The man training police to shoot first ask questions later, is also their biggest "expert" defender in courts

[redesigned]

The man training police to shoot first ask questions later, is also their biggest “expert” defender in courts.

He not only defends them when the shoot and kill unarmed people:

When police officers shoot people under questionable circumstances, Dr. Lewinski is often there to defend their actions. Among the most influential voices on the subject, he has testified in or consulted in nearly 200 cases over the last decade or so and has helped justify countless shootings around the country.

His conclusions are consistent: The officer acted appropriately, even when shooting an unarmed person. Even when shooting someone in the back. Even when witness testimony, forensic evidence or video footage contradicts the officer’s story.

In the protests that have followed police shootings, demonstrators have often asked why officers are so rarely punished for shootings that seem unwarranted. Dr. Lewinski is part of the answer.

In testimony on the stand, for which he charges nearly $1,000 an hour, he offers winding answers to questions and seldom appears flustered…“He won’t give an inch on cross-examination,”

He also actively trains them to shoot first:

In addition, his company, the Force Science Institute, has trained tens of thousands of police officers on how to think differently about police shootings that might appear excessive.

Training Officers to Shoot First, and He Will Answer Questions Later...

[daneel]

I saw this earlier.

So, this guy seems to think, as an ‘expert’, that the onus to make encounters with the police safe is on the untrained member of the public and not the trained police officer?

I’m sick of this. Not prepared to assume the risks of being a police officer? Perfectly reasonable. Just don’t join the police.

[LDoBe]

What I find infuriatingly bad logic, is that so many vets get a practically free pass from being paid to kill people, to the streets where they’re supposed to police people. As if their experience and training to make them better than average at killing a perceived enemy in any way qualifies them to be an officer of the law.

I’m not denigrating soldiers here. I’m just pointing out that being trained to kill people isn’t the same as being trained to police people. And experience fighting a war is not a valid substitute for having experience doing police work.

It’s simply a bad idea to give a person a gun and let them loose on the streets looking for trouble after having spent a few years constantly being told that all the people on the streets want to kill them, and they have to shoot first if they want to survive.

[Boundegar]

@redesigned

…how to think differently…

Isn’t that strange? Police officers grow up believing it is wrong to shoot an unarmed child in the back. Good thing there’s somebody ready to train them to think differently.

[anon73629133]

Sadly, another profiteer leaching off the post 9/11 terror-industrial complex.

[anon67050589]

Color me…wait, what’s the opposite of surprised?

[anon63581570]

Jaded? Downtrodden? Disillusioned? Disappointed? Whelmed?

[redesigned]

@anon67050589

Color me…wait, what’s the opposite of surprised?

@singletona082

Jaded? Downtrodden? Disillusioned? Disappointed? Whelmed?

I was going to guess chartreuse…

[redesigned]

I guess people always make the joke about police and the “Bad Apple”…it is finally nice to know the name of that apple, William J. Lewinski.

I wonder if someone like him will ever be capable of feeling remorse for all of the lives on his hands and all the family whose lives are ruined and will never receive justice because of him. My guess is he is so self blinded that he sees himself as some sort of savior of justice protecting police. Going to go be sick now…

[anon73629133]

Why the NYTimes Story On Police Murder Shill Bill Lewinski Falls Short (with...