jeopardy. They specifically said it in the case. So all these people were trying to read Barnes v. Felix as though it somehow opened the door. All it did was not close the door. They said, we're not even going to address it right now. Okay, fine. We they couldn't have been more clear that that case was not intended to say anything about uh officer created jeopardy issues. But it didn't close the door on it either. So people who were using totality of the circumstances to advance their officer-created jeopardy narrative were like, it's a victory, they didn't close the door on it. But what they, if you want to use the best example, Kavanaugh on the case gave examples of, you know, it was all suspect-focused examples. If the guy threatens you yesterday and says, the next time I see you, I'm going to kill you. And then today he moves in a manner consistent with a draw stroke and he's disobeying orders and all that. Is it relevant that the day before, is it relevant to your threat assessment that the day before he said he was going to kill you the next time he saw you? Under the Fifth Circuit's dissenting opinion, where they were saying we're limited to the moment. Well, actually, under the Fifth Circuit's opinion, we say we're limited to the moment of threat, then that would not be relevant, right?

SPEAKER_05: 35:49

Uh yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 35:50

The the fact that he threatened you the day before would not be relevant. And all the Supreme Court says, yes, it is, of course it is, right? So not just what what he said to you the day before, but the entire context, how many times he disobeyed you, other efforts you made to de-escalate, all the things he ignored, those were all relevant. And the the good thing about the Fifth Circuit is they had always done it under a total of the circumstances. So what they said about we're limited to a moment of the moment of threat is limited to the moments preceding the decision. Even even their previous cases weren't that tightly constrained. So that's all the Supreme Court said in that case is that moment of threat decision can be informed by the totality of the circumstances, not just the information immediately preceding it.

SPEAKER_03: 36:36

Okay. Um we did have a question from uh Harrison. He said, and this is to me, is more of a uh for science-based question. So uh what about the shots after the car passed the ice agents? And I thought that that was a great type of for science question that uh you could you could answer. Uh Von is reading Bards v. Felix wrongly. That's from Mr. Billfold. I know. Thank you, Mr. Billfold.

SPEAKER_04: 37:06

Trust me, you are not the you are not the first person to say that. But that's the beauty of law, yeah. At this point, it's argument, not precedence, but I can tell you that I'm reading it consistent with the Supreme Court's interpretation, and I'm reading it consistent with the uh the majority opinion. But I can also tell you that the people who wanted to advance Officer Creative Jeopardy have been using that case, uh claiming that it in fact does that because it didn't it didn't uh close the door on it. Right. Um but the Supreme Court's gonna answer it. So everybody can put money down, and eventually the Supreme Court's gonna come back and say Mr. Billful nailed it. Whoever that Vaughn guy is needs to find another line of work.

SPEAKER_03: 37:48

He's an idiot. Um then uh human performance. And then the the the performance part uh Yeah, so this is this is there's a couple of things that come into play here.

SPEAKER_04: 37:59

One, we can't pretend to know what happened. We can't pretend at this point to know if it was an intentional shot or not.

SPEAKER_05: 38:04

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 38:04

We can't pretend that that that first round didn't go off as soon as he got hit by the car, right? There's the just looking at it, that's one of the questions I'd be asking is was it an intended discharge? Did he pull his gun as a presentation, as a threat of deadly force, to say, hey, I'm right here, you're not gonna run me over. And then when he gets hit, the first shot goes off. And then you have that sort of rebound effect we talk about, where it's it's now he's being jolted, he's being spun. I'm not sure if the I would look to see if the uh driver's side mirror hits him, because I think as it's gonna go by, these are the kind of things we would look for, to see if those shots were even intentional. Um, if they were, and he says, I absolutely pulled the trigger as soon as I realized she wasn't gonna stop. Um when you pull the trigger of a gun at a cycle rate, what we call the speed of life, right? You're just gonna bang, bang, bang until until you realize the threat has ceased. There's a couple of human performance questions we're gonna be asking. We expect that he's probably operating in what we refer to as system one thinking. It's that fast and frugal, like I'm I'm reacting, I'm I'm responding. I'm not evaluating. I'm not doing slow, deliberate system two while I'm being run over by a car, right? So the idea of a threat assessment when you're in that very fast, frugal system one thinking is we do evaluation and we do response. We don't do them both simultaneously. So it's I think this is a deadly threat, I got to respond, bang, bang, bang, bang. And then I stop to evaluate. Simultaneously in dynamic movements, your positioning's changing, the car's positioning's changing. And so we got to ask ourselves, was he ever aware? At what point did he become aware that he had cleared the vehicle? Not when do we see it. Right. Especially you watch that, like the guy's bouncing off a car, spinning around, we're nice.

SPEAKER_03: 39:49

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 39:49

And we're like, look, he's definitely fast. Yeah. And so they'll they'll try to what we call weaponize still photos, and we'll say, look, at this point he's on the side of the car and the gun's still going off. I'm like, it's irrelevant, but what we see. Seeing what we perceive. I want to know what he saw, what he was perceiving in that moment. And quite frankly, when you're spinning off the hood of a car, it's probably very little other than stopping to see what happened after it's over, after the smoke settles. Those are the questions we'd be looking at. And you only get those through interviewing the officer. Is you know, sometimes you just ask, why'd you stop shooting? And they probably, a lot of times they have no idea why they stopped. They basically like they fired the gun and then they stopped to evaluate. And it just happened to be three rounds. Um the other thing we look at is, and many of you guys, I think we've talked about these studies. We have this study that came out in 2025. We had an earlier study at Force Science that investigated what we refer to as time to stop. And so what we did, we worked with Lon Bartell over at Vertra, and they have a simulator at Vertra that is accurate enough that DODs approved it for research, right? So the timing is accurate enough. We use that to conduct research. Um what we did was we took a class over at Cumberland University. I think it was a little over a hundred students. Some were police, some were students, but various levels. We just wanted humans. We didn't care, you know, cops or students. And we on this on the simulator, we had a silhouette, like a target. We said, when it turns green, fire as fast as you can. When it turns red, stop immediately. Right? This is a simple stimulus, very easy to know when to stop because it turns red. Nothing like real life.

SPEAKER_03: 41:29

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 41:29

In real life, it's complex. You don't quite know when you should stop. You're like, when am I safe now? Am I not? We wanted it to be very simple. So with a simple stimulus, when the target is green, fire as fast as you can. When it turns red, stop instantly. On average, it was a little over a third of a second before they could actually stop. And so the time it takes time to start once you make a decision, and it takes time to stop once you've started physically performing an action, and then you go, okay, I need to stop now. You might get, on average, two to three additional rounds fired. And so in interviewing the officer, why did you stop? They might say something, well, as soon as I saw him drop the gun. We're like, Well, you fired two shots. We would expect any human who's firing at the, you know, cycling through about a quarter of a second trigger pulls to once they decide to stop, they might reasonably fire, just being a human, at least two to three additional rounds on average. Right. Um, some fired a lot more, and you, those are usually focus of attention issues. Like they've got inside their own head and they were they stopped really paying attention. And you'd see five, six, seven, eight, nine additional shots. But on average, it's about two to three additional shots in a lab setting against a simple stimulus. You can expect more than that in the real world because you don't you don't know when the start stop signal is precisely, especially if you're spinning around off the hood of a car. I'm not even reading this much.

SPEAKER_03: 42:57

It's a good one. We need to clone you. Oh, geez. We need to clone this guy. We need a platoon of him.

SPEAKER_04: 43:04

Yeah. But this uh please don't don't inflate his ego anymore. No, it's not an ego thing. I don't I don't want to turn around and see a bunch of me behind me. You did martial arts, right? I had a I had a a coach one time tell me, you know the guy who we're most worried about is is the guy who looks the most like us and trains just as hard as we do. Yeah. Like, uh like the really big guy, we can make excuses. I'm faster, I'm you know, whatever. The little guys, I'm stronger. But you look at a guy who looks kind of like you do, and you're like, oh yeah, this is gonna be a problem.

SPEAKER_05: 43:38

Exactly.

SPEAKER_04: 43:39

So anyway, so that's the time to stop studying and it's complicated. Like, we don't, we don't ever, and I'll train everybody, or all of our instructors have known this. There is no universal start time, there's no universal stop sign. So, Dr. Mark Green, he does this for traffic studies. He does perception, cognition, and decision making for drivers of cars. Well, it applies directly to what cops do. Because when we drive a car, it takes time to start. You know, when we decide the light turns green, then we have to go, oh, it's green. Now I can go. That's the meaning, and then I can put my foot. All that takes time from seeing, perceiving it, making sense of it, and then physically carrying out the movement. It takes time. And so they study that. Same thing with cops. It takes time to start. If I see a threat and I'm like, oh, I need to do something, that's the observe orient, decide and act, right? So I observe it, I make sense of it, we call that sense making, make a decision, and I do it. And it takes time. It also takes time to stop. I need to stop now and then to physically stop that movement. Um again, one example we use for jurors. If you guys have ever been changing the channel with a remote control on TV, right? And you're looking for your favorite news station.

SPEAKER_05: 44:50

Right?

SPEAKER_04: 44:52

Fox and Friends, if you're listening.

SPEAKER_03: 44:55

If you guys need to watch, if you guys need a talking, I did not watch news. I'm just kidding.

SPEAKER_04: 45:02

So you're changing the station and you're looking for your favorite news station, right? Click, click, click. And then when and then when you find it, what's the next thing you have to do? Go back. Go back past it. Because you were in a cycle, you're click, click, click, just like you're pulling a gun. Yeah. But with no consequences of getting it wrong. Right. So it's click, click, click, up, and then you got to go back to that. Is a that is everyone's experience of time to stop.

SPEAKER_03: 45:25

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 45:25

Right.

SPEAKER_03: 45:26

And you always feel like a badass when you do stop, right? Nailed it. You're like, or like when you're typing in your uh uh something you're looking for, your email address on the TV, because you got to go to the S. And then you're like, well, if I go to the right, I can cycle back through, or do I go all the way back? Like usually when you do it right, nobody's there to witness. Yeah, you try to hold it down and make it stop right when it gets there, it never works.

SPEAKER_04: 45:47

That's not a good analogy from my point, but it's a funny story. Fuck you, Vaughn. Like, how am I gonna use this in court? I was gonna steal it. I'm like, this is what we do. We steal analogies from experts all the time. So when I sit with my buddies who do this for a living and they'll use some story like that, I'm like, ooh, I'm taking that. You know, you got your phone down here on your notes and stealing it. Yeah. And I was ready to take yours and realize it was not.

SPEAKER_03: 46:08

Well, I use I use other people's Netflix accounts all the time. So you always have to type in their email address because that makes sense. It boots you out more perfect. So when you bootleg their Netflix, you all right.

SPEAKER_02: 46:19

Well, let's talk about that. You know, just even the just the traffic light stuff. I mean, if you you know, when when you're doing that study with students in law enforcement, when it's green, you're you're dispersing rounds and you must stop as soon as it turns red. Well, the general public and us when we're in our patrol cars or whatever driving, we have that barrier. We have that yellow light that pops up. That's right. And that's a huge thing for think people to think about. That's that buffer, that yellow, it's not going from green to red. It's going green, and then you're getting in different cities at different times, but it's usually less than a second, but that's enough time to react. I can make it. And how long, how long does that yellow light last?

SPEAKER_04: 46:57

Sure. Long enough for me to get through the light. They base it on how fast the traffic is. So long enough for me to gun it. It's gonna be longer. The one in a city is gonna be shorter, right? Because they've taken into account time distance speed and how long it takes to make decisions at that time distance speed to get physically get it to stop. So all that goes in, and so we have to consider those things with with any use force. And again, this applies to civilian cases too. We have we have now, I think at least half our cases are civilian cases where we have to make these exact same observations.

SPEAKER_03: 47:29

Mike, Mike, you better not snitch. No snitches allowed on our channel. What's wrong with you? You know, it's kind of like going uh oh, pro tip. For you know, I like giving our civilians out there pro tips. The the white line, as long as your front tires break the plane of that white line on a yellow, you're good.

SPEAKER_04: 47:51

If you're doing the speed limit.

SPEAKER_03: 47:52

Well that.

SPEAKER_04: 47:53

If you're doing the speed limit, that's right. That's how I teach kids to drive too. I'm like, if you're if as long as you're doing the speed limit and you're within that white line of the turn lane next to you, you're going to make it. It's been that line is a sufficient distance that if you're within it, you'll make the yellow light.

unknown: 48:07

Yep.

SPEAKER_04: 48:08

If you're doing the speed limit.

SPEAKER_03: 48:09

If you're speed, if you're if you're not, yeah, but the cops got to get you on radar to prove that. So y'all know I'm not about that ticket life. No, not at all. Uh not at all. No. Okay, cool. So hopefully, Harrison, that answers your question. I mean, obviously, like you said, there's so much that we can't answer. That we don't, we don't, we're not privy to all the information. So the thing that I wanted to do with this show is people are gonna talk. They're gonna in notoriously call the policing cultures, we don't say shit. We used to give the same fucking answer for everything. We're gonna wait till the investigation. They don't say shit till the investigation's through. Yeah. Well, I think notoriously that has bit us in the ass because we're not even getting somewhat of an educated opinion out there. And I think being able to just talk and help navigate through the emotional side and still give uh expert police opinion based on experience, I think that helps calm things down a little bit.

SPEAKER_04: 49:13

It does. And we what you know where the expertise has been most helpful now is when they show the video. Yeah. And none of us like Thank you, Axon. Yeah, we do this for a living, and we're like, um, none of us would give an opinion based on a video, which we know the capabilities and limitations of video are not fit for the purpose of forensic analysis. We start cases and we say video as it sits here right now until it's been interrogated, um, isn't you can't use it for time, distance, speed, or angles. And when how many times in this most recent release we're like, well, he's in front of the car, he's the side of the car? And I'm like, you guys, this is a distorted camera lens. Yeah. Like this is, and I don't even know what the lens was, but you can expect if it's a surveillance camera, a body cam, you're you're gonna look to ask the question, what kind of lens is it? Is it a is it a is it barrel distortion, right? It's a fisheye lens to expand things out and it destroys angles. And the other thing is what are the artifacts? Like somebody said, Well, here's a puff of smoke. And I'm like, did the camera miss the other puff of smoke? Because if you look at these cases, you'll see cases where things occur in the real world that are not going to be captured on video. And when you say stuff like that to people who are who are hypnotized, and that's all of us, we are hypnotized to believe what we see on video. Yeah. Otherwise, we wouldn't watch TV shows. We suspend reality. And as we're watching on a screen, we we allow ourselves to believe that what we're seeing is an actual representation of life. When we work these cases, we just worked a case up in Montana where they charged a guy with murder because he said the guy swung at him.

SPEAKER_03: 50:51

Oh, you told yeah, you told us on the last one that it was in between frames or it didn't catch the frame.

SPEAKER_04: 50:57

Yeah, and I was able to show you guys that thing. So it's it's like, well, if you understand the capabilities and limitations of video, you understand that what we just released under the premise of transparency comes with a playbook, right? And it's like, yeah, have you read the playbook? Do you know what you can and can't say from watching this video? Because there's entire courses and training programs designed to get you to understand the limitations of cap and capabilities, not the least of which is artifacts and and frame rates and and the algorithms to decide what to record and what not to record. Uh, angles are totally distorted, speed can be totally distorted, and then we release it and we go, hey, what do you guys think? And then we add to that this ridiculous notion that a video can be used as a proxy for the officer's experience. An officer is getting bounced around and spun off the hood of a car, uh, fires his gun, intentionally or otherwise, and we sit in an air-conditioned room and watch a video that occurred from a completely different angle that doesn't has no looming effects, has has the sounds, we're not hearing the sounds, the smells, we're not seeing facial expressions. We can't tell how close that car was. You're you have no consequence for getting it wrong, and then we're happy to give an opinion, right?

SPEAKER_03: 52:19

Yeah. I one of the things that I'd like to push on that too is if you were Joe Blow's citizen, how hard and meticulous would you want your defense attorney to look into all of those factors that you're talking about? It's it's I do find it's very easy when it's a cop. I catch myself doing it. I'm holding cops to a way higher standard. And I'm like, am I being fair? Sometimes I'm not. Sometimes I'm not fair. And I catch myself like, oh fuck, I'm being a little too too hard. And to your point about the video camera stuff, that's something that I kind of push the people that follow what we do is like, I want you to kind of think of the the level of meticulous scrutiny that you put into a cop, because sometimes that's what they're doing. Would you want that same level of scrutiny put into your case? I'm going to assume they're going to say yes, because then they don't want to be a hypocrite. But then I say, if you got a guy like Vaughn on your side talking about all this stuff, because if right now you're looking at what Vaughn's saying and saying that's all bullshit, are you going to call that bullshit when he's defending you? Because I don't think you are.

SPEAKER_04: 53:36

And if we're going to be fair, well, no, you're that's that's one of the reasons why when I came on, I said, You guys, we're getting a lot of pushback that we're cop apologists, that we're making this stuff up for cops. No, they use it in NASA, they use it in traffic, they use it in sports, you know. And it and all Dr. Lewinsky was doing when he first started Force Science was, hey, you guys are considering all these human performances. We didn't make them up, these are not force science concepts. We looked across all these other industries that were already considering these concepts, not the least of which was traffic, and said, Hey, you guys aren't considering any of this in civilian and or police shootings. Now, his initial foray into the industry was policing, right? But when I came in, and he did some civilian cases too, in fairness, but when I came in, I was like, hey guys, if if we're gonna try to get past this, hey, all you guys do is defend cops, uh, then we have to make sure we're also taking just as many civilian cases, plaintiff's cases, defense cases, criminal, civil, because the human is the human. The the bad you know, the human behind the badge is the same as the one who's behind the the dump truck, right? Or whatever the case may be. So we don't distinguish. Um I recently read a social media post, they said there's no such thing as a cop brain or a cop memory. I was like, thank you for making our point, right? The cop is just a human behind the badge who's going to be affected by all the psychological and physiological influences that result from stress or that just result from the normal, ordinary human processing of memory or decision making, right? So uh it's a great point that you make. Like, and I always say you hate defense attorneys until you need one. Yeah. Right. And I see some defense attorneys, they'll take any case and they're they're they're defending some really evil people. And I go, I just look at them, I go, well, that's just practice for when I need you. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 55:28

Yeah, exactly. Um sorry guys, I'm not trying to neglect the comments over here. We've got a bunch of uh pinned, if I can get this thing to work here. We got a bunch of pinned comments. So um let's go to Jerry's first. We got we got 10 comments to get through here. The problem with all the violent protecting going on with ICE agents enforcement efforts is the lack of cooperation by local law enforcement. Liberal mayors have instructed police to stand down. I would agree. I think part of the problems that we have with where the ICE issues are is we don't have local law enforcement cooperation. Whether that's because it's politically blocked or whatever, but I think the the best solve for all of the issues with ICE is having local law enforcement as your filter.

SPEAKER_04: 56:15

Yeah, it'd be a great, it would be great if they had that level of cooperation. Yeah. Yeah. I just saw a federal uh oversight hearing this morning where there was a union rep from Minneapolis on there. And he wanted to make it very clear it is not the cops, it is not the Minneapolis police who are trying to who are saying no. They are being told, you know, right and and I mean let me not speak for him. I've I have heard uh a couple different agencies where the political leadership has not just asked them to not support, but if you guys went to IACP recently, one of their chiefs of police for a major organization spoke out. Said, well, he was he's actually pretty supportive of his. He's pretty woke in his own uh in his own in his own effort. But but they told him, we not only want you to not support him, we want you to physically arrest them and physically stop them from kidnapping us. And and he was like, Yeah, no. Yeah, like it's one thing for us to not release them from our jails and be cooperative, right? Yeah. But if they call us, if it's an officer who needs assistance or they call us for back, or we we certainly are not going to start arresting or attempting to arrest ICE agents.

SPEAKER_03: 57:22

Right. But and and part of my issue with some of this is and I don't come from the area. So if but I'm I'm trying to put myself in the position that my local politicians are telling me I can't go out and do something that I know to be right. Do I listen? I don't know that I would.

SPEAKER_02: 57:43

I think what we always is is law enforcement, you have to fall back to the letter of the law. You know, and that goes with with either backing up an organization to do, you know, it's just going back to ultimately it comes down to the Constitution. Yes. And but we've got to we've had we've got to fall fall back on what's black and white, not to what uh a Republican, Democrat or indifferent wants. It's we have to fall back to what the law is, period.

SPEAKER_03: 58:07

So me cooperating with uh a federal agency as far as saying, hey, if you guys are gonna come into my city and you're gonna go after people, I want you to filter your warrants through me. I want to see who you're going after so I can tell you, yeah, this is a this is a continuous criminal problem person, or you're going after Mary, who works down at the local shop that we've never had an issue with her. Like, that's not the one. This is gonna get you in trouble.

SPEAKER_04: 1:01:29

Yeah, under under order, we've all done that, right? So Tass, when things are working in their ordinary, you know, their ordinary process, that's exactly what happens when it when we start worrying about leaking and and leaking for officer safety concerns, um, and all of a sudden we're not sharing information anymore, right? Yeah. And so the individual officers still have their individual officer contacts. We're like, hey, you know, listen, we want to de-conflict. And that's what you're describing is a process of deconfliction, right?

SPEAKER_02: 1:01:58

And to give people an example that maybe law enforcement watching this is you know, there's an organization out there called Haida. And working for an umbrellaed DEA or a task force, just even here in the state of Texas, if I worked for uh a city in the western Terrant County area and I'm gonna go to eastern Dallas County, more than likely, if we're on the up and up, we're gonna contact Haida and we're gonna do that in deconfliction. And we're gonna make sure that there's not another organization out there that's looking to hit the same look where somebody else is not coming in at the same time.

SPEAKER_04: 1:02:31

Or it's embedded, embedded in that. Yeah, absolutely.

SPEAKER_02: 1:02:34

And because you can have a federal embedding on that, and that's happened. That's why Haida kind of started doing that in the early 2000s. And and I had to do that a lot in my career is we had to we had a number to contact, we gave them our call for service number, this is the address we're going to, and then they would usually call you back after they did a deep dive into it uh to make sure that we weren't going to run into somebody else or interfere with. Another investigation.

SPEAKER_04: 1:02:56

Yeah, deconfliction. Even if it's a local, I you know, we got time, so I'll tell a little funny story. But I I was working patrol, I'd been in narcotics and I left narcotics. I was a patrol corporal or something. And I was still getting after it, right? So I'm answering my calls, but when I'm not, I'm uh you know, you can't turn off your your narcotics brain. Yeah. So I uh I get a hold of my narcotics place. I'm like, hey, this this apartment complex is hot. Like it's in my territory. Why don't you guys put some work in on it, right? It's open-air drug market, it's embarrassing. So I'm driving by, I'm getting ready to get off shift, and uh I drive by and I look over and I see a hand-to-hand, and I'm like, no, are you kidding me? So I initiate contact, call for backs, initiate contact, and and uh all of a sudden I I see all these all these ninjas coming out of bushes and coming out of houses, and I look over and there's my buddy, the narcotics guy. He's like, uh, do you remember asking us to work this work this spot? And I was like, Yeah. He goes, Yeah, we're doing that. And you just blew up, we've been watching this house, you just blew up our case. And I was like, Oh, on him, he should have been contacting you a little bit more. Well, that's the deconfliction piece, but I felt I felt terrible because I was the one I was like, hey, come do it some work, and he's like, We're on it, we're doing it. And then we didn't deconflict, and I blew up, I blew up their case. We got like rocks of cocaine instead of like years.

SPEAKER_03: 1:04:23

Um they were talking about Wade was talking about this last uh live stream I did with my I had my dad on here. We were just bullshitting. Um he said, I mentioned last week Trump's executive order 14287, basically saying that liberal cities are insurrectionist. In March, it will be the one-year limit to comply. Trump may invoke Insurrectionist Act. Is that uh The Insurrection Act? Yeah, is that any anything that you're familiar with?

SPEAKER_04: 1:04:51

Yeah, well, yeah, but not me. Look, for the first time, we're starting to see this stuff really ramp up. So how it gets it's it it is not intended typically for although I think it does. I I wish I had it in front of me, so I'm just gonna have to shoot a little bit from the hip to for the discussion. Uh but it's it's usually when the local government is unable, and I think it says unwilling, so unable or unwilling to uh carry out the government functions, right? Let's pull up a little chat GPT. And so in this case, what makes it odd is that it's deliberate, right? It's it's not just an unwillingness, but their allegations aren't not just it's unwilling, but they're complicit. Right. So it I think it changes the analogy, but yeah, and this current, as I sit here in it, the insurrection act and its implementation in 2026 has not been my focus of a 10 year old.

SPEAKER_03: 1:05:44

So I just asked ChatGPT, Insurrection Act, please explain it to Von Kleem, the Four Science Guru.

SPEAKER_04: 1:05:51

He says it starts out with, I will write in crayon.

SPEAKER_03: 1:05:55

Explain simply here's a no-nonsense explanation of the Insurrection Act. Frame the way you'd explain to Von Kleem or any four science LE audience. Oh, cool. Okay, interesting. Let's see. Insurrection, Insurrection Act explains simply and accurately. The Insurrection Act is a federal statute that allows the President of the United States to deploy active duty military, federalized National Guard forces inside the U.S. to restore order when the state authorities cannot or will not do so.

SPEAKER_04: 1:06:26

Nailed it.

SPEAKER_03: 1:06:27

It is one of the very few legal exceptions to the general rule that the military does not perform domestic law enforcement functions. That's right. What problem the act solves? Under normal circumstances, states handle law enforcement, National Guard answers to the governor, federal military stays out of civilian policing. Under the Act, it exists for extreme breakdowns of civil order, such as widespread violence, armed rebellion, systematic obstruction of federal law. I think that's the one that applies the most, state failure or refusal to protect constitutional rights. Interesting. Importantly, this authority comes from Congress, not executive whim. Okay. What the insurrection act is not. I think this is the important part. It is not martial law, it does not suspend the constitution, it does not eliminate civilian courts, and it does not put the military above the law. Interesting. Bottom line, von Kleem version. The Insurrection Act is a constitutional pressure release valve used rarely, legally, and only when normal civil authority fails. It reinforces a rule of law, it does not replace it. I love Chat GPT. I think I nailed it. That's all I'm saying. You did. Absolutely. Von GPT nailed it. Von GPT. You know what I'm going to do? I'm just going to I'm going to add hundreds of hours of Von to give the test of testimonies. Mars language model. Yes. And then just I'm going to be like, I want you to now speak to me in Von Kleem.

SPEAKER_04: 1:08:09

Dump all my articles in there. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, that's terrible. Oh shit.

SPEAKER_03: 1:08:13

I just gave Bill Fold an idea. That's terrifying. He's going to do that and just have you talk him to bed every night or something. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:08:19

Hey, so you know, you go back to your point about coordination. So the idea of the Insurrection Act is, you would hope it's falling into the category of they're unable to. They've over they're overwhelmed, right? But you also look at what is the federal law that they're unable or unwilling to enforce. What's the year the Insurrection Act was passed? Because it's sort of like looking at Posse Comitatus issues and sort of how much of this was occurring during the civil rights era, the the the uh um well even speaking of of posse comitatis, do they not train that in the academy anymore?

SPEAKER_02: 1:08:53

Because I just as a as a FTO 1807. I used to I I used to talk to my rookies about posse comitatis and the general public, you know, and give me some examples on where we can use this. Because in my academy, and even in the Marine Corps, we spoke about posse comitatis on things, and it just seems like it's kind of fallen to the wayside. I mean, maybe in other states are training it, but I just I just didn't see it here.

SPEAKER_04: 1:09:15

Well, it was a big part of what we trained when I worked uh domestic operational law, right? So I was a legal advisor for the defense coordinating officer for Region 7. And so basically we were talking about how does the military integrate with civilian law enforcement? What are the limits? And so Posikamatadas is always a big part of that. The problem is most of the things the military wanted to do, which was protect federal missions or engage in the exception of the military purpose doctrine, right? If you're doing something for the purpose of executing a military mission, even if it incidentally touches civilians or requires you to enforce security measures against civilians, that's not Pasikamatadas. Possiamoitatas is about the enforcement of civilian laws for the purpose of enforcing civilian laws. Um and you're seeing a lot of that now. Is how is the military being able to come in and support ICE? Well, it's a federal mission. And I don't remember what one of the Supreme Court justices before he was on the bench actually wrote the memo that supported the use of the military, not just for military purpose, but could lawfully without violating Pops Comitatas help enforce federal missions. Sure. But if you think about like the insurrection act and stuff, what if there's circumstances where like a state's refusing to to enforce the anti-slave laws? And it's like, look, that's a civil rights issue at this point. It's a constitutional right, and you guys are refusing to do it. That's unable or unwilling to enforce the law. Yeah. Right. And so the feds could come in under the feds, arguably, would not be violating Pasicamatadas to come in and could invoke the Insurrection Act to the degree it it was uh they were not able or willing to enforce those laws. But but the point was, Eric, you brought it up earlier. This stuff works wonderfully when there's cooperation between the state and feds.

SPEAKER_03: 1:11:07

Yes.

SPEAKER_04: 1:11:08

Right? It's usually the state's going help. We need help. Yeah. Right, not get out of our state. And then we invoke the insurrection act. So this is new territory. There's gonna be a lot of academics, you know, fleshing this out. Um we we spend a lot of time doing this. Remember the San Bernardino shooting? So when I was at the Pentagon, I was at the doing domestic ops, working with the planning cells on how do we plan a military response to the next active shooter terrorist event, because it's going to require you to have the military interact with civilians, stopping cars, right? Routing traffic. So they say you one of the examples of Poscamatis is you can't have the military enforcing traffic laws, for example. Sure. But if I'm on a military transport route and I've got, you know, high value equipment, weapons, and stuff that I'm trying to get pre-they might block off the on-ramps to the highways. Well, who's blocking off the highway, right? It's military.

SPEAKER_05: 1:12:06

Okay.

SPEAKER_04: 1:12:07

You don't have that many police to help with that. And so if a car decides I'm not listening to you or going out of the barrier, can they physically seize that person to prevent them from accessing the highway? And the answer is yes.

SPEAKER_03: 1:12:17

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:12:18

Because they're not doing it for traffic enforcement, they're doing it for military purposes.

SPEAKER_03: 1:12:21

I lived that when the Department of Energy and stuff, when we remove nuclear weapons. That's the example we use. Yeah, ICBMs and stuff. We had moved warheads and missile maintenance equipment and stuff like that. And they were like, we're like, what if somebody gets in between our convoy? Like, because that people would try to fuck with you intentionally, just teenage assholes just jacking around because they see a huge convoy of military vehicles, and they're like, probably to that effect, they can't do anything because they're just military. And we were told, like, nobody stops you. That's right. Like, nobody stops you.

SPEAKER_04: 1:12:53

Well, we we would get some weird questions from commanders too. Like, so when when a unit was redeploying, and so they'd fly into some local international airport and they have their weapons, right? So they'd stack up all their weapons in a van or whatever, and they'd have to transport them back to the base. Well, they'd want they'd want convoy security. And so we'd have to discuss what if somebody tries to, you know, steal the weapons, and they'd want the security guys to have nights. Like, well, we're not going to arm them because we don't want to violate pascomatars. And I'm like, do you think they're going to attack your weapon supply with something that your batana is going to be able to stop? Right.

SPEAKER_05: 1:13:32

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:13:32

You know, just thinking about it, like, well, I don't want to violate pasta comatar. So we had scared our commanders so much that they didn't even know that they could use force to protect their own military assets. So you get Jags to come in and be like, all right, so let me square you away. First of all, you can be more restrictive than the law, but if you believe that the law prevents you from carrying weapons to protect weapons, that's not the case. Yeah. You can be more restrictive if you want. I don't recommend it, but I'm not your tactics guy.

SPEAKER_03: 1:13:59

So um so Mr. Bill Fold, I want to make sure I hit this for him. He posted uh quite a lengthy thing in the Discord channel. If you are guy, guys, if you're listening, you're not a part of our Discord channel, please join that. This is where you can get a lot more in-depth answers on things where we share videos. It's actually it's like an inside look of the brain of our community. So um, I'm going to uh are you bouncing? Okay. Okay. Um, I will wait, but I will I I want him to be able to be a part of this question because it's mostly for Vaughn anyway. But if you guys want to be more in the brain of Two Cops One Donut and get to be able to talk to Banning directly, talk to me directly, talk to a lot of the people that are a part of Two Cops One Donut, but aren't officially in like Vaughn. You guys don't know this about Vaughn, but he is not just somebody that you can get on anything. Like for whatever reason, he likes banning and me. Maybe just banning.

SPEAKER_02: 1:14:59

No, no, man. He loves you. Yeah. And he loves he loves our crowd. He loves the fact that we have people that are unsupervised. It's not a cop echo jump. No, and that's and that's exactly what this show capitalizes on. And is it to everybody, man? We we want all the people. We can't be unsupervised. Join the Discord or donate. That's absolutely correct. 100%. Idiots. But uh it is a it's a it's truly awesome that Vaughn decided to Vaughn flew in to come be on this show.

SPEAKER_03: 1:15:28

You just named a jujitsu move and you didn't even know it. No, I didn't. Do you know what the Von Flu choke is? No, I sure don't. Oh man.

SPEAKER_02: 1:15:33

Maybe on a yeah, maybe on our fruit, we don't do breaks, but maybe when we're done.

SPEAKER_03: 1:15:37

Yeah. So the Von Flu choke is a very famous MMA move. Uh, and if you guys don't know what that choke is, look it up. But uh the point that I was getting to is yeah, getting Vaughn on the show for anybody else out in the regular, unless he's your like friend, like you're not getting Vaughn on your show. It just doesn't happen. And for whatever reason, he likes you knuckleheads, and so he likes coming on here and being put to the test. It's so funny.

SPEAKER_02: 1:16:05

Uh you know, I even asked I asked Vaughn a question in my truck when we were driving over here, and and it was uh somebody else had asked the question uh if if Waltz was going to take the the his National Guard and do something with it, yeah, towards the federal government.

SPEAKER_03: 1:16:21

And I and I think uh Oh look at Alan's pulling up the von Flu choke for us. There you go. Hey Alan, if you can pull up a video of the Von Fluchoke, show it. So he made a he was saying he's like Von Flew in. I said, Oh, you just named a jujitsu movie, you don't even know it. And he's like, What? It's like the Von Flu, the Von Flu choke, and so that's uh You have to get a picture next to that, too.

SPEAKER_04: 1:16:45

They always they always named jujitsu moves after the person who got choked out by it. You always quit the person who did it. You're like, no.

SPEAKER_03: 1:16:53

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02: 1:16:54

So um so that was a good that I just want to go back to that for one second, Eric. Is somebody else, and I don't know who who asked it, but maybe Alan can find it. And I believe he threw it up on the screen a little while ago. If Waltz did there you go. I'll let you read that.

SPEAKER_03: 1:17:09

Oh yeah. What happens if Governor Governor Waltz controls the National Guard and instructs them to remove ICE agents from the area? What happens?

SPEAKER_02: 1:17:20

Yeah. Well, we we we I think we know what happens.

SPEAKER_04: 1:17:23

Uh well you better hope there's uh well one that Yeah, there's nothing good about that. One, you've got actual people involved in that. So you're the ICE agent and I'm the local guy or I'm the National Guardsman and and it it's gonna come down to weapons at that point, right? I think the two guys you're gonna look at you, yeah, we're not we're not doing this. Yeah. Yeah, we're not doing this. That's not even a that's I heard that brought up today by uh one of the federal uh one of the federal uh Trump appointees who is just like laughing at like that's not gonna work out well for you, right? Sort of thing. So nobody's seriously thinking that that's where we're at. That's called a civil war, is what that is, right? So we play that what if game that from a jurisdictional authority standpoint, yes, the governor controls the national guard, and if he wants to order them to attack federal agents, that seems to be the definition of civil war. And certainly on you know, yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 1:18:20

And and that's kind of getting to the point where I'm trying to say if I'm the local PD in what Minnesota is that where it was at Minnesota. If I'm them, I don't care what the governor or the mayor is saying. I'm going to cooperate and try to help. Like I said, mitigate the issues.

SPEAKER_04: 1:18:41

Here's what's terrifying. You and I could sit here, like there was a day with we were just like, okay, whatever, Walls, like go away. The problem is they have spent so long putting people in positions of power that are true believers. We're talking about chiefs of police out there who think that they can arrest ICE agents. And they are telling people try to do that in my jurisdiction and see what happens. Like you hear that from a chief of police at a right media, and you're going, who is this person? Like who thinks that was a good idea, right? Yep. So that's what's terrifying. And look, if you go across the country, you meet a whole bunch of cops who will surprise you of how far left they are in their in their beliefs. They actually think you it would terrify me if these guys were told those ICE agents are engaging in unconstitutional kidnapping. You need to go arrest them. And they're like, on it. And they'll do that. They'll get in that confrontation. I'm waiting for that confrontation to take place. I don't think we're quite there yet in mass, but I've met those individual cops and we we're seeing a lot more of them come up to the media podiums. Oh, yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 1:19:52

Yeah. Let me give a shout out to Mike Cucumber. Um, he he mentioned Lark and Rose in the last one. He dropped two bucks in the super chat. But um, Mike, I I do want to tell you that I looked up Larkin Rose uh on my Audible and found some audible stuff that I'm going to I'm I listen to Audible books all the time. Um, usually educational stuff. I like emotional intelligence sled books. Uh, what's his name? I I'm so bad with the Goldblum, Golden Fuck, I can't remember his name. He's like a huge emotional intelligence author. I just can't think of his name off top of my head. I'm not sure who it is. Uh yeah, he's one of the one of the leading authors on that subject. It's not a law enforcement book, but Jesus, the parallels there are just yeah. I I think I think emotional intelligence is um a topic that is I don't want to say it's grossly overlooked by law enforcement, but I just don't hear cops talk about it as much.

SPEAKER_04: 1:20:49

Well, it's interesting because we the capacity they say is now they let me be careful because I want to say this is Von Kleem remembering books he's read on these issues, right? Right. The EQ is more important than IQ. This is sort of the the approach, right? Because I need you to know yourself and to be able to manage your own uh emotional arousal states. Daniel Goleman.

SPEAKER_03: 1:21:11

Yeah, that's it. Daniel Goleman, yeah. Yes, good call. See, we got Alan behind the scenes. Nice.

SPEAKER_04: 1:21:17

Uh so yeah, EQ is better than IQ, right? Right. Because EQ, you know, loosely defined as your ability to recognize your own thoughts and emotions and be able to regulate them, and also to do that with others, to interact with others in a way in which you can de-escalate as you know, manage the emotional states of others. So that's sort of the EQ, it's empathy, right? And and that's good. But the uh I don't know the outstanding question is whether you can teach it or whether it's it's set, or whether just your your top end is set and you can be taught to achieve the maximum capacity of your top end. But but that was always the question. It was like your EQ is sort of set at age four. Like you can see the kids who have high EQs and low EQ by the age of it might even be two, I don't remember what it was. But uh when they talk about police, like training police to have higher emotional intelligence, and I'm like, well, you can I think we can like through verbal judo training and stuff, teach them to fake it, right? To act as if, right? To but if you're actually increasing their EQ, I don't know.

SPEAKER_03: 1:22:24

Yeah, Mike said for he dropped another two bucks on the super chat. He said, the most dangerous superstition. I I'm a bit I'm a big fan of emotional intelligence, and I do believe you can teach it. I believe it's my buddy George, go ahead on the show. We were talking about we did the whole ego class. I don't know if you've seen that series that we put together, but it's an ego course that we literally taught for our recruits. And he developed that course based on a lot of the videos I showed. Oh, wow. Some of it, yeah. Yeah, and um I look at it the same way he kind of described a magic trick. He's like, I show you a magic trick, a sleight of hand, and you're like, Whoa, that was awesome! Like, how the hell did you do that? He's like, I tell you how I did it, and and I show you the trick again, it doesn't have the effect on you anymore. Right. Kind of the same thing with emotional intelligence. I show you the tricks behind it, what you're looking for, why you react the way you react, why other people are reacting the way they act. And now I've kind of revealed the secret, the the the trick. So when I reveal the trick, yes, are you you're still not going to be Houdini? You're not gonna be him. He's he just has it. But I can teach you enough to where you learn what's behind the trick and you can kind of perform. Yeah. So just like you said, I don't necessarily know if it's faking it as much as it's like, oh, I see how the trick works now.

SPEAKER_04: 1:23:47

Well, uh you know, I think we're gonna say the same thing because I agree with what you just said. The I have an example of a guy I taught verbal judo, so I like it. And I I like You mean de-escalation. Well, four different no, four different national programs. We repacked the first one was verbal judo, yeah, which was de-escalation, communication, and persuasion, right? It was all the about it was the early, and Dr. Thompson was great, but he makes this point. Like teaching them the magic tricks isn't the hard part because he even had like little, you know, you went through it, had little little uh formats, little seven steps, like little, you know, do these things.

SPEAKER_03: 1:24:20

I'm often the reason I pulled you over is this.

SPEAKER_04: 1:24:23

I did notice, I did notice you ran that stop sign. So you just by reason for the violation of it. If not, before you reach for it, can you tell me what you could right? Yeah, it was great. But it allowed you to sound like, and this was his point, right? This stuff he said early. Um it allowed you to sound like a 10-year veteran on your first day, as long as you followed the script. You didn't have to feel it, you didn't have to know why it worked, but do the script. It's gonna make you look good, sound good, and it'll be good. What I found in teaching that for so many years was there was cops who were problem children, and they'd been to the class and they'd get sent back to the class for remedial. And I'm like, I would literally print them off certificates like master's in verbal judo. And then I gave a guy a PhD in verbal judo because he'd come back so many times. A couple of those. I still know their names. Well, one night I'm working a call with one of these guys. We'll call him Chris. You know who you are, Chris.

SPEAKER_03: 1:25:12

Uh rhymes with bris.

SPEAKER_04: 1:25:13

Yeah, rhymes with bris, but starts with a C-H-R-I-S. So I told them.

SPEAKER_03: 1:25:19

We called him Topher, but whatever.

SPEAKER_04: 1:25:21

Yeah. So I I so this guy's been to verbal judo class enough times that I literally print him off a PhD certificate. That's awesome. Yeah, he probably still has it. Oh, yeah, I hope he does. And so he uh but the guy just didn't care to engage, didn't care to work the program. So one night we're up in uh 600 block in North Kansas Avenue, as I remembered. It was it was sort of a rundown part of the city. There were some bars up there, and there's a lot of fights and all this good stuff. And he calls for a back. Our guy we're gonna call Chris calls for back. And I show up in uh this big mongrel man, and I've never seen a more perfect verbal judo practice in my life. Yeah, he's like, sir, is there anything I can say to get you to cooperate? I'd like to think so. You know, I was just like, ask, tell, give options, confirm resistance. Like I was like, I was like looking at this guy, and I was like, You don't want that smoke. That's exactly right. I was like, it wasn't the skills that were missing, it was the motivation. The motivation he needed to have. He didn't have the incentive. Yeah. But that man provided him the incentive. So I think your points while making, he never could grow in his well, arguably, it wasn't his EQ that was being advanced. He had the skills that if he wanted to, I say act as if he wanted to pretend, you know, Dr. Thompson talked about uh showtime, right? It's like when you get out of your car, tell yourself it's showtime because you can't bring your personal face to the encounter. You got to bring your professional face.

SPEAKER_03: 1:26:45

Yeah. Alan said, Danning is my motivation, right? All of us that did cut me must be drinking. Naked guys, that's my motivation, sir. Please, what do I have to do to get you in the back of the car without touching you?

SPEAKER_02: 1:26:56

Well, think of the de-escalation Alan does when he walks up with a car with no shirt on.

SPEAKER_03: 1:27:00

Yeah, I know, right?

SPEAKER_02: 1:27:01

Just a badge on his belt.

SPEAKER_03: 1:27:03

If the glass, if their windows are up when he walks by, they just cut right open. Cutting glass out there. Maybe we went out weigh in left field. Sorry, guys. Verbal Mr. Bill Fold said, I use verbal bare knuckle boxing. There is a verbal karate version, yes. Yeah. Oh man. You know, we need to get Rogue Audit Nation on here. Um, we need to get him on. We haven't had him on yet. Rogue, let me know if you're ever interested in being on, brother. Um, I try to get auditors on here all the time. I feel like they get misrepresented quite a bit. Uh, especially the ones that follow us. The ones that follow us, they have what I would consider a noble mission where they're trying to hold police accountable and the First Amendment. Which is well within their wide. I think that's fair. Uh, and I think that's one of the beautiful things about our nation is that you can do that here without fear of retaliation.

SPEAKER_04: 1:27:56

You know what I think of it is if the community's the boss, it's undercover boss. Right. You always like you're like you're like, well, first of all, before I leave today, I want to let you know I was the auditor.

SPEAKER_03: 1:28:07

Like, no, yeah, how did I do? We had a guy today. You're fired. You're fired. We had a guy today uh in the real-time crime center. Somebody called in and said this guy is scoping out a bank. So, you know, check to see if we got the cameras in the area. We do see the guy. Um, local security guards must have got called. We're not in communication with them. Um and they start coming down the sidewalk and the guy takes off running. And we're watching, we're like, that's weird. You know, we're laughing because now they're running after him, but and they call PD. Well, we were watching the whole thing because somebody else had called in on the guy scoping out the bank and uh see him take off the dude's in shorts, tennis shoes, and and a sweater, like a just a regular old sweatshirt. Yeah, like he's exercising. Well, I yes. I mean, that's kind of how he was dressed. Yeah, but he was being a weirdo, and and we're sitting there and we kind of look at each other and like he's baiting. He wants people to check him out. So what does he do? He runs to the next closest bank. Now it's downtown in a very major metropolitan area. There's a lot of banks. So he stands outside that door and he just sits there and he gets his phone out and he does one of these for a little bit, and all of a sudden a money drop happens. Now he's filming them. And I'm sitting there, I'm like, we're looking. There's nobody following him like to video from afar. Of course not, because they're robbing the bank you guys just left. Yeah, yeah. He was the decoy. He chases around it. And so, you know, us this is kind of one of the benefits that I really like about real-time crime centers is we saw an officer trying to go in the area and we're like, don't mess with this guy. He either one, he's looking for the attention, which we don't need to give him because he's not doing anything illegal. No, if he's not breaking the law, yeah, he's not breaking the law. Yeah. And so now we had to convey to the security guards. So we had to get conflict. Yeah, we had to call, figure out who they were, let them know, like, hey, he's not doing anything. We see him, he's fine.

SPEAKER_02: 1:30:10

Yep. And those guys are steadily adding keys to their key ring. Like, man, if that guy comes back, I'm throwing this key ring at him and he's done.

SPEAKER_03: 1:30:17

You know what? So I so anyway, um, the thing that I liked the most about the the crime center is we were able to help prevent one, an officer from going up there and violating his rights on, you know, maybe not having the most practice at that stuff. Could have been a new officer, we don't know. Um, because we did have an officer trying to go into the area, and we're like, no, leave him, just just go on. He's he's not doing anything, I promise you. And so we prevented that, and then at the same time, we were able to educate security guys like pay attention to what this guy's really trying to do. And he did, he ended up the security guards left, they they were they'd stayed a block behind him. Like you could see him on the corner, you could see the guy looking at him, he'd start filming them, and then he'd go on to the next bank. And that was this, that was his little thing. He did this for like an hour. I was a very patient man. I wouldn't have been as like for him, I'd have been like, Oh, I'm not getting any cops, I'm leaving. So but no, but that's my point with the auditors is I'm like, I like that checks and balances because who else in the world can hold their own police accountable like the citizens of the US can? Good luck trying to do that shit in Mexico. Good luck trying to do that shit in Brazil.

SPEAKER_04: 1:31:31

Well, that's terrifying is I don't know what the auditor training is, but I I've mentioned before I did training for judges and attorneys and cops and social workers and psychologists, like all in the same class.

SPEAKER_03: 1:31:42

Oh, you did First Amendment training?

SPEAKER_04: 1:31:44

It was broader than that, but it was basically what are the what are the police authorities? Right? What can the police do and not do an America sort of thing? Because they all want to be, they all want to hold officers accountable and they want to have a an opinion about policing.

SPEAKER_02: 1:31:57

I knew that was gonna get highlighted. I know.

SPEAKER_03: 1:31:59

I want to be on with Vaughn again. He's a dreamboat.

SPEAKER_04: 1:32:04

It's the haircut. We go to the same barber.

SPEAKER_03: 1:32:07

Uh I don't I does Bill Fold have hair, I don't even remember. He's got a huge ass beard.

SPEAKER_04: 1:32:13

Yeah, if that little icon that popped up was him, he's he goes to my barber.

SPEAKER_03: 1:32:17

Oh, okay. It's hard for me to tell on that icon.

SPEAKER_04: 1:32:20

Yeah, so the the training was interesting because I gave him a not a quiz quiz. I start them all the same way. Like, basically, it's can the police ever arrest an innocent person? And the answer is yeah, because we we stop and arrest people on probable cause. All the time. All the time. And but the sound of it, they're like, no, of course you can't. You can't arrest an innocent person. And so you just started to get them thinking. What I what I learned was all of these people, including the judge, including the attorneys, they didn't specialize in constitutional policing. They didn't have a clue of what the police can and can't do legally and what it takes to legally detain somebody and what citizens' rights are and obligations surrounding that. Um it's legal to be weird out there. Yeah, it is. It is. It is. It's reasonable, weirdness, reasonable suspicion. As long as it's within a reasonable range, it falls under the reasonable weirdness clause. Yeah, you're like, right now he's falling within a reasonable range of weirdness. So let's leave him alone. No, so I but that's what's terrifying is we have a lot of people we say that are testing the limits of their constitutional rights and they miss the mark. You're like, no, like you way overstepped. Like you now, and you hope if you get their motives figured out that you just give them a warning, like, hey, yeah, you actually can't do that because we're doing this thing and you and like, oh, I didn't know. Like, how many times you hear them go, oh, I didn't know that. It's like, yeah, that's why when we give police orders, you're required to obey them, not ask us, not decide whether or not it's a lawful order on the spot. It's presumptively lawful order because we presumably have more information about what we're doing there than you do. And if you want to continue engaging conduct to challenge us in that moment, you are risking getting arrested for interference, obstruction, disobeying whatever happens to be in that jurisdiction. And that's what that's why I thought engage, well, this is such an important podcast, like engaging with the community to actually flesh out what your rights are, what they're not, what the police authorities actually are and what they're not. And also for the police, because if you're an FTO, you know, I've used the example that just stood in my head. Like whenever I teach policing, like the authority and jurisdiction piece, I'm like, what legal platform are you standing on right now? Because it changes. What I could tell somebody to do something and whether they have to do it or not, depends on what is the legal platform I'm standing on.

SPEAKER_05: 1:34:34

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:34:34

Right. And so we we do knock and talks. You know, for your audience, a knock and talk is, you know, the neighbor's like, hey, there's a lot of cars at that guy's house. I think they're selling drugs. Well, that's not reasonable suspicion.

unknown: 1:34:43

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:34:44

But we're like, okay, so we watch the house for a while and we're really not seeing anything. It's on our list of like 50 houses we're supposed to watch, right? So you go, well, let's just go ask them who they are. So you knock on the door and you talk and you say, Hey, we're the police. We're just you guys are new here, kind of wondering. And they can tell they can shut the door and tell you to go pound sand. Most of them were like, oh no, no, that was my my cousins or that was whoever, and thanks for coming and checking on us, right? And you go, great, let us know if you need anything. But when they let you in their house on a knock and talk, frequently it's a drug house and it'll smell like a drug house. They'll have leave paraphernalia, and you're now making your case because they lawfully let you in the house.

SPEAKER_03: 1:35:24

Yeah, it was consensual.

SPEAKER_04: 1:35:25

It was consensual, right? Do I want to seize the scene?

SPEAKER_02: 1:35:27

Yes. Or do we want to have a stern conversation to make it go away now?

SPEAKER_04: 1:35:31

Right? You've been there. Oh, yeah, many times. So I'm in a house and I knock and talk with my buddy. We have no paraphernalia. We have no reasonable suspicion. We knock, they let us in, they're happy to talk to us. And there's a guy sitting on a couch and he will not look at us. He's just staring at us. He's being weird. He's within a reasonable range. Yeah, his weirdness range. He's within a reasonable range of weirdness, but you're just staring at the TV won't look at us. That's odd, obviously. But if you don't want to engage with the police, then you don't have to, right? So my buddy's like, what are you wearing over there? My buddy, the other officer, what are you wearing? He had a fanny pack on. Well, back then, fanny packs only held one thing, right? Yeah. A gun. So he's sitting there and he's like, he's just, you know, he looked like a gang member. He, and I'm not even gonna tell you what race he was because it doesn't matter, but uh, he looked like he was part of a criminal organization, and he's sitting there staring, he's got his fanny pack. Was the fanny pack fuchsia? Like I can tell you that the fact that he was wearing a fanny pack. Yeah, he's a white boy, bro. He's some sort of biker gang. I can probably tell you what which gang culture he was not part of. So my buddy's like, do me a favor, stand up with your hands on the wall, I'm gonna pat you down. And I look over and I'm like, okay, first of all, I agree with you. I don't feel safe with this guy. Yeah, I think he's got a gun. I think he doesn't like us. I don't feel safe right now either. And if this was a Terry stop, I would agree it's time to pat this guy down. Right. But we're in his house consensually. Yes. He's sitting on his couch watching his TV. I'm like, I go, hey, hey, hey, come here for a second. I go, hey guys, thank you very much. Appreciate you guys letting us in. And we're out. And I get out, I go, dude, you can't just start patting people down in their living room. And he's like, what? He had a fanny pack. I go, no, no, your instincts were right. Yes. I also your environment was wrong. But you weren't standing on that legal platform. What changes the platform literally is what's in your head as a cop. That's what is scary about maybe auditors or anybody who wants to test the limits of their constitutional rights, is the legal justification of what the officer is doing is often in that officer's head. It's what the officers saw and how they interpreted it. And so it makes it it makes it risky.

SPEAKER_03: 1:37:37

Yeah. When people are uh something to consider, Vaughn, and this is me just spitballing ideas here. One of the things that I have my mind has been expanded upon in doing this podcast is just how often cops violate constitutional rights, thinking that they're in the right. And more often than not, they're in the wrong. I was called here, so I need your ID.

SPEAKER_04: 1:38:16

All of these violations, right? Suspicious vehicle out front, unknown trouble, and you show up there and you like this was the one anonymous callery, anonymous caller suspicious vehicle in front of the house. Right. And you go up and you're like, Hey, I need to see some driver's license bubble. And they're like, No. Yeah. And you're like, Yes. Yeah. Yeah, you're suspicious. I was called in. Yeah. And okay.

SPEAKER_03: 1:38:36

You're right, yeah. So in that, and in having my mind expanded, like I said, one of the best things I in April, this will be five years that we've been doing this. So I've learned a lot from just our community. And some are pro-law enforcement, some are anti-bad cop, as they like to call it. I like that. Um and I will say that I was that guy that was like, ah, there's 99.9% of them are out there doing the right thing. I don't believe that anymore. I I do think it's still a high majority for sure. Yes, I think they're doing great things, but there's a lot more problems than I thought. And that's one of them. I would love, I would pay. This is you'll like this. I would pay for a Von Kleem constitutional law enforcement class.

SPEAKER_02: 1:39:24

Well, I think that would be that would just go hand in hand on I think, and this is just banning talk, and I've got no affiliation with force science, but I would love to see you guys put that class out there that makes it available to law enforcement agencies, state, local, and federal, to where you could actually do this and go out there and do it. Collaboration. A two cops. Well, one dumb.

SPEAKER_03: 1:39:43

You understand what I mean. Force absolutely it's bond clean, constitutional law for law enforcement. We actually put on practicals.

SPEAKER_02: 1:39:50

Yeah, we can do on practicals. We role play. We can film it. Yeah, they can learn, they can learn from their mistakes and always have a lot of people. We didn't know this was gonna be a damn business pitch today, did you? But it's but it's it is a national problem. Not every department, obviously in every state, but it's a lot of departments in a lot of states. Oh, yeah. So here's the here's the thing.

SPEAKER_04: 1:40:09

One, it's it has to happen. Like that collaboration or that education process has to happen for cops and for communities because one, the law is complicated. Now we do it all the time. It's some of this stuff like uh so I'll give you a great example. I got a call from a cop the other day. He got a uh he got a call of a check the welfare kidnapping that just occurred in another state. We just got a call and we think they're at this house in your state that they kidnapped this girl, she's in that house at that state. He's like, on it. And he goes, and the lady opens the door and he says, he says, Hey, I'm officer so-and-so, such and such department. Um, I is so-and-so here. And she's like, No. And he's like, Well, did she used to live here? And he's like, No. And he's like, I know she used to live here. Like, I have police reports where she was abused at this house. He doesn't tell her that, but he knows this is a house she'd been at before, and that the guy who abused her lived at this house before, and that that she'd been kidnapped in another state, they're thinking maybe brought back here. So he's like, and the lady starts to shut the door. He's like, nah no, no, no, no. And he says, Nope, I gotta make sure she's not here, I gotta check the welfare. And he goes in and he checks the house and he doesn't find her, he leaves, and they call and say, This guy just came in our house. This cop just came in our house. We told him no, he tried to shut the door, he forced his way in. And they're like, Did that happen? He's like, Yeah, 100%. And uh, so he calls me, he's like, Something wrong with that. I go, Well, yeah, you can't do that just a little bit. I was like, Freeze the scene, get your warrant. Oh, yeah, well, not even a warrant. Because if he here's what I'll say about the warrant. Well, I'm thinking. If he had enough to get a warrant, he might have had an exigency.

SPEAKER_01: 1:41:50

Yep.

SPEAKER_04: 1:41:50

Right. I don't think he had enough to get a warrant at that point, right, is the problem. Nor do I think he had any reason to believe she was in there right now in danger. So what we do is what you say, like, okay, look, you got a good starting point. Choose it as a starting point, make your own case. We hear that that term, make your own case. So when you get anonymous tips, it used to be the case that wasn't anonymous, but they didn't have enough specificity. It was basically like, hey, we got a we got a possibility she might be here. Can you go check it out? Can you just make your own case?

SPEAKER_03: 1:42:17

Kind of do a knock and talk and see if you can build some PC in there.

SPEAKER_04: 1:42:20

But in his head, he's like, this is important. This woman's but you know, been kidnapped, she might be in there right now, tied up. I got to check. So his motives were pure. Right. And I was like, let me tell you how a veteran would have handled that. And so I broke it down, you know, basically starting with what you said, like, you know, like you did your knock and talk. I don't even know if I would have started there, but if you think it's a kidnapping, and she might be in there tied up, and you want to go look, listen, and feel like what's going on here, the demeanors, all that. I understood the impulse, but there's other ways to investigate these make your own cases. It used to be, and you'll remember this, old birds, where if you had an anonymous tip. Of a of a you know suspicious vehicle in front of the car, you go and you stop the car and you're like, hey, what's going on? You know, but well, case came out. There was like, no, anonymous is insufficient. You know, it has to have some, it has if it has some prediction, there's some I I I'll get into at the class we put on, I'll get into the legal exception. Yeah. But generally speaking, an anonymous tip is not enough. Right. It just gets you to the scene. It might be for a DUI. Yeah. It might be if the anonymous tip has a phone number associated with it. Yep. Because then you're like, well, it's not truly anonymous because you gave me your phone number. But if it's truly anonymous tip, there's some things that you have to have in addition to that to get on the right legal platform to start forcibly detaining people.

SPEAKER_02: 1:43:36

Otherwise, develop your PC. Develop it. Yeah, I've always developed my PC on it because that anonymous can go away at any time. Yeah. You know, the the ability to go back and contact and test it. Yeah. You know, I always developed my PC.

SPEAKER_03: 1:43:49

So you've got to. For like my dope chasers out there. If I were to tell you, hey, something weird about that house, cars stop there for five minutes and they leave, and they happen all night long. You can't just pull over a car for stopping at that house for five minutes and leaving. Right. Not against the law. But you have to figure out how to figure that out.

SPEAKER_01: 1:44:10

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 1:44:10

And so you start saying, I watched 10 cars in the past 20 minutes. Stop at this house for five minutes at a time. So the 10th car I decided to follow. And they, you know, ran the red light. You know, they didn't come to a complete stop. I pulled them over, immediately saw a small baggie on the in the center council. Like you develop your PC that way, but through that traffic stop, that violation, and then showing. And in our class, I will tell you, you only have to develop reasonable suspicion.

SPEAKER_04: 1:44:41

Not PC. Not peace. Yes. That's right. I'm sorry. And be precise. We got people listening. Sorry.

SPEAKER_03: 1:44:45

Just like when you said reasonable, what'd you call it?

SPEAKER_04: 1:44:47

Reasonable belief. Belief. Reasonable belief.

SPEAKER_03: 1:44:49

Yes.

SPEAKER_04: 1:44:49

Yeah, we'll confuse it. No, but that's exactly right. But anyway, the point being a lot of cops, like you know the biggest one? The stop and frisk.

SPEAKER_03: 1:44:58

Ooh, what's this? This is a spicy. Force science plus von Klemm con law. Constitutional law. Uh, your brain was in survival mode. The judge was not. Oh, okay. I see what they're saying. I thought they were calling you a con man. Maybe. I think I think it was constitutional. Constitutional.

SPEAKER_04: 1:45:16

That's how I choose to frame it. Yeah. Yeah. My world is pretty good because I frame everything to my benefit. It's like a compliment somehow. I don't know. It was a bad word, but I'm sure it was meant as a compliment.

SPEAKER_03: 1:45:25

One of the things that we pointed out on here about constitutional law for law enforcement, I had uh Chris Palmer on from Staccato. He's a retired Phoenix. He is revolutionized police firearms instruction with the red dots and all that stuff. And now he actually teaches for staccato, like for law enforcement. Nice. Just salt of the earth guy. Really great. We had him on here. Blew a lot of people's minds because they just expected to see some, you know, ate up, you know, yeah, knuckle dragger, oakley canned glasses, punisher tattoo, firearms guy. And that was not how he was at all. I mean, he really blew their minds with how police need to be held accountable and stuff like that. So it was really good. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:46:09

Um well, take take that to the point of these guys judging cops that judge themselves harshly. And these cops want to do a good job. They're easy to train. You know, these guys who they have to be free to make mistakes. The consequences have to be and and right now, society, like the law is actually inertia to the benefit of cops. You can make mistakes and learn and grow from them. If you have a good leader that allows you to learn and grow from your mistakes, you just you hope you make them early enough where the consequences aren't that great. But violating someone's constitutional rights should never end your career if it wasn't done intentionally, because there's a I'm sorry, these 21-year-old constitutional law and policing, I like I said, I teach classes of attorneys who don't know this stuff because it's operational, it's an operational attorney gig. So when you talk about you need a cop there who also and a and you need a lawyer there, a lawyer who understands the law, a cop who can interpret it, right? Here's the black letter law, here's what it says. And the cop says, here's what that looks like on the street. Let me give you some scenarios. If you have one who's both, someone who has a lot of operational experience and legal experience, then you have an operational attorney, right? Well, there's there's plenty of them out there these days, right? Um, and so I look at it and I'm like, how can we educate cops? Because the the the big one to me was like stop and frisk, stop and frisk. They won't want to talk about stop and frisk. And I was like, guys, that's that's such an amazing tool for cops. Like, and then I realized to what you realized is there was cops out there who didn't understand that it's actually stop and maybe frisk.

SPEAKER_03: 1:47:37

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 1:47:38

You don't get to frisk everybody that you get to legally stop.

SPEAKER_03: 1:47:41

You have to have Raz, maybe.

SPEAKER_04: 1:47:42

And so what they would say, good cops who are trying to do a good job would say, You say, Why'd you pat him down? What was the what was the answer? Why'd you pat him down? He looks suspicious. Well, that would be great if he did. I would rank if you say that. No, they go for officer safety. Oh, okay. I see where you're and you're like, well, what do you mean? Like, maybe give me more. Like, what do you and they thought it was a blanket justification for always patting everyone down, right? Even when they hadn't legally detained him. So you go, you start to dig in to some of the stop and frisk, and it was stop and frisk everybody. Or they believed that anytime they saw somebody that like they they had some extra time and they want to go make sure it was basically like self-initiated. They just go, hey, come here for a second. What are you guys doing here? Turn on me, patch down, make sure you have any weapons. You know, and you're just going. And even I'm looking at it like these guys think they are out there confronting evil. And the people there, a lot of these people that they're engaging with, um, a lot of them are absolutely evil, corrupt, you know, organized crime members, but many of them aren't. And it doesn't take too many of them who aren't to spread like wildfire that these cops are harassing them and they're engaged in unconstitutionally. And you look and you're like, yeah, literally what you're doing is unconstitutional. But but you're not doing it with malevolence. You're doing it because you just didn't know any better. I'd like to get to them.

SPEAKER_03: 1:49:00

Yeah. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:49:00

Early and often.

SPEAKER_03: 1:49:02

The point that I I don't want to lose both trains of thoughts. Um, the the point I was getting to with Chris is um I asked him the question. I said, Hey, you guys are doing all this firearms training, 90 hours for recruits, and then you know, like at my department, we can fire every month. You get a hundred rounds, you get 50 rounds per gun that you have that the department gives you. So you got free rounds to go down there and practice. And that's a hell of a benefit. Oh, hell yeah. I mean, that's a big deal. I love it. And then on top of that, you have to fire semi-annually. So twice a year, you got a qual. Okay. Then I asked him, I said, How often did you ever have to do a refresher on constitutional law? And he goes, Oh, um uh never. Yeah, never. That is fucking nuts. You will never don't let me say never. More often than not, you're never gonna use your firearm in the job.

SPEAKER_04: 1:50:00

Yeah, that's still probably a true statement.

SPEAKER_03: 1:50:02

Right. For most cops. Yeah. Never gonna use your firearm. How often are you gonna use constitutional law?

SPEAKER_04: 1:50:07

Every day, every day.

SPEAKER_03: 1:50:08

Every encounter. Yeah, yeah. And we don't touch it. Tell me that's not a problem. Well, and the people teaching it don't know it, don't understand it, or they teach it improperly. Yeah, just like you said. That's my point. If if I what I hear when you're telling me guys are stopping and frisking people and they're trying to thwart evil and all that stuff, what the public hears is I have qualified immunity, they can't touch me. Right. And what I hear when I'm I'm like, fuck, the training's terrible. The whoever the root cause of that, whether it's an FTO that corrupted a whole branch of them, or if it's the academy that it corrupted it. And I think that's where us in the audience, we get a long, we're understanding each other, we just look at it different. I look at it at the training side, they look at that qualified immunity as a blanket. I can do this, and eh, if I fuck up, I fuck up, I'm not gonna get in trouble.

SPEAKER_04: 1:50:59

Yeah, what's really funny is that in a lot of these low-level things, like stop and frisk stuff, you're not getting qualified immunity because what you did is just on its face, no reasonable officer who understood the application of the actual law could have thought that was okay. So a lot of times, the the low-level constant daily constitutional violations you're talking about, when you explain to them, like, no, you can't legally do that. And and you can't be mistaken about the law. You can be mistaken about the facts, and your interpretation of the facts have to be reasonable. That's where qualified immunity comes in to protect officers. But you don't get to be wrong about the law. You know, the law is well settled, particularly in a lot of these areas. So there's a lot of fact patterns in constitutional violations that are well settled that come down to your point. It's a training issue. And so who teaches constitutional law to police? It's gonna be your DA, your city attorney, you would hope, police, legal advisor. But even if it is, you know what? They they don't know it. Yeah, they're not operational attorneys. I I had the pleasure of sitting in an advanced search and seizure course one day.

SPEAKER_03: 1:52:02

And I come in and I Was it by Anthony Bendero?

SPEAKER_04: 1:52:06

No, oh, he's awesome.

SPEAKER_03: 1:52:07

I like yeah, I like it.

SPEAKER_04: 1:52:09

Oh, yeah. Yeah, so uh I bought a stack of his books for some cops who were getting ready to hire on, and I was like, read these. Good starting point.

SPEAKER_03: 1:52:17

Don't get yourself effed up. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:52:19

So I'm sitting there and I'm sitting in his class, advanced search and seizure, and the slide deck comes up, and I'm like, well, this looks awful familiar. And he gets this next slide, next slide. This is my slide deck. Somehow he got his hands on my slide deck. And so I'm quietly sitting there, like, okay, he's gonna teach me my class. This will be interesting. He didn't understand the first thing about this slide deck. He didn't understand Terry stops, he didn't understand probable cause and the difference between reasonable suspicion and probable cause and stopping maybe all the all, and I'm and I was like, fine. I was like, hey, just real quick, the way I understand this, and I still didn't tell him it was mine. I'm like, hey, I way I understand it. He's like, actually, no, that's really good. That's you everybody hear that? Did everybody hear that? How many times? He's like, afterwards, he's going, So are you are you an attorney? Like, and I go, I go, yeah, I'm curious. Where'd you get this slide deck? And he tells me, and I was like, okay. So I call that person who I knew very well. I was like, hey, did you get my slide deck? Like, oh yeah, I was supposed to teach that class, and I got conflicted off. So I let him, I hope that's okay. And I'm like, no, no, no, typical cop shit. It's I said, it's well, these are attorneys. Yeah. I'm like, no, no, it was no, this was an attorney teaching it. An attorney teaching it.

SPEAKER_03: 1:53:24

Oh, it's an attorney teaching it. Attorney teaching my legal class. Pause. Motherfuckers, see what I try to tell y'all? You get at cops and attorneys don't know this shit, and that's their job.

SPEAKER_04: 1:53:33

Yeah, 100%. 100%. It is very difficult to find an attorney who actually understands constitutional policing at the operational level.

SPEAKER_03: 1:53:42

And you want us crayon eaters out on the street to understand this shit. Yeah. I like crayons. Yeah, you do. His favorite flavor is purple. Purple. I know his favorite's purple. Uh Ariel said, super chat,$5. Thank you, Ariel. Appreciate that. Sticking your foot in the door for a knock and talk saying you need to talk to me. Yeah, that's that's a bad day.

SPEAKER_04: 1:54:05

We'll include that in the lesson.

SPEAKER_03: 1:54:06

Yeah, that's a bad day. That is a foundational recruit training scenario. At least it was. I I've been to three academies. I hope you all know this. I've been to three academies. Um, and that has been one of the scenarios in every single academy I went to. So, to give credit to the places where I went to academies at, that was a big one. The the foot in the door at a loud music party.

SPEAKER_04: 1:54:30

Yeah, and here's what's good about the foot in the door. We would change one fact. So in law school, speaking that lawyers don't know, I went to uh I like this. Sorry.

SPEAKER_03: 1:54:39

I like picking out lawyers. Let's see.

SPEAKER_04: 1:54:41

Yeah, there's a whole class of lawyers. They're all they're all licensed attorneys, um, and they're getting an update on criminal law, criminal proceed, well, criminal law. And we were talking about search and seizure, of course, and I'm sitting there interested. I was a student in the class, and they gave a good example, and they said, uh, here's a here's your fact pattern for this, for all the audience members. Uh you go to a house and you see a uh let's say marijuana is illegal, right? And you see a marijuana plant in the windowsill, and the question is, can you go in and seize it? Right? Okay. And then they say, and they said, um write your answer down, right? Then they say, okay, somebody now pulls the curtain aside and looks at you and their eyes bug out and they grab the plant. Can you go in and seize it? Right. And in the first one, what they wanted you to recognize is there's no exigency. The question is, do you have probable cause to believe there's contraband in the house?

SPEAKER_03: 1:55:44

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 1:55:44

Yes.

SPEAKER_03: 1:55:45

Freeze the scene, get your search warrant.

SPEAKER_04: 1:55:46

Freeze the scene, get your search warrant. The second thing is, is there an exigency such that the delay would reasonably believe to be caused, or do you reasonably suspect that a delay would result in destruction of evidence? Yeah. Well, when someone goes, uh, I see you, police, grabs the contraband and takes off, the answer is yes. Now, this is different than should you. Like, is it in terms of the risk to yourself as an officer? The question, the first question is legally, can you go in and forcibly enter that house to secure the scene to stop people from from that? All right. So with a foot in the door, we would change that scenario. You the door comes open and the person immediately starts to shut the door. And because you're thinking it's a knock and talk, right?

SPEAKER_01: 1:56:33

No tricks.

SPEAKER_04: 1:56:34

And now let's imagine it's a it's a jurisdiction where marijuana's illegal. I gotta keep saying that because I know lots of jurisdictions, so that's totally fine. But let's pretend it's you know it's illegal, right? So the door, the door opens up and you get a strong odor of burning marijuana that you now smell. Is there probable cause believe there's contraband in the house?

SPEAKER_03: 1:56:57

You're good. Keep going.

SPEAKER_04: 1:56:58

Yeah. So is there is there a probable cause believe there's contraband in the house such that now they're gonna slam the door on you? And what's the risk if you don't make immediate entry? Now I'm doing low level, so that's but the idea is you do now you have probable cause at this point, not just reasonable suspicion, but probable cause to believe that there's a presence of contraband in that house and people in that house who just indicated their willingness to interfere and potentially destroy the evidence. So then can you put your foot in the door is the question and stop them immediately and go in and seize them, secure the residence? And the answer's yes. Yes. Now, it's it's that little fact that was olfactory, it was a smell that made the difference. Now, the person who's coming in the house who smokes weed all the time and doesn't think it's a big deal. I've been smoking weed my whole life, and I'm a you know rocket scientist. So I don't, by the way. I meant this in quotes hypothetical. Uh there's the lawyer. They're gonna make that sound by that. So there I was. So there I was smoking weed. Yeah. Um uh but it's one additional fact that changes the probable cause in a legal platform you're standing on. And there's more exceptions and more exceptions and more exceptions. So you have to have an operational attorney who can flesh out how a single fact can change it. The problem is our community member who's on the other side of the door, has no idea they think they can just slam the door. They're in there smoking weed, which they do all the time. It's like it's no big deal. They're not criminals in their head. Like, I don't, I don't haven't committed a crime in my life. I just smoke weed. You're like, well, in this state, in this state, you know, and and admittedly, no, I'm gonna have to go down that road. So the the the shorter answer is yeah, you gotta have attorneys who understand that a single fact can change it. And and where it gets more difficult isn't the the marijuana. That's easy. It's where the single fact requires you to view the scene like a cop.

SPEAKER_05: 1:58:54

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 1:58:54

And we so when we talk about sense making, right? Um, I call it what cops know. So I can put out a whole fact pattern that you and the all of us would look at and go, oh yeah, this is this is evidence of such and such crime. This is at least probable cause, if not reasonable suspicion. A lot of these attorneys would have no idea how to piece those together. So I got lucky before I was an attorney. Um, I partnered up with our senior attorney, and we go around doing trainings on these constitutional policing issues, and I would be the one who got to do tell him what cops know, and he'd be the one, well, here's the law. And I'm like, and here's what it means to cops. So then when I went to law school, the law professor, to your point, and this is how bad it is, uh, and how hard it is for cops. The law professor. The law professor who taught criminal law and criminal procedure wanted to know if I'd be willing to debate him in front of the law school class on probable cause, reasonable suspicion.

SPEAKER_03: 1:59:52

You're an attorney at this point.

SPEAKER_04: 1:59:53

No, I was a student. You're a student, yeah. But I've been a cop for a while. But so I'm in there because he kept saying stuff in class, and I'm like, well, no, that's not how that works, right? And so he You were Mr.

SPEAKER_03: 2:00:03

Billfold in your class. Oh, I was. That's why they get along so well. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:00:08

And I was like, uh that's the draw. Finally, he just started doing hand-in-arm signals. I was like, I'd sit in the way at the back of the class, and I'm like, so he would uh, so he goes, Well, would you like to debate me? Would you be willing to debate me? And so it was one of the law school associations sponsored a luncheon debate or whatever. And it's on VHS.

SPEAKER_03: 2:00:26

Oh, so it was like a real Oh, yeah, it's on VHS.

SPEAKER_04: 2:00:29

It's in the law library. It was, it was great.

SPEAKER_03: 2:00:31

So you had a luscious full head of hair. I had no idea.

SPEAKER_04: 2:00:34

I doubt it. I was probably a lot more muscular back then. I was probably a bigger guy, but anyway, so we do the debate, and uh he comes up afterwards and he says, I give you permission to tell anybody that you won this debate. And I was like, Well, of course I won the debate because you're not a cop. And all of these issues, as we framed them, require you to view the scene through the lens of a police officer, knowing what a police officer knows. You couldn't win this debate because you don't understand how cops see the world. Right. Right. So when we flushed it out and we just went right down the line, he'd go, he'd set out a fact pattern and he'd give his this is illegal for the following reasons. And I'm like, and here was the benefit. This cracked me up. I'm like, okay, not only is this not illegal, here's why this happens, here's here's what cops know that would justify a reasonable suspicion. And by the way, we do this all the time, and it has never been suppressed. This is like policing 101. And he said I had permission to say I won that debate.

SPEAKER_03: 2:01:37

So Mike dropped that started the legend of Vaughn.

SPEAKER_02: 2:01:41

Did you at least get a picture with that professor and have it framed? Right.

SPEAKER_04: 2:01:44

He was we became such good friends too, because he was a he was a lifelong uh Berkeley guy. He taught at Harvard, he taught the the trial advocacy at Harvard, but he And here you are, Phoenix Online, just destroyed him.

SPEAKER_03: 2:01:57

I was like, I don't even want to, I don't even know if that's a school or not. I'm not gonna I'm not gonna say no, they haven't a birdie school. So Harrison said, um, what happens if the cop has a smell of weed, but they do not find any weed? Was the cop lying, had an issue with his nose, or was there something wrong with his brain? Um, no, I mean there's people that that Harrison, you may not be a weed smoker. Um or you might, I don't know, but I can tell you there's a lot of guys that they go to the boy's house, they smoke a bunch, then they jump in their car and they drive home. Or their boy smokes a bunch. Or their boy smokes a bunch. And it's all over their clothes. Yeah, and it just reeks, and weed doesn't go away. Like it stays with you.

SPEAKER_04: 2:02:38

I give you a little trick. Oh, I don't know if I should. Is it good? I just give a little pro tip. Yeah, give a pro tip. So uh I don't know if I want to.

SPEAKER_03: 2:02:46

Come on. You're you've already teased it now. You got to.

SPEAKER_04: 2:02:50

So here's how I used to get people because they they didn't think that like they're smoking weed. Right, they'd smoke weed and they'd spray stuff all over them.

SPEAKER_03: 2:02:57

Yeah, oh you got the the the whole tree forest felony forest, yeah. That's what I was going for. You know, you know what they for the black ice, yes, yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:03:05

You know what they always forgot? Their their hat. And you know what saturates weed smoke because they're smoking wearing a hat. Oh, yeah, right.

SPEAKER_03: 2:03:12

The entire hat under the bill, yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:03:14

So you take the hat and it's just reeks of weed, and now you got PC to search them. So if you went stepwise, uh-huh, right, do an interdiction, if the car smells of weed, right, you can search the car. Right. But can you search the individuals in the car?

SPEAKER_03: 2:03:31

No. You can pat them down.

SPEAKER_04: 2:03:35

No.

SPEAKER_03: 2:03:36

If they step out, pat them down for what? If you believe there's narcotics, then you start linking that with narcotics often comes weapons.

SPEAKER_04: 2:03:44

Narcotics, you talking about weed? Are you telling me that people that smoke weed are so commonly associated with guns and weapons that you can pat down people because they smell like weed? Oh, don't make me be the liberal guy. Hold on.

SPEAKER_03: 2:03:58

We gotta remember, I was doing this back in like 2012.

SPEAKER_04: 2:04:03

Even in the 90s, we weren't that liberal with our patent. You smell like weed, I get to pat you down. No, you're right.

SPEAKER_05: 2:04:09

Yeah. Fuck me.

SPEAKER_04: 2:04:10

So here's the here's the deal. No, you're right. No, but when the car stop come out, we want to be able to search as much of the car and the people. So if what we ended up happening, what ended up happening, and you had to you had to have law-driven tactics. That's how I would teach Constitution School.

SPEAKER_03: 2:04:22

Okay.

SPEAKER_04: 2:04:22

So I get the guy, I get the oh, and I got, look, I get to search a car, but then we would search an individual, and the judge would be like, why'd you search the individuals? Because the car smelled like weed. Did you particularize the weed to them? So we're like, well, no, the car smelled like weed, they're in it. They're a compartment. So when you search a vehicle on PC, you can search for weapons, evidence, means of escape. Anywhere in the car where the contraband can be found. Yep. Locked or unlocked, right? Right. Locked or unlocked. Containers. You can have a safe in there that's padlocked and you can rip it open if you have PC W there's contraband car. Very broad at the end. We're not going that deep. No, of course we're not. Right? Like the answer is yes, we're not, right? Yeah. Of course that's probably where it's at. If I got a safe in a car that smells like weed, I'm sure that's where it's at, right? Anyway, so but all we did was then, okay, fine. I get the individual out, I walk them to the back of the car and I talk to them for a little bit. How are you doing? Do I have weed coming off their breath? And then I say, Can I tear your hat for a second? And they're like, Yeah, and you're like, Yeah, okay. Well, now I've particularized it. Now I get to search them top to bottom for anywhere the contraband can be found, with the limitations being privacy, right?

SPEAKER_05: 2:05:29

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:05:29

There used to be a day where they pull their pants, look down their underwear and stuff, and the courts were kind of like, eh, let's not do that out in the public. So people adjusted. Um so this was law-driven tactics. You had to do it one step at a time. And it was easy, but you couldn't skip a step.

SPEAKER_03: 2:05:45

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 2:05:45

How did I particularize it? So to me, the the easy thing was either your breath was gonna smell like it or your hat band was gonna smell like it if you had a hat on, or your do-rag or whatever happened to be on your head.

SPEAKER_03: 2:05:55

I guess for me, if I'm pulling you out of the vehicle, it's typically for a safety reason. I see something that's going to because I'll leave you in the car. I feel like I've taken it.

SPEAKER_04: 2:06:06

No, no, no, no, no. We're talking about the car smelled like weed, you're gonna search it.

SPEAKER_03: 2:06:09

Yeah, I'm saying if I pull someone out of a vehicle, it's typically for a safety issue. It's not because I didn't give a shit about dope. I really don't. If you're smoking weed and that I just smell a little bit of it.

SPEAKER_04: 2:06:19

Is that what you mean by dope? You don't mean crack and no, no, no, not the hardship.

SPEAKER_03: 2:06:22

I just mean yeah, weed.

SPEAKER_04: 2:06:23

It just means a little bit of cheat and treatment. We never called weed dope. See, this is regional. Dope is dope. Dope is cocaine to me.

SPEAKER_03: 2:06:29

Yeah, so but if you're smoking weed, maybe weed, I could give a shit less.

SPEAKER_04: 2:06:33

Yeah, we didn't care. Here's the problem with that. Uh a hundred percent uh one, I don't want my kids smoking weed, right? I don't think I don't think any of us are smart enough to tie our hands behind our back and saturate our brains or marinade our brains and that stuff and still be successful in life. And then all of a sudden, well, what Joe Rogan is. I'm like, okay, well, you're not him. One of the most disciplined guys out there, right? But okay, you can't use Joe Rogan as your example, but uh the uh Yeah, I didn't particularly care. I had other things to worry about rather than somebody with smoking weed. But I got two buddies of mine who were cops who went to investigate a car that smelled like weed, they both got shot. They both were killed instantly because they were investigating a marijuana complaint, right?

SPEAKER_05: 2:07:16

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 2:07:17

And we got guy, another guy who uh in our drug raid who went in the front door, he was killed going in the front door on a raid for what ended up being like a pound of weed, right? So so the the idea of the distribution of the product and violence being associated was a big deal, but yeah, the guy smoking it.

SPEAKER_03: 2:07:34

Yeah, I'm just looking at some of these nasty comments. I'd love to hear what most creative places people have hidden drugs before. No prison pocket story. You know what?

SPEAKER_02: 2:07:42

Going on that, who was that who was that Texas Texas cop 2000 to 2004? There used to be an interdiction. Yep. Then he got uh Barry Cooper. I don't know his name, but he went around the country doing uh well then he and then he started teaching uh he wasn't getting enough money where he was at, and his he had he kind of went sideways with his superiors, and then he started making videos, pay videos on how to properly hide your stuff to get away. And I can't remember the dude's name. Um anyway, he used to be an interdiction cop, and I'm sure some of our viewers may know Hey, the best way to counter things is to understand how they're done. Sure, sure. So yeah, but they're not teach it.

SPEAKER_03: 2:08:19

Yeah, why not? Okay. I'll give you an example, Vaughn.

SPEAKER_02: 2:08:22

Little That's who it is, Barry Cooper. Barry Cooper. So I bet you it's still on YouTube some of the videos.

SPEAKER_03: 2:08:28

Okay. Lateral lateral vascular neck restraint. Right about rear naked chokes, right? Are you allowed to teach those at most places anymore?

SPEAKER_04: 2:08:38

Yeah, I mean, I won't say most, but yeah, they're L V and R versus a rear-naked choke.

SPEAKER_03: 2:08:43

No, no, no. It's the same move. L V and R is cutting off. Your rear naked, yeah, for a bunch Jiu Jitsu standard for the case. It's the same fucking thing.

SPEAKER_04: 2:08:50

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 2:08:50

But most cases will not let officers do them.

SPEAKER_04: 2:08:54

I don't know if I'd say most. I think I don't know if that it's most. I do I do agree with you. There are some that have elevated it to deadly force. Like you can use it, but only at deadly force.

SPEAKER_03: 2:09:03

Only it's a yeah, but my point is a lot of them won't even teach it in the academies anymore. Yeah, that's true. Because they say it's a deadly force movement.

SPEAKER_04: 2:09:11

Zero deaths associated with a proper application of a lateral vascular neck restraint, by the way. Thank you. But go ahead.

SPEAKER_03: 2:09:15

Yeah. Uh look at Kansas City. Uh Kansas City's National Law Enforcement Excuse. Yes, the only department's been doing it since the 70s. I don't know if they're still doing it, but they are um yeah, the zero deaths from it. But my point being is academies won't even let them teach it. And my argument is, well, if it's ever applied to you, you need to know how to counter it. So teach them how to counter it. And in doing so, you've teach them how to use it just in case shit hits the fan.

SPEAKER_04: 2:09:43

Well, we said the same thing, like when when uh these conversations when I was over at Lexipol, and they were trying to say, well, do we need to write a policy prohibiting the lateral vascular neck restrain? I was like, well, write both. Some agencies are still going to use it, some aren't. So it's a it's a sentence difference. Put the word not in it, right? But to your point, I said, you some of these policies say you can only use it if you're facing a threat of death or serious body injury. So it's elevated to deadly force. So you can use this lamp and hit somebody over the head with this lamp only when you're facing a threat of death or serious body injury. Under those similar circumstances, you could use a LVNR, which is an intermediate force option that is not substantially likely to cause death or serious body injury. And so it is literally, legally not deadly force, but by policy, they've limited it for political reasons because of the optics, right? And they'll say things like, well, if it's improperly applied, I'm like, okay, that applies to every single technique, right? Like that's not that's not a distinguishing factor, right? So yeah, the straight arm bar improperly applied is going to snap the elbow, right? Sort of thing. But anyway, I told him, uh, well, you just authorized the technique. I mean, you elevated it to deadly force, but now you have an authorized technique that they're not trained to use.

SPEAKER_03: 2:10:55

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:10:56

So now you you sort of have to train them.

SPEAKER_03: 2:10:58

And and then the the position you put an officer in, let's say he uses, let's say he's in a deadly force situation and he goes straight to that rear-naked choke, L VNR, whatever you want to call it. And I use that until he goes to sleep. But I was in a deadly force situation. So I keep holding until that person dies. Now, me as a person who is trained and understands how the LVNR works.

SPEAKER_04: 2:11:25

You would have known to let go.

SPEAKER_03: 2:11:26

I would have known to let go. Right.

SPEAKER_04: 2:11:27

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 2:11:28

Versus now I was on a deadly force situation. He was trying to kill me, so I killed him.

SPEAKER_02: 2:11:32

It's always better to have the training there. Yes. I agree with that 100%. 100%. People are going to argue that until the day's over with. They're always going to argue that. I mean, you can argue about firearms too. We know it's uh deadly, but unless we're training with it all the time, we don't know if we're going to be accurate with that with that firearm. And that's one of many tools we're going to do.

SPEAKER_03: 2:11:52

So I need a red dot. True. A red dot fiend now. Have you used one?

SPEAKER_02: 2:11:58

Oh, yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 2:11:58

Have you?

SPEAKER_02: 2:11:59

And they were saying Barry Cooper is still on uh YouTube. It's called Never Get Busted Again. And I remember I remember watching those in an interdiction officer being so mad that this dude was putting stuff out. But my dog was named Mary Jane, and none of his tactics worked uh for my dog.

SPEAKER_03: 2:12:15

Mr. Bill Fold says, I think it's a distinguishing factor. An improper armbar can't result in death. That's a fair distinction to make. That's true.

SPEAKER_04: 2:12:24

Yeah. I don't know. I hold on. I'm gonna have to test this theory. We're gonna have to do some research, me, Mr. Billfold, on whether or not we can if we can cause death from a straight arm bar. I don't know if we can get that through the uh through the board approval process, though.

SPEAKER_03: 2:12:41

Yeah, the uh I am a big fan. I wish to God that that could be I would go to an L VNR over a taser over uh pepper spray any day. Over well over a baton. I've I've been a cop 20 years. I never used a baton on a person.

SPEAKER_04: 2:12:58

I did once, and I was the instructor and the guy, little mongrel man, he was huge, but funny story. It was at a pizza hut. They said this guy at Pizza Hut's destroying the place. Come help us.

SPEAKER_05: 2:13:10

Okay.

SPEAKER_04: 2:13:11

So I happen to be like three blocks away. So do you wait for your backs? Depends on if they still got pizza in the little buffet thing. Yeah, yeah. No, I think here's how I used to think about that. There are civilians in there right now getting beat up. Yeah. And you're like, I'm not going in there, it's not safe. Like, what? Like a tool belt, you've got also right. So I'm like, you gotta go in, even if it's just to draw attention and be like become the bigger problem, right? You gotta do something. But there was like, why did you go into that disturbance without your back? I was like, well, because pizza called and they're they sounded pretty scared, right? Right. Anyway, so the guy I get there out in the parking lot, he's standing up on a parking block doing the uh Conan, and he's like, ah, uh, and I'm like, and I literally I remember getting on the radio going, yeah, I think I got him. I think I got the guy he's outside. I think this is this might be him. So he takes off running and he's got no shirt on, and he's he's clearly on drugs. And uh, so I kind of he's running and I'm in a car, so I'm like following him in a parking lot, like, you know, all over, stop, you know, whatever. Eventually, I know I'm I can't keep going because of the car, so I have to bail out. And he turns around and he squares up with me. Now he wants to fight. And I'm like, okay, let's, you know, I'm the PR24 instructor. I see a shirtless guy who just wants to box me, so out with the stick. And he's he steps into me and actually, actually, I forget this part. He actually reaches behind his back. Oh. And so I'm in no man's land, right? I'm too close to back up and draw because he's gonna beat me on the draw. So you can't already occupy with the batons. So we learn if you're close, you attack the weapon, right? Don't try to outdraw the guy who's already beaten you to the draw. So I go in and I hit him, whack, and he just goes, ugh. And I was like, oh I throw my stick, and the best part's coming up. So I do an R a silly uh uh straight arm bar. Like I get I get a good wrap on the arm and I just press him and he goes down onto a side. I put my knee right up here and actually use my knee to compress him the rest of the way to flatten him out, and it's done. He he's in a lot of pain. He's like, ah, ah, so cuff him up, no problem. My back officer shows up like seconds behind me, laughing, just laughing at me. And I turn around, and I remember his last name's Ren. He's looking at me, shaking, he's like, I got that all on video. The Vaughn, the PR24 instructor, it didn't work. No, he saw me hit the guy and the guy's like, What?

SPEAKER_03: 2:15:35

Like, what you basically you just showed a constitutional lawyer who can't understand what works in the field for a cop. You you proved that with your PR-yeah, your PR24. What works in the classroom environment didn't work out on the street.

SPEAKER_04: 2:15:51

Oh, not even a not even a not even for a second. Yeah, I well, we had one guy, uh Terrell, I don't know his last name, but I remember who he was. Giant, no-neck, bull neck dude, gang, selling crack like it was, you know, heavy on water. I guess I couldn't come up with something much faster. Um, selling crack like something you sell really fast. Like stolen radius. But uh one of our other PR24 instructors, also a pretty big guy, he hits him with that stick and he says, it hits him hard, and he goes, You hit me with that again, I'm gonna take it from you. And I'm just like, I'm not using this thing anymore. Just it doesn't work on angry people. I but you know who it does work on? The instructor who's fully padded. Yep. And they find that little gap. That's exactly right.

SPEAKER_03: 2:16:39

The little gap between the red man's and they find it. Yep. Oh, I think.

SPEAKER_04: 2:16:43

Oh, you're 100% right. Cortez, I remember it's so funny. It was so impactful. The guy, Louis Cortez. If you're out there, Louis, I remember you, uh, was the officer, and it was a training baton. And he found that slip behind the knee, whacked me with that thing, and I was like, Cut me open.

SPEAKER_03: 2:17:00

Oh yeah. I had the uh we had the stupid training batons that were it had foam over a PVC pipe. Yes. And I'm like, who designed this? Like, this is idiotic. Because of course, what ends up happening is that little piece of foam glued, yeah, the little tiny rips. And so I felt it hit the side thigh, you know, this part you're supposed to be going for. Common peronial. And he hits and it wraps around and it gets the exposed area behind the thigh on your hamstring. There's no padding there. And it just I felt it, and I was like, you know, you try to eat it because you know, you're trying to give good training as an instructor. And then afterwards, I'm like, oh, and I show somebody, it's like, did he get me good? And they're like, bro, you're bleeding. And I'm like, what? My hands just red. I was like, damn, fucking plastic got me.

SPEAKER_04: 2:17:47

Yeah. And then you'll get people who are like, we just don't know how to use it then. And they'll like do all sorts of ninja moves with it. I'm like, right, okay, yeah. Whatever however many hours you put into that cirque de soleil move you just did.

SPEAKER_03: 2:18:01

Yeah. I've never I've used it on dogs, I've used it on doors and windows.

SPEAKER_02: 2:18:06

Now you didn't put out flares with it?

SPEAKER_03: 2:18:09

No. No. So road toad comes out of the comes off the top rope. So before anybody freaks out about using it on dogs, I didn't hit dogs with it. You guys know I love dogs. Um dogs will bite the this was taught to me when I was real young, but dogs will bite the closest thing to them. And so if you stick that out there, generally that's what they're gonna bite. So I'm extend the baton, put it out there, let them bite on that thing while I got up on top of my car or what I was on my car for like 30 minutes one night because I'm not gonna call out on the radio. I'm like, can somebody come get these dogs away from me? You know, pepper spray, yeah. Just the sound.

SPEAKER_04: 2:18:44

Yeah, the sound of pepper spray would make them run sometimes.

SPEAKER_03: 2:18:46

Yeah, so eventually that is what I did. I was hoping they would just go, but at the same time, I was like, well, it's like an hour and a half left in the shift. I was like, I'll just you know, I'll stay up here until they leave. I was ready to go home. Uh, but no, I did end up having to give a little burst of spray to make them go away. But yeah, it was a whole hood pack. You know how they anybody that's been in a hood, you understand there's a hood pack that goes around. It's it's usually led by the smallest dog for whatever reason. Little chihuahua in the frown ball is like the smallest dog's the pack leader. So weird dogs being dogs. Um, Vaughn, Mr. B is looking for work, homie. There you go. You could definitely hire some research.

SPEAKER_02: 2:19:30

Going back to the baton just for a second in the academy. I was always excited to do that. I did really good with the pugil sticks in the Marines. Oh, yeah. And I'd never really messed with the baton. So we we got up to that week of training here in Texas back in 2002, and our instructor's assistant, and I know a couple of the guys that I went to the academy with or watching tonight, uh, had a heart attack. So the guy that was supposed to be in the red man suit had a heart attack. He was okay, but he was in the hospital being treated. But now it's uh we're we're gonna we're gonna go over all the scenarios and it's it's test day. So they got me, they're like, You're former marine. I was like, Yes, right. So you've done work, you you kind of know what we're doing. I was like, a little bit, but I need to I still you're like, get in the red man suit. Oh so I get in the red man suit as a as a guy in the academy, right? I'm just a rookie recruit, and I put on this red man suit, and it was a big dude. I'm a decent sized guy, but this guy that wore before me was a big guy.

SPEAKER_01: 2:20:24

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02: 2:20:25

Uh and and friggin' it was just it was a like you were saying, had a nerf thing over the baton. Right. So people uh saw me, and I was the guy that did all the physical fitness for our platoon. And this was their time to get back at me. And my right my my friggin' thigh ones would keep falling down because they were too big. As soon as it did, they'd swing that thing hard enough to where the nerve would come off and it would make contact in the perennial. And you want to talk about that whole academy class got to take it out of me that day for the runs that I used to give them. And anyway, they got they got their uh their licks back in on me on that day, man. That was a that was a rough day.

SPEAKER_03: 2:21:01

I still to this day, like 150 pounds, maybe soaking wet. Uh his name was Towns. I've never been hit. And I've I've gone against some some trained boxing guys. Like I've never been hit as hard as I've been hit by this one kid. Last name's Towns. Towns, if you're listening, he still knows. The kid rung my fucking bell. He I was in the red man suit. And he, you know, I'm trying, I'm trying to get him to do an arm bar takedown. I think that's what it was. And so he starts to work it and starts to, but he abandoned it kind of like halfway through. And I'm so I'm trying to show him like, don't give up on that. So I kind of go to stand up, and my boy just rocks me with the biggest freaking hook right in the ear, right in that ear hole, like and just not only did the concussion. Like, yeah, he earboxed me on one side, but he hit kind of behind the ear in that equilibrium and just rocked me. I saw stars, I'm on the ground, and because of the way I fell, my arm was kind of trapped. And what do we teach our recruits to do? Give me your hand, give me your hand. Boom, give me your hand. I'm like, just I'm like, our our little safe word is red. Red stop, and I'm like, red, I'm yelling it for myself because my own people don't even recognize. I am dazed. He's like, What you call me? Yeah, I am dazed, and lo and behold, it's not he graduates, he's a great officer, he's you know, he's out there, you know, thwarting evil. And uh he gets a guy that tries to fuck around and find out with him because he's not a big guy, but he's not a big guy with fists that are like abnormally large, right? And Marcus Rule. Us and he gets a guy on the ground, and I actually reviewed his use of force. Like I was one of the reviewers on it, and he's sir, please don't make me hit you. That's what he says. Please don't make me hit. Like he's pleading with this guy, and he just drops one. Like, does it like he it's not like every like he just boom hits him real quick, fast to make a point? And the dude is just like just folded him. And I was like, kids, he is one punch man. That's literally, if you know what I'm talking about, any of my anime fans out there, he's one punch man. The kid can hit, just some people can hit. Uh Ryan said, Do you guys have to get pepper sprayed as part of training? Yep. Yep.

SPEAKER_04: 2:23:38

Well, it was uh for us, it wasn't have to.

SPEAKER_03: 2:23:41

Um well, if you don't, you're that guy.

SPEAKER_04: 2:23:43

Well, yeah. The uh, but yes, the they did provide the opportunity to be pepper sprayed. And and provide the opportunity. You must take the opportunity if you want to be part of the tribe. Yes. Yes. I I I don't know how it affected the thing. I did learn from watching that, and then teaching it was it it didn't bother me.

SPEAKER_00: 2:24:05

It doesn't mess with me that bit.

SPEAKER_04: 2:24:06

Whatever, whatever, it doesn't matter, you know, and so I could demonstrate it a bunch of times. And I want to put this in perspective. There was another guy there, uh, Manny, who he got hit with it and broke out in hives instantly. We had to call it EMS. And it was like, man, it just affected him different. And so I realized like it really does. You have to take that hit to know how it's gonna affect you under the most controlled circumstances, right? He's gonna escalate to deadly force pretty quickly if somebody takes his pepper spray or threatens him with pepper spray because he knows I don't respond well to that at all. Where someone else might be like, okay, let's go, right? You gonna spray me, really? Interestingly, we put pepper spray up on such a like pedestal. It's like, this is the stuff, right? Uh my my nephew, I say my little nephew, he's he's a monster. He's just all muscle. He's a marine black belt mix map instructor. He came and lived with us for a while while he was uh going through his uh instrument black belt instructor course down at Quantico.

SPEAKER_03: 2:25:00

Oh, okay.

SPEAKER_04: 2:25:01

And so I'm like, what'd you guys do today? Like every day I'm like, what'd you guys do today? And they had to go out into the woods, and they basically would just they were just told to wear It's a fucking kumite. Yeah, they it was. And so they they had no idea how long it was gonna last, but they're out there, and eventually he's getting jumped by a bunch of ninjas in the forest, right? Yeah, and he's gotta fight them all off like they all do. Once you lose, you get pepper sprayed. Oh, okay. So I was like, You got pepper spray? He's like, Yeah, and then you go to whatever body of water you can and you have to self-decontaminate. And I go, and then what? And they're like, back to training. I was like, How many times did you get because you know how we did it? You got pepper sprayed. It was the last event of the day because you had to have the whole day to recover and we had to monitor you and make sure there wasn't any follow-on effects. I said, How many times you get pepper sprayed? He goes, uh, probably five. I'm like, you got pepper sprayed in the face five times today. He's like, Yeah, it's and that's just a Tuesday. That was just a Tuesday for these guys.

SPEAKER_03: 2:26:01

Well, we didn't get the whole day. Ours wasn't like a last thing, ours was at the beginning of the day. So early in that morning, you got, you know, we did your taser, then you did your pepper spray. You went, you took a shower, you deconned, and then you took a shower, changed out of those clothes, your PT clothes, and then you had class the rest of the day. Yeah, like you had all the rest of your shit, you had lunch, and then all that. So um, that's how it was for us. But I will say pepper spray doesn't mess with me that bad. Um, it does me. It doesn't mess with me that bad. Is that thing coming loose? I don't know. Oh, okay. That's what we're just making sure. Nah, it's yeah.

SPEAKER_00: 2:26:38

It's it's a part of that chair that makes him roll to the side.

SPEAKER_01: 2:26:43

There's nobody back carrying disturbance in the force. I'll be sorry about that. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:26:48

Um you you treat your guests like rock stars and green MMs and he's perfectly the best bathroom qualities.

SPEAKER_03: 2:26:58

Not all of us are world-renowned lawyers going around the world uh making all this court money and shit. This fucking guy. Well, what's what you nobody pays me for my opinion? I get super chats for$2.99, motherfucker over here. What you give my von Vaughn clean, fucking guy. Anyway, anyway, where was I going with this? You fucking threw me off making fun of my equipment. That's the best China can provide, okay? Hold on, I know. I'm looking for my your wrench, yes.

SPEAKER_00: 2:27:38

I had it so I learned in the police academy when I got pepper sprayed that I was allergic and I had a rash for two months afterwards.

SPEAKER_02: 2:27:48

Did you say allergic?

SPEAKER_00: 2:27:49

Virgin, what what yes, exactly?

SPEAKER_02: 2:27:51

No, the speaker's really low. I apologize.

SPEAKER_00: 2:27:54

Everywhere that pepper spray runs, it it goes south, right? Two months of a rash afterwards. Oh and uh I can't handle like capsacin, like uh jalapenos and all that anymore. Not a good thing. Uh that was a learning lesson that um we we should not repeat. I will get pepper sprayed any day of the week or uh tased any day of the week over pepper spray.

SPEAKER_02: 2:28:22

Uh with me with in my class, I got I was one of the last ones pepper sprayed. I was the sergeant of arms of the class, and I was trying to be this mic looks good. I was trying to be uh the tough guy, and they used the riot can on me, and I got a good five or six second burst from top to bottom and uh fought off my attacker, handcuffed another one, and then I had to recite some some ditties afterwards. And so I got in that I got I got in that shower in the in the in the at TCC here in Terra County, and I was in there from 3 30, I think, until almost 7 p.m. Jesus. It was so bad. Uh not gonna say I had to replace any tiles or anything in there because it was hurting so bad, but it was horrible. I mean, so I uh when I get sprayed, it's and I don't know if it's my complexion or what because I'm pretty much like paper. You don't care this. How was CS? CS wasn't that bad on me. It cleared my sinuses out, but yeah. Well, I did uh I would in the in the military.

SPEAKER_03: 2:29:16

I can smell CS too.

SPEAKER_04: 2:29:18

I went to the CS CS room and we did some PT thing, so take the mask off. And I was so used to getting pepper sprayed. So I'm just my brain was thinking, I'm I can fight through this. So I took a basically a deep breath. Oh, that shut you down real quick.

SPEAKER_02: 2:29:34

You gotta do it. It does a whole different thing inside. Very different. With that mask off, you gotta be very slow and methodical with that breath and get it very shallow. It was brutal.

SPEAKER_03: 2:29:45

Give a shout out to Harrison dropping 10 memberships. Uh, you guys know the game. Thank you, Harrison, for one. But uh Marine Bloods did not get another membership. So salute. That's a drinking game. So he's been with uh you need more. That's a little damn. He's been with us um since the beginning, pretty much.

SPEAKER_04: 2:30:07

And uh he's never gotten a and he's never gotten a membership.

SPEAKER_03: 2:30:12

Let's get rid of that water.

SPEAKER_00: 2:30:15

So we drink every time he does it.

SPEAKER_03: 2:30:17

Um and uh we're drinking Smoke Wagon tonight, boys. So just in case anybody's out there wondering, um, shout out to Smoke Wagon. Actually, Vaughn's very first glass, he got some of the um the rare triple triple something or other. Yeah, he got some of the the good magic there. Trying to get the glare off of there. Triple seven. Yeah, shout out to Smokewagon. But there you go, Vaughn. Cheers, brother. Cheers, sir. Uh Marine Bloods to you, buddy, for not getting another membership. Um, the oh, we got another comment up here. I always got sent to the gas chamber in September on my birthday, so they all used so they used all the remaining gas before the new fiscal year started. Oh man. Anybody that's ever had, because you said you did it during PT. If you're sweating and you go in and get CS, it goes in your pores and you feel it. It feels like little needles all over you. It would you have to do your mop gear? Do you have to put a mop, yeah? Yeah, mop gear, yeah. CS water.

SPEAKER_02: 2:31:27

I I I guess I got in there at a good time. They use three, that's a little little white tablets to get on there with a little burner underneath for people that don't know. And it's usually inside of like an ammo can, at least in the Marine Corps. It's probably the cheapest way to do it. Talk about CS gas, you use the cane like no, ours was CS by the by the little pill. And I'm sure Mr. Belfold. And literally it was it was very concentrated, it would hit that, and then they had a blower underneath that that moved it out into the room, so it would go up and around banning that it's uh drugs, sir.

SPEAKER_00: 2:31:57

Like if you're taking pills, that's like hallucinogens. Yeah. They told us it was CS gas.

SPEAKER_02: 2:32:03

No, it was it was definitely CS. I I'd been there for a few opportunities after to watch when I got out to come back in and look at it.

SPEAKER_03: 2:32:10

But our SWAT team, they have this fogger. It looks like a leaf blower, is kind of what if I were to say, and it probably heats up one on the inside. And when they use that thing, that is the most concentrated thing of smoke I've ever seen in my life. It is cheating. That is not how real CS works. So when they use that thing and you're out in like an open field, it just clings to you. But I will say, anytime I've been in a contained area, whether it's pepper spray or CS, something psychological happens differently. Like my abil, my ability to breathe getting pepper sprayed out on a parking lot, fine. My ability to breathe, getting pepper sprayed in a doorway, I'm out of control. Like I panic. I'm like, oh I got I can't breathe. I can't breathe. Yeah. Horrible.

SPEAKER_02: 2:33:02

Shameless plug. What about the uh impact? Impact's breathing. I haven't used it yet. We still have yet to do that. Yes, that's that's some good stuff. A little shameless plug there. Uh that's good stuff, man.

SPEAKER_03: 2:33:14

Reminder to alcohol companies. This channel is now taking your request to sponsor them. We're not. We're only taking certain ones. Yeah. Smoke wagon. That's my favorite. That's not a that's not a uh to get them as a sponsor. That is literally what we've been I've had on the show.

SPEAKER_02: 2:33:31

Just to give your guest a nice little swallower.

SPEAKER_03: 2:33:34

Yeah, right. Absolutely. But um where else are we at? What else have we got to talk about? We've we've hit on the Minnesota stuff. Looking over at the comments. Uh Mr. Billfold said they used dozens of them on banning. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Um, but Vaughn, what have you got going on, sir, right now? Like, what is something for you that you are seeing that you think law enforcement needs to focus on for 2026?

SPEAKER_04: 2:34:06

Oh well, in my in my consulting capacity, we we keep running up against our we're battling for the we're battling for honest accountability. And you guys have heard me talk about honest accountability, which is two things. Whatever standards you hold officers to, they have to be clear enough that officers can predict the lawfulness of their own behavior. So we're gonna write policies and training standards and laws. They've got to be clear enough that officers aren't guessing like I used force, now I got to wait till somebody after the fact tells me if I was okay or not. All right. So we want to make sure we got standards clear enough. So we're we're seeing that. We we will do, we'll address that with like policy, policy development and consulting at that lynch. The second part, though, is more prevalent and more problematic is we've got evaluations of police that are beyond human performance capabilities. So we expect things from cops that no human could do. And we have people out there who are coming to these cases, they're academics, they're PhDs, they're lawyers, and they are testifying against cops. And we're constantly like, well, no human can do what it is you're asking this cop to do. And they know better, they should know better. And so we're having to fight that because they're trying to throw people, not just cops, civilians and police, in prison for things that no human could do. And they're getting up there and they're hiding behind their credentials. Well, I'm a PhD, and and it's like, well, fine, you still have to include the reality of human performance. And so that is probably our biggest battle is to get people, like, for example, we talked tonight, I think it was a great conversation about time to stop. You know, why did he fire those additional rounds? And the question, there are so many things that go into answering that question from a human factor standpoint, right? That the first question is, well, could any it could any human have stopped faster than that and not fired those shots under those circumstances? And you don't know. Like there's no universal response time or reaction time for humans. The question has to be is you might say he should have stopped immediately. And I'm gonna say, I don't, all I can tell you is that if you think he didn't stop immediately because he chose to fire those at two should those two additional shots, there are human performance considerations that might explain those shots beyond intent. Right. And so you have to consider them. We at Force Science and those we train, we constantly think there's no universal response time. If I tell you we did a study, and in that study, we had an average stop time of 0.35 seconds, you know, in that particular study. That does not mean you get to then take 0.35 seconds and overlay it on an individual.

SPEAKER_01: 2:36:45

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:36:46

But what it does mean is that if your theory is he should have stopped immediately, well, most humans can't stop immediately. I'll venture to say none can. The ones who do stop, like you were talking about on your thing, it's because they decided to stop after one shot.

SPEAKER_03: 2:37:03

Right.

SPEAKER_04: 2:37:04

And so it looks like they stopped immediately. But we do these studies with hundreds of people, and we've done them with virtual simulators thousands of times now, and humans just can't stop instantly. That's one example. The other thing is like, why didn't he do this? Why didn't he do that? As though in that split second, he could engage in rational decision making. And we got to go, well, we don't expect humans to be engaged in rational decision making in the middle of a critical instant, like as a matter of uh of just the reality of human performance when they're facing things that are a threat to them. So those are the things we're battling. Um and the each of those issues is imperfect, and so the science is constantly one of the big ones we're fighting right now, is kind of silly. We're not really fighting it, but um when's the best time to interview somebody? Like whether sleep helps with memory consolidation or not? Are you gonna get a better answer? And we got people out there go, well, we don't let robbery suspects sleep before you interview them. I'm like, and and there's no other population. We heard this one silly one. It's like, no other population do we let sleep before we interview them, other than cops. And that's not fair. We shouldn't do that. And I'm like, well, hold on a second. That's one that's not true. I mean, don't we've had training where we let victims of sexual assault sleep, get a couple of sleep cycles before we go back and interview them. For the same reason, the expectation is that over time, certain parts of memory might be improved. Peripheral details might fall off, but the gist and the meaning might improve. Uh other times it's really based on the arousal state of the individual. The the point being, it doesn't really matter deep dive into sleep stuff, is that smart people are debating these things, and we're trying to provide police the best guidance we could give them based on the research right now.

SPEAKER_03: 2:38:51

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:38:51

Nobody can say this guy on this night, if he would have slept 48 hours, would have given you a better, more complete statement versus if he would have given it to you immediately. The question becomes is we want to give you guidelines on when to interview people. And that guideline is going to be based on their arousal state in the moment. It's going to be based on their willingness, it's going to be based on their whether they're exhausted for because we know sometimes we get to the interview after critical ins hours after the event, and they're literally physically exhausted. Is that the time you want to interview them? So a lot of questions go into it. Um, and so forced science and other police agencies try to give guidelines on what best to do. But the takeaway is there isn't a universal template that's going to overlay all of them and guarantee you're going to get a broader, a broader uh what I call bucket of information or details from memory. That's not our issue. The issue with the science is to sit and wait and see and kind of give guidance where there isn't a universal answer. My problem, what we're dealing with is people who are, they want to weaponize the ambiguity of science. So they'll say, we want that officer in there immediately so we can interrogate them, so we can get the inconsistencies between them and the video cameras and call them liars. We're not going to treat them any different than a robbery suspect. I'm like, well, then you're not really trying to mine for the most accurate information then. You're trying to play a gotcha game with people that, you know, like, well, we don't do that with robbery suspects. Do you not see the difference between people who have an incentive to lie and the ones that have an incentive to tell the truth?

SPEAKER_05: 2:40:23

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:40:23

And yes, police who are engaged in excessive use of force might have an incentive to lie. But when we're talking about standard operating procedures and responses, if you're not giving your police the benefit of the doubt and a presumption of regularity, you're not, you've got a bad hiring process. You got bigger systemic problems. Yeah. Right. Because by the time a cop makes it to the street, you have done ideally, and I think I've talked to your audience about this before, we do give police the benefit of the doubt and a presumption of regularity. If your community is recruiting, hiring, training, screening, giving psyche vows, your your chief is interviewing you, your hiring board's interviewing, your community members are interviewing them, right? Then you're supervising them, training them, you're all of these things going on. By the time they're out on the street, as a society, we had better be able to give them the benefit of the doubt.

SPEAKER_01: 2:41:14

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:41:14

And it's theirs to lose. It's a presumption of regularity that's theirs to lose. But uh we got people coming in, and I was like, we need to treat your police officers just like we do a robbery suspect after a critical incident. I was like, well, you can do that if that if you're hiring robbery suspects, you know, for gosh, I guess. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 2:41:35

But I like that. You know what we haven't done on this? I pulled him up just in case, but we gotta get Von to do some body cam breakdown. At least one.

SPEAKER_04: 2:41:48

At least one. With my caveat.

SPEAKER_03: 2:41:51

We just one.

SPEAKER_04: 2:41:52

We don't give expert opinions based on a single video, but we'll talk about tactics and what cops know.

SPEAKER_03: 2:41:56

Right. Yeah, let's see. Let's let's find uh what's what's the shortest one?

SPEAKER_04: 2:41:59

These guys gonna stick with us this late? Who we got left with this?

SPEAKER_03: 2:42:02

Oh, we got plenty. Quite a bit, yeah. Thousands. Thousands. Okay, this one's not even two minutes long. Let's let's do one. We just got we got one queued up, so let's uh share screen. I believe that's the right one.

SPEAKER_04: 2:42:20

All right. Am I doing the pro-police or anti-police?

SPEAKER_03: 2:42:24

Uh it's a law school. It's a bad cop. I can't remember what we cut. We don't know. We haven't seen the video. This is the law school.

SPEAKER_04: 2:42:31

You're the prosecutor, you're the defense. Go.

SPEAKER_03: 2:42:33

Yeah, here's the caveat. Anybody that is not familiar with what we do on these is we do not know what this video is. We've never seen it. Uh, we pretend that we are the officers in the scenario, and we don't watch the whole thing and try to Monday morning quarterback. We we try to talk tactics and how we would respond as police who have all been trained from different Places around the nation. So it kind of gives you an insight that we've all been trained differently for sure, but we all kind of can get to the same end goal in our own ways. And it's kind of the unique part about law enforcement. I think that's what we love about law enforcement is we can get to that same angle. Uh and then when a cop really screws the pooch, is when we all three on the panel were like, I do this next, and then the cop goes off the rails, and you'll you'll see.

SPEAKER_04: 2:43:21

So when when I look at these for court cases, one of the things I say is cops are trained to consider the following possibilities. So we're not we're not mind reading. So when we see something on there, we're like, okay, I don't know what's about to happen next, but cops are trained to consider the following possibilities, and we all interpret things as that which is most dangerous to us in terms of our our preparation.

SPEAKER_03: 2:43:41

Yeah. All right. Let's let's see what we got here. Um, shout out to Police Activity YouTube channel. This is where we got this. Uh, all the videos that I did prep just in case because I didn't know what we were going to talk about tonight. And uh if it got dull, I was gonna pull up a bunch of videos, but we've been talking for almost three hours. So uh I figure we get one video in and then we'll call it good for tonight. So here we go. Uh play. Okay, I have seen this one. I actually made a short on this, so uh I recognized it right away. So I will recuse myself. I'm being the honest guy. I've seen this video, I know what happens. So I'll let you guys go.

SPEAKER_08: 2:44:28

Copy. We're still on the ramp for Westbound 94 from 52. The vehicle is flowing, they're bailing. They're gonna be bailing, bailing.

SPEAKER_03: 2:44:37

Okay. We don't know what's happening. I I mean, I know what happened, so I'm not gonna give it away, but you two don't know what's happening. Um, but basically, our officers are going after that front leading car there, and you can hear them calling it on the radio. So from here, you two, what's your next play here?

SPEAKER_02: 2:44:58

Next play here is I mean, that car in front of the the marked unit. Is that is that uh a civilian or is that and I don't know yet on this. I was gonna say you tell me but they they would know, hopefully, um, I'm going to put myself in between them and the subjects because it's our job to protect them.

SPEAKER_04: 2:45:16

Okay. Vaughn. Yeah, the doors come up. So this is I don't like that car. If I'm in the guy in this car, I don't like I'm I'm okay with that car up there. Here's what I'm thinking might happen. Either they're coming out to assault me right now. Um, I'm looking to see if that car's still rolling or not. Even so, I want to I would likely stop and start backing up and creating space because if this is gonna be an assault, the tension's gonna be, however, that it's gonna be a foot chase. So it's if it's a foot chase, your instinct is to get as close as possible so you can get out and catch them. You're like wanna catch them. The problem is I call it the Omaha police where you don't want to get shot with your seatbelt on. So these doors come open and you're waiting to see if they're gonna run or if they're what, and you actually close the distance because you're thinking it's gonna be a foot chase, and I want a chance to catch them, and they end up opening fire on you, and you end up dying with your seatbelt on. So after I've had that experience and was exposed to that experience in Omaha, I was like, when I see this, you need to create space if you can and prioritize the ambush, not the pursuit. But I'm gonna tell you instinctively, you're you're getting ready, you're getting your seatbelt off, you're getting ready to jam it in park, and you're getting ready to get sucked into a foot chase. Okay.

SPEAKER_01: 2:46:29

Go, go, go, go, go.

SPEAKER_04: 2:46:31

See?

SPEAKER_01: 2:46:32

Get the driver, get the driver, get the driver.

SPEAKER_03: 2:46:34

Okay. So you got one of them's communicating. Get the driver, get the driver, get the driver. So that's probably the passenger officer. So they're they're riding two men in this unit, and one starts communicating. Get the driver, get the driver, get the driver. I love that. I don't want to talk on the on this call because I already know what happens, but as far as communication goes, in a highly dynamic situation, for somebody to have the wherewithal just to keep everybody focused on the same target, that's a good, that's a good trait. That's a good trait to have. So what do you got, Benny?

SPEAKER_02: 2:47:06

Same thing. I mean, right now it's the driver. I don't know what brought us here to begin with.

SPEAKER_03: 2:47:10

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02: 2:47:11

Uh, but the usually the the best bet is to to concentrate on the driver. Obviously, visually, we're watching the passenger to make sure safety-wise, we're good. But we're going after that driver. Unless we have a more totality in there, maybe the passenger was involved and they they committed both of them committed a crime. And then we may have two absolute targets that we need to stop uh to figure out and detain, figure out what's going on. But right now it's on the on the driver. But we have to look at the passenger to make sure he's not armed trying to protect his partner, the driver. Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:47:42

Yeah, this falls into there's a series of only bad choices. And I love this because cops, people who evaluate cops, forget sometimes we have to make a choice among bad options. There are no good options, right? Right. And so I like the communication. I've been in similar situations where you got the pastor. I might have been the pastor, and you look at the pastor and you go, stay there. Right. Yeah. Like stay there. You can turn, hope it worked, right? And sometimes it does, and you're surprised. Like, wow, they stayed. He stayed. Yeah, and then you make fun of them. Not me. I'm like, thank you very much for your cooperation. No, and then, but yeah, this is pretty realistic. Like I said, the instinct is to follow the guy. Um everything cops do requires them to assume risk. So you think, well, this is dumb. This isn't safe for the officer to follow this guy who's an unknown threat right now and potentially armed. And you go, yeah, policing's dangerous. Cops assume risk on behalf of the community at all times. Right now, letting this guy run into the community, I don't know what they had on him. What was in nation for the stop, whether he was a good one? Yeah, we don't have that.

SPEAKER_01: 2:48:39

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:48:39

Yeah. So so that makes it tougher to analyze it because you're going to assume more risk if you if the guy's fleeing from a kidnapping, if the guy's fleeing from something that's armed, then it's a traffic violation and and you don't know what he's got.

SPEAKER_03: 2:48:51

Stole an ice cream cone from McDonald's.

SPEAKER_02: 2:48:54

And and to go back on that, if it's if it's just a traffic stop and they're fleeing to flee, I'm staying with car. Because look at the ramp. What's the speed limit on the ramp? We are now responsible for everything that comes up behind that car. So if it's a class C violation or a minor violation, what Banning's gonna do is sit with that car. I'm gonna get on the radio, especially if I'm a single man unit. This is what's going on, yada, yada, yada. Because if it's a minor violation, I'm not going to expose that. They are now bailing because of me. Yeah. And now I'm leaving that road hazard because of me, so to speak. Yes, it's because of them for the main, you know, the actual traffic deal. But if it's just traffic, yeah, let them go and make sure you get the car off the roadway.

SPEAKER_03: 2:49:31

And I'm gonna be honest, I don't think there's a world in me that would allow the driver to run on a fatal car. On a fatal funnel that he can't escape from. I'm going after him. Well, sure.

SPEAKER_00: 2:49:43

Well, we we I think once he got past that ledge where he couldn't jump up over the wall, it's like, okay, now we're just gonna follow him and let him, you know, run out of energy.

SPEAKER_04: 2:49:55

Yeah, yeah. I'm with you on that. Yeah, my my sense is this comes up too in court a lot, is when somebody takes off and they resist at a level that's disproportionate to the underlying offense, it is reasonable for officers to believe there's something more going on than the underlying offense. And so you're thinking, okay, my job is crime prevention, crime detection, law enforcement. It's not just the traffic at this point. It's like this is reasonable, suspicion the guy's engaged in a crime beyond the traffic. Now you've got interference with so you're not wrong for staying, especially if you're by yourself and you're like, nah, I'm not running into this fatal with multiple people. You get to take have the discretion to assume the risk or not. I don't know what the nature of the call would dictate that, but I'm with you. I'm like, I would, I, I would like to be banning, but I don't I don't ever imagine a time where I would have stayed with the car.

SPEAKER_03: 2:50:42

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:50:43

But I did have, you know, I do have a case where I'm doing it, and the guy, the passenger starts shooting at me. And then uh once they bailed, passenger bails, and I'm like, yeah, I'm sticking with the driver. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 2:50:55

You know, it's like, but yeah, I would uh I I couldn't. There's no way. I couldn't in this particular one where I'm like, he's got nowhere to go. Like, there's no way I could not chase after this guy.

SPEAKER_04: 2:51:08

I think it's my curiosity. I'm like, what are you running for? Yeah, it's gotta be pretty important. Like you're not running for the traffic violation. All right, let's keep going.

SPEAKER_01: 2:51:16

Jack in the driver. Yeah, the driver. Go, go, go. Shot.

SPEAKER_03: 2:51:23

Okay. So officer yells out, shot. I think I think he was trying to yell gun at the same time the shot rang out. So now our driver has just turned and fired around. Um so what are you saying now, Banning?

SPEAKER_02: 2:51:45

Try to unalive two officers in there. Yeah.

SPEAKER_03: 2:51:47

Oh, yeah. I mean, absolutely.

SPEAKER_02: 2:51:49

Truly a fatal funnel, and we've got to end that threat. And he's already got a weapon aimed towards the threat.

SPEAKER_03: 2:51:55

Now, I don't know if he picked it up or not, but we're already throwing rounds downrange. I was wondering if that was from inside out. Yeah, runner only throws one round. Yeah, he he turned and fired a shot and then kept going. These guys were fucking ready because they followed them for having their gun out.

SPEAKER_00: 2:52:16

Like, that's amazing.

SPEAKER_03: 2:52:18

They fired so fast.

SPEAKER_04: 2:52:21

So depending on like when you're back working narcotics days, gangs and narcotics, you got your gun out before that car's even stopped, before your cars even stopped in this little pursuit, just precisely because of this. There were so many shots fired. I we had a hate, I mean, everything you pull up, we're gonna be like, I had a story like this once, but you know what just dawned on me in in our real case where this occurred, very similar, the uh it was the passenger. Now we got we got a multitask, we got to split attention because because you don't know if this one's armed, the other one's armed, you're now in an L-shaped, you know, yeah position, tactical disadvantage, and you can't get sucked in. And it takes a lot of discipline. And I remember I was with a rookie having to say, you know, watch the passenger, watch the passenger, watch the passenger while I'm focused on the guy with the gun who's coming up and over. And so yeah, it's only bad choices here. Right. You can't just let the guy go at this point, too. So yeah, getting some rounds on him while you got a good backstop, but eventually you might have officers throwing this thing and drive and closing dis oh well, here we go.

SPEAKER_03: 2:53:28

I mean, because look look at what we you know, we had to pass the passenger that got out. So as the passenger officer, God, how hard is that to stay focused on the driver knowing you're passing a potential threat. So I'm gonna play this till its conclusion and then we'll talk.

SPEAKER_07: 2:54:37

He's got a gun still, he's got a gun. Stay off the fucking radio. Jesus.

SPEAKER_02: 2:54:49

When you're doing work, do work.

SPEAKER_03: 2:54:51

Get so angry at you cops. Stay off the radio. You're you're literally in a gunfight, and you're like, get this information out there. No. Handle your gunfight and then get the information out there. Christ.

SPEAKER_04: 2:55:09

I shared some one of the other shows where the guy calls in in the middle of the fight, he's been pepper's brain. While he's literally wrestling with the guy, like starting as he's been pepper's brain. I had to tell him afterward. I was the lawyer on that one. I was like, if you think you have to do that, you don't have to do that. Yeah, you can you can actually win the fight first and then call in for medical or whatever. But in we talked about the psychological draw for this, and we talked about it last time. We'll just repeat it quickly is that you feel alone out there. You want to know you're not alone.

SPEAKER_05: 2:55:39

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 2:55:39

Right. And so you're on that radio confirming like you're not alone, you want to get help, get the cavalry. But you're right. It's like, do work, do work. And and I had a rookie one time with me in the fight, and I was fighting with the guy at the front of the car, and he's calling for backs, and and uh I was like, it wasn't a big fight, it was a wrestling, wrestle the guy in the handcuffs, you know, it wasn't an MMA fight or anything. And uh I was laughing, you know. I'm in the fight with this guy, you know, bobbing and weaving, looking over, and you know, blind blind wrestling is what I was doing because it was close. And afterwards, like I go to my rookie and I'm like, hey, great job calling calling it in. I said, but you know, just keep in mind you you are the back. Yeah. And he was like, uh, but it it it's a sort of that that part I get. Like it's in it's kind of instinctual to call for help. But here's something I will notice. We want to be close. We want to be close. Here's a guy who's been shot, he's on the ground, he still has the gun, and that officer is closing in, closing in, closing. Where if we were to do a tactical after action review, yeah, you get torn apart. Like, hey, how do you drop in? Commit you got an unsecured person back here. Stay in a position to cover, give commands. Yeah. And if you need to move your stuff up, I don't know why you wouldn't at that point, because he's actually a lot closer than he looks on video. That's the other thing. Yeah, he looks like he's pretty far away, but video distorts that. Yeah, but you would have to ask that in the tactical after action review. Like, why are you getting closer? Why are you magnetizing to this? And we want to get close every time you see that, and we've all felt it. And you see the guys that get close, they back up, they get close and they back up, and you're like, Yeah, it's just they're overcoming that instinct, and you you gotta have a super that go, stop, stop, stop, cover, cover, cover, and you're like, Oh, okay. Right. Oh, and it kind of breaks that. Oh, yeah, I guess. And you know this, because of that psychological pull, if you're the supervisor, you can anticipate at the end of the chase when the guy stops, and that if you're if you're positioned for a high-risk car stop, you're still gonna have your pursuit officers potentially wanting to bail out of the car and get up and close. Right. So as a supervisor, you're like, you kind of notice things are slowing, you're about to get a present, you get on and say, Everybody holds it.

SPEAKER_03: 2:57:53

Felony car stop. Felony car stop.

SPEAKER_04: 2:57:55

And it triggers them, like, oh yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm not gonna sprint. Having said that, we we get in a car chase with a guy, and we got the car stopped. It's a robbery, potential shotgun involved or weapon involved. And uh my partner's there, Pat, you know who you are. And uh and uh he's hold, hold, hold, and the passenger door opens up, guy gets out and takes off running. Well, we got an insecure vehicle with occupants, potential weapons. We probably ought not be chasing past that insecure door. We set these up in training scenarios. Sure enough, there goes Pat, flies. And I'm like, Up, what do you do as the back officer? Up here we go. You're going in. I guess I gotta go in too, right? So yeah, you follow him, and sure enough, there was a guy laying down on the floorboard with the shotgun that we had sprinted. And we had an additional unit there, but I don't care. Yeah, like the the right thing would have been to kind of with what would have been holdback, but I'm just pointing that out as like the instinct.

SPEAKER_03: 2:58:57

So I'm gonna read um what the description is here. It said on December 21st, 2025, at approximately 3 p.m., General Motors was electronically tracking a stolen Buleck. Uh, notified police the vehicle was in St. Paul. Officers located the vehicle and began following. Okay, so it was a stolen vehicle. Uh this was on start. Yeah. Vaughn pulled a handgun out from his waistband, pointed at officers. Well, the officers fired from their service weapons, striking him in the leg. Okay, so uh he was medically clear. Okay, so he he took the rounds, but he was medically cleared. The female passenger was located and taken to custody a short time later. No other injuries. The best outcome you could hope for. Uh considering there was a lot of rounds that were thrown down uh that little hallway there. Uh I'm gonna stop sharing this. We'll go to our big view here. So in that stolen vehicle, I get it. Following, I think they made the right move going up over the curb uh to put themselves between that and the vehicle that was behind them uh or in between them. So I like that move. I would have chased them. I'm trying to think of another way. I'm like, no, I would have. I would have went after him.

SPEAKER_02: 3:00:23

Well, you have stolen car. Stolen car, yeah. Knowing that it's a stolen car, yeah. It changes the car.

SPEAKER_03: 3:00:27

Yeah, so now that we know that, yeah, I definitely would have chased after him. And I have no issues with them firing.

SPEAKER_04: 3:00:34

So let's go to the officer created Jeopardy. Like, the guy, you're in a position to cover. You leave your cover, you know the guy's armed, you leave your cover and you start closing gaps, closing distance, and he turns and shoots you. The argument is no reasonable officer would have left cover and closed distance with a guy who was armed with a handgun. This is the argument that the officer created Jeopardy, folks. You provided him the opportunity by standing in front of his car. By standing in front of his gun. I'm making the analogy. Okay.

SPEAKER_03: 3:01:06

Because a gun is just a very small version of a 2000 20,000-pound weapon. The car could be.

SPEAKER_04: 3:01:12

So the okay. I'm trying to make the argument sound ridiculous, right? And and the idea being, this is what the this is what these experts will claim is that wait a minute, you had he might have had intent, ability, and means, but he didn't have the opportunity to shoot you until you recklessly left cover and closed the distance with him and provoked him to shoot you. Therefore, he's not legally responsible for the shooting. That's their theory of officer created jeopardy. You see the problem with that.

SPEAKER_01: 3:01:40

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 3:01:41

Like we can sit here and say all day that tactically there's some there's some things to discuss.

SPEAKER_03: 3:01:46

Yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 3:01:47

But he might come back, the officer might come back, and we consider what were the benefits of closing the distance? Because all tactics are discretionary and they're based on risk benefits and trade-offs. What was the benefit of him closing the distance?

SPEAKER_00: 3:01:58

Well, I I'll argue that for you in so eliminating that threat for the other people involved. So there's another officer, you know, there's another vulnerable car behind you. And so if he's just firing rounds at you, the sooner that we get that gun off of him, the sooner that he can't do that. So you're putting yourself in between them and those other people.

SPEAKER_04: 3:02:22

Yeah, couldn't you do that with accurate gunfire at distance?

SPEAKER_00: 3:02:25

You could, but you don't know what those people are doing behind you because you don't have eyes out of the back of your head.

SPEAKER_04: 3:02:31

So the benefit would be you create distance from the people behind you. And I'm I mean there are benefits. So we would list them, right? There are benefits. More accurate gunfire. If you're trying to do verbal de escalation, you're stepping in a place where you can actually hear the voice pitch, pace pitch modulation. You know, he gets to see and hear all that. You can increase your chances of verbal persuasion by closing the distance and engaging in all of your communication tools. Maybe. Accurate gunfire, maybe changing angles, right? From where you were um, like you might be saying, drawing fire away from other people if you choose to re-engage. Okay, those are benefits. What are the risks? Right. And so those are the kind of that's what goes into tactics. My problem with officer created jeopardy theorists is they ignore all the benefits and they they merely point to the fact that what you did was what they say productively counterproductive. And you go, well, what is that's not even a legal standard. Right. But they'll say that in front of juries and they'll make jurors believe that if you engage in something that a law professor expert believes was productive, was predictably counterproductive, that you should be held criminally liable because you provoked it. Because a reasonable officer would never have done that sort of thing.

SPEAKER_03: 3:03:47

Instead of holding the person accountable for the actions that caused our response.

SPEAKER_04: 3:03:52

How about instead of recognizing that the cops had a series of bad choices, right? Bad options. Now, I think in this case, nobody's, I mean, I would hate to say nobody would argue officer created jeopardy, but I do not believe that anymore. I've heard them on the stand in cases where we're like this this guy is actively trying to stab another cop, and you guys are arguing he wouldn't have been trying to stab the other cop if you guys wouldn't have tried to enforce the law in the first place. Like we've seen this level of argument taken from the stairs. So it's it's I'm I no longer lack creativity in my anticipation of the arguments they're gonna make, but this is probably an example of one they might argue.

SPEAKER_03: 3:04:33

I'm not gonna lie, because I seen the video before you guys did, but my initial reaction was I would have floored it. I would have floored it. I would have run him over when the shot was fired. When the shot was fired. I would have been like, because I'm in the vehicle already.

SPEAKER_04: 3:04:49

That's military too. So we talked about this the other day. Um you have to train out of people their impulse not to run and and and assault through the ambush, right? You got familiar with the idea of assaulting through the ambush. It is counterintuitive, it's against everything your body wants to do. No bad things are coming from that direction. Yeah, get after it now. Overwhelm it with firepower and and initiative and violence of action. You got to assault through the ambush. So you're describing like I'd gun it. Yeah. That's you saying you would have assaulted right through that ambush. Yes. Um, that's tough, right? To train people to do that. I think once they get it and they see it successful a few times, it can become intuitive and it should become responsive. Right. But then you gotta explain why you ran over a guy who was not pointing a gun at you at the time.

SPEAKER_03: 3:05:36

Right. And and and then what's the argument gonna be already? We shot him in the back.

SPEAKER_04: 3:05:41

Yeah, so the this is this is the thing.

SPEAKER_03: 3:05:43

That's gonna be the next argument.

SPEAKER_04: 3:05:44

Yeah, and this is the thing is these are these are predictable arguments. The guy has already shot at you once. There are experts out there who will say at the time you ran him over, at the time you shot him, he was not pointing the gun at you. And I'm not joking. He has already fired a shot, but at the time you shot him, he was not pointing the gun at you. Therefore, it's unreasonable. And we're getting called as experts on this. Like, absolutely not. The speed, this is where human performance, the speed with which that guy can turn and fire again is so fast you cannot respond fast enough to stop it if you wait for that to be your start signal. Once he's legally, once he is engaged in conduct that just I'm gonna be really careful. Once he's engaged in conduct that is sufficient for you to reasonably believe he poses a threat of death or suspicious injury, you don't have to wait for him to do it twice.

SPEAKER_02: 3:06:34

Well, just like that call with the I don't know if it was on cops or maybe it was one that we covered, but he uses his crown vic to go and hit that guy with the rifle, launches him up. Oh, yeah, yeah. Because he was already taking rounds at people, he was shooting at traffic going by, and they knew they had a threat, and he basically came back behind him and just took him out.

SPEAKER_03: 3:06:53

Yeah. Um Ryan asked, Eric, could you see a future where they ping a car, have drones follow these guys to keep distance for police? Yes. Um, so they have things called micro drones that they're working on right now. I know SkyDio is doing um a version of this, uh, partnered with Axon, where you could possibly have drones launched from an officer's body. Um that is a little micro drone that will go out. Um, and also ones that are launched from vehicles, uh, from the patrol vehicle that would go out, um magnetize to the vehicle or orbit or go up real high and try to follow for 20 minutes or whatever the battery life is. Um, so yes, those things are coming. They're not here yet, but the technology this is my favorite part. The technology is capable. It's not, it just gotta get it made. So that's the cool part.

SPEAKER_04: 3:07:46

Yeah, and I would add that and that might be a great tool. Understanding again, there's trade-offs because officers are supposed to preserve evidence, identify suspects, get warned, you know, all the things. You can potentially lose that if it's a drone merely doing surveillance versus taking enforcement action and freezing the scene. Understanding there's risk, benefits, and trade-offs to both approaches. So when we talk about all the legitimate traditional law and order interests that are balanced against, like okay, so yeah, you follow the guy, he pulls into a thing and he goes into a house and he starts washing his hands and destroying evidence and coming up with alibis. Those are all things that are gonna happen. Those are the risks. What's the benefit of the drone? And if your idea is we get to choose the time and place of the next engagement, we can I try to identify the guy through investigative measures. All those things are true, just understanding that there's there's gonna be trade-offs.

SPEAKER_03: 3:08:42

Yeah. Um, two cops when donut has Vaughn did cases where he charged LEOs as a U.S. assistant attorney?

SPEAKER_04: 3:08:51

No, my I wasn't in a I wasn't in that division. I was uh working homicides and sexual assault cases as a special assistant U.S.

SPEAKER_02: 3:09:01

attorney. And you got a question up there on Instagram as well. That's we know what that is.

SPEAKER_03: 3:09:05

Um bless said, don't they already have the GPS one that you can shoot off the front of the squad cars and track them? Yes, that's called uh Star Chase. So you got Star Chase, that one shoots the little goo GPS thing out there. Um, I think typically that's only a one-shotter.

SPEAKER_02: 3:09:26

They're two shots. Is it two shots? Two shots, and they've got uh, I believe two successful ones, one this year, one last year, uh at a car going by at over 70 miles an hour. Oh, nice. They were able to land that, and that was down in southwest Texas.

SPEAKER_03: 3:09:40

We are actively trying to get Star Chase on our tech and order show with DTV. So uh that is something we want to try to get out there. Um Mr. Billboard said, I agree with Vaughn. The gram factors allow the reasonableness of that action. Barnes will allow the totality of the circumstances to factor in as well, but gram governs the analysis. I like it. Um, we do already have a magnetic GPS tracker that can be shot and attached to fleeing vehicles. Uh drones can follow that. Yeah, that's the part that you guys are gonna find really interesting with the drones is they've already got drones that can keep up with F1 cars, Formula One cars. They go 200 and some odd miles an hour. Um, now obviously battery life is going to be a problem. Well, oftentimes altitude weather, yeah, yeah, yeah. All those things weigh in, but with the way that these drones are going, and I I'm not talking from theory. I've actually seen the prototypes for these things because I went out to Axon and SkyDio and saw some of the stuff they got going on. Um it's just a matter of time. Just give it time. Once they get these things perfected, they're gonna get them out there, but they're going to be able to do a bunch of things. One of my favorite things is the pre-analysis on a traffic stop. You pull over a car for a normal traffic stop, and the drone automatically deploys, goes around, analyzes so you can and and lands on the car before you ever have to go up and make contact. Now, you're gonna have to break a lot of bad habits cops have uh when it comes to jumping out of the car as soon as they pull someone over and being patient and allowing a drone to analyze for them, but that is something that that can do. And if the drone notices any odd behaviors that are trigger mechanisms, or you, as the officer, notice anything in the camera, you can have the drone sit there and analyze and hold and sit in front of the vehicle at a hover position and look into the driver's window. It's the one spot that they just can't hide their actions. Uh, and and you give it's going to give the officer a big advantage and and keep things safer. So if they see something that's hinky, they don't even have to approach. And now we can start getting backup and say, Hey, I need somebody.

SPEAKER_04: 3:12:02

And if the guy too shut down the electronics at some point, uh, I don't know.

SPEAKER_00: 3:12:07

So they uh I actually had a conversation with Rick Smith on that one, and they were actually working on going on to the interstate there in Phoenix, where if you were not allowed, like if there was something, say we as cops said that vehicle needed to be pulled over that could just pop up out of the highway and um you know, known as something that would taser and shut down a vehicle, but then they ran into some other issues and so they backed off of that idea. But they actually have worked on and are in the works on a device that would just shut off the the vehicle, but now electric vehicles are out there, and so that's added a whole new uh avenue.

SPEAKER_03: 3:12:51

I I would think electric vehicles would be easier to stop than well.

SPEAKER_00: 3:12:55

So the the safety of shutting, you know, it's almost like sending an EMP to that vehicle, and so um, you know, how does it come to a good stop? Is is where they're at at this point. They can already shut them down, they just have to be safe in doing it for the the rest of the public.

SPEAKER_04: 3:13:17

If you have circumstances that are safe enough to do a pit it, you can probably shut it down a little bit.

SPEAKER_03: 3:13:22

I mean, I would much rather shut a vehicle down than ever pit. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Um yeah, it's pretty cool. The technology is fair. I don't like it.

SPEAKER_04: 3:13:31

I came after my time. I don't I've never pitted a car. I don't even think I was ever trained to pitch.

SPEAKER_03: 3:13:35

I was like the whole time, I'm like, oh my god, oh my god. Like you just there's some some cops that love that rush. I'm not that guy. I'm like, this is fucking sketchy.

SPEAKER_04: 3:13:45

I've I've I've pitted cars unintentionally when they when they crashed into the went flying.

SPEAKER_03: 3:13:51

Yeah, no thanks.

SPEAKER_04: 3:13:52

You said something funny about overcoming your instincts. So when I when I was uh working a street full time and then I left for the military and I'd come back because I I've told people like I worked the street as a civilian cop. Um even while I was an attorney, I'd come back and work weekends, holidays, whenever I could. But I had to take a couple years off for my initial training and then you know, in doc and work for the military. Then I came back. Uh and I had a younger officer who I I went to my uh, he's a great friend of mine now, but I went to one of my sergeants. I say, who out here likes to get after it? Because I wanted to ride two man before I went back out on my own again, right? Yeah. Get familiar with the the new toys and the computer. Like, what's this? Yeah, you know. So I was smart about it.

SPEAKER_03: 3:14:36

Have a little safety net. Oh, yeah, yeah.

SPEAKER_04: 3:14:37

I said, so who's who's who likes to get after? And he gives me this guy's name, uh, Matt Cobb. And Matt, uh great friend of mine still, but uh he's still working in the street. And Matt, I remember we started to pull a car over and he knew us. He knew about our unit, the the street crimes team. And uh he looks at me because he knew I was on the street crimes team before I left. And we were, it was the 90s, it was gang infested. We were getting after it, right? And so he's like, hey, just so you know, we don't do that jump out shit anymore and run up to the car.

SPEAKER_03: 3:15:06

And I was like, first of all, what we got.

SPEAKER_04: 3:15:08

What I was I was cracking up because I was like, yeah, because I was about to do that, actually. Yeah, I was like, I'm glad you said something. You recognized it right away. He saw that clip. I was watching it, have my hand on the door, like, go, go, go, go, go, go. Cause I'm thinking, foot pursuits, yeah, stop the dope, get before they swallow, whatever, you know. And he's thinking, rightly so, no, we're not getting murdered out here. Yeah, you know, so I just credit because I I almost I'm kind of quoting him, but it's kind of a paraphrase where he's like, Yeah, we don't do that jump out shit anymore. And I was like, that's awesome. I was so indicted.

SPEAKER_03: 3:15:42

Yeah, we my rookie year where I'm at now. Um, I was coming from a department that you could pit. Like that was something we trained. And I was like, all right, cool. Was it gonna happen? Probably not. But uh, so first week or two that we get up on a I think it was a stolen vehicle, and I'm getting in position, like I'm ready at not thinking like training. Literally does take over. I you know, I was like, this is what I've been trained to do. And he's like, I was like, get approval, get approval. Like, I'm getting up there, you know. I'm like, got my my shuffle steering going. I'm like, get approval, get approval. And he's like, What do you mean? You pull back, and I was like, Oh yeah, we can't do that. Oh no, making him nervous as well. Oh yeah, he was so chicked out because I I was I was getting in position. I was this is when you were in training, yeah.

SPEAKER_02: 3:16:33

So I bet on your DOR was like, we had to talk about so afterwards, he's like, What was that?

SPEAKER_03: 3:16:39

And I was like, Yeah, we could pit in my old department, and he was like, Yeah, we can't hear. I was like, Well, I figured that out. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I was like, What was your clue? Yeah, it was just training took over, and it it's a th it's a real thing, you know. Muscle memory just it it hits, especially when you're elevated.

SPEAKER_04: 3:16:57

So it reminded me we don't do that anymore. So the uh it was the same department, but uh you guys were around when how you stop people from swallowing dope, right? I mean, like it was so jam your finger.

SPEAKER_03: 3:17:11

Well, I wouldn't go that far, but I'd try to find some. I'm not doing it. Yeah, I'm just I'm going off a training day. Yeah, yeah, don't do that.

SPEAKER_04: 3:17:19

I wasn't that bad. But we had I would do like mock DUIs. Like, I'm like, this guy's holding dope in his mouth right now. So I would be like, look over here, look over here, and I'm like, hey, just make sure you had too much to drink to drive, put your hands together, put your hands to your side, and I want to check you for feel spared. If you ever tilt your head back, you know, as soon as they do this, you're like, Yeah, spit it out, you know. And uh one guy remember pinching his nose and pulling his beard. And there's a this is actual yeah, it worked. It was actual, they filed a motion to suppress on me. It happened right in front of the police department, too. This guy, red-headed beard. I remember the whole thing.

SPEAKER_00: 3:17:52

Uh banning, what are you doing over there? Yeah, yeah, what are you doing, right?

SPEAKER_04: 3:17:57

So it was actually a uh a uh court case where they filed the motion to suppress it. I kept a copy of it because the judge was like, Well, based on reasonable suspicion, believe the guy had drugs in his mouth. It was we find this not to be unreasonable, right? So now fast forward, I'm back with the same cop who's telling me we don't do that jump out stuff anymore. And uh we get a call of a guy knocking on people's doors, and the lady's like, There's a guy at my door, and he's trying to get in, whatever. And we got a description, and then we get the guy stopped in a field because we see him coming out of the apartments. I'm like, I think our guy right there. So I meet him in the middle of a field, and I'm like, Hey, how you doing? We got we got a call looking for this guy. And if it's a black suspect, I'm like, hey, we got a white guy, he's about this tall, and he's last scene. Do you know where he's at? And he's like, Oh, they're not even looking for me, they're looking for a white guy who's this tall, right? Just allow me to get some tactical advantage, get close to him. And I'm like, by the way, what are you doing out here? You know, and I'm I'm there, right? So let's play silly games. And then we're guys doing the whole like, mm-mm. And I'm like, Oh, I know how to deal with this. Yeah. And so it's on, right? And and the rule is stop, stop trying to get the dope in guns when blood starts rolling out of their mouth because you're like, okay, this guy's not giving it up, and I'm not gonna hurt the guy to get it. Yeah. So you get a warrant for his crap. Like, literally, if they're gonna swallow dope, we had either one period of time we would get a warrant, and the hospital would lavage him and make him puke it up, right? Or we didn't even need a warrant, we'd just tell them he swallowed a bunch of dope and they would make him puke it up. Then some of the doctors were like, No, we're not doing that without a warrant. So we'd like to do a telephonic warrant, they'd make him puke it up. And then their doctors were like, I don't care if you get a warrant, I'm not doing that. So we got a warrant and we would collect their sh their shit until they and then well the jail would have to do it, not us. They'd put them in the chair until they've never done that. Well, we had one of our biggest drug dealers, and he was just so he was just like a terrifying guy. He was a big muscle-headed drug dealer. He was he was evil, and uh he swallowed a bunch of dope, just got out of prison, went right back into the business, swallowed a whole bunch of dope, tried to bite the officer's fingers off who tried that trick. And I was like, don't do that. Stop, stop, stop. We're just gonna get a warrant. Watch this. Because now I'm a lawyer, too. I'm like, don't try to fight people for dope in their mouths anymore. I said, uh, so so we got a warrant. So they put this guy in a chair and he has to sit there confined to a chair until his next bowel movement. Uh, and then that jail collects it, and you have to keep them restrained for what cops know. Because if you don't have them restrained, yeah, they'll eat it again. Oh, come on. Yeah, 100%.

SPEAKER_02: 3:20:28

So we that's why you have to restrain them because they will eat their own feces to get the so are we feeding them magnesium citrate in excessive volumes?

SPEAKER_04: 3:20:36

We don't feed them anything, we just maybe a cup of coffee or something here to get things moving.

SPEAKER_03: 3:20:41

All right. I think we hit a perfect time to end. They want to know what cops know. Nasty. All right. Listen, everybody, uh, I want to thank Vaughn for uh gracing us with his presence out here in studio. Thank you very much for flying out. Appreciate the invite. Thanks for having me. Yeah, I'm sorry my mic stand doesn't want to stay for you. Mike just likes them. Yeah, it's magnetized to that beautiful grill. Uh, everybody in the comments, thank you very much. It's been very fun tonight. Uh, this was good. I mean, shit, we went three hours plus. Uh that's how you know it was a good one. Um, everybody that donated tonight, again, thank you very much. Uh appreciate it. Everything that you guys donate does help go to the show. I'm gonna do it to get another set of headphones. What ones do I got here? These are the Audio Technicas. That's what I'm gonna get. Another pair of. I I guess I need technically I need four. Because if I have one more person, yeah. I still need to get one more camera if that happens too.

SPEAKER_02: 3:21:43

So if anybody would like to donate a camera.

SPEAKER_03: 3:21:46

Yeah, no, don't we're not there yet. Let's get it. Couch. You want to donate a couch? Let's get a set of headphones first. Um, that is one of the next things we're doing. We're gonna try to eliminate the table and go to more of an open seating with uh small coffee table. Sean Ryan actually.

SPEAKER_02: 3:22:02

Yes, yeah, yeah, it's a lot more comfortable for the guest, the interviewer, or the host, yeah, and people watching as well.

SPEAKER_03: 3:22:08

So I'm I'm wondering because I'm gonna get a tool chest back here that I can store so I can get rid of these bookshelves where all my equipment's stored and store it properly, and then that's where all the alcohol will be sold.

SPEAKER_04: 3:22:22

People are gonna mistake you for a professional soon.

SPEAKER_03: 3:22:24

I know one of these days, one of these days it's gonna be it's not bad, right? It's getting there.

SPEAKER_02: 3:22:29

The next time we can give them a demonstration on how we get the dope out of their mouth with the tools.

SPEAKER_03: 3:22:35

Yeah, absolutely. But no, everybody out there tonight, thank you very much. Uh, everybody on Instagram, thank you. I I forgot to initiate the Instagram like until we were like already an hour in. So they got two hours worth, but appreciate it. Uh Wade Lucero said, What a great guest. Please come back, sir. Yeah, you're done. Definitely a phone. Oh, is that me? That's you. That's not banning. Nobody likes banning. Oh, this is fun. Thanks for having me guys. Ryan in the uh super chat said for some Timu headphones. Thank you very much. Thank you. I am going to get this episode downloaded and uploaded to our audio. So if you weren't able to watch or you don't have the time to watch, because I know these are long, you can listen on your car rides to work back and forth.

SPEAKER_04: 3:23:22

Just a good podcast where they talk shit. Who said that? I don't know, but it was actually it's a literal, it's actually literal this time.

SPEAKER_03: 3:23:31

So that's too funny. We were together. Just a good podcast where they shit talk. Yeah. Yeah, that's really what we did tonight. Uh good times. Well, all right, boys. This was good. Thanks, you guys. Alan, thanks for the uh the the support tonight, brother.

SPEAKER_04: 3:23:47

Appreciate it. Hey, we're gonna put in some uh don't forget you guys get on force science news, read force science news. We got our online force science in in encounters course, force encounters course. Um still a 15% discount if you guys enroll. Um and get a hold of send us a message, we'll give you guys a coupon code. I think it's LEO 15, is what it was last time, or FSI 15. But we'll get to a coupon code for 15% off if you do it through two cops, one donut. Um get on that stuff uh that's opened up to civilians now. Uh yeah, look forward to seeing you guys out there. And thanks. Thanks for having us.

SPEAKER_03: 3:24:22

Oh yeah, brother. All right, Vanny, anything?

SPEAKER_02: 3:24:25

Just appreciate everybody being here.

SPEAKER_03: 3:24:27

Yep, it was a good time. All right, guys, and girls, have a good night. Take it easy.