Shooting Scares and Mayor's Reports: Just Another Day in Akron

It's the akron podcast for May 9, 2026.

We've got two shootings, some illegal gambling.

We got some problems at the Northside Marketplace.

We got some updates at the Rock hall.

And the mayor is released that independent report about police brutality.

And at the end, we're going to have a summary of that.

It's the Akron Podcast.

Our website is akronpodcast.com Ohio authorities are cracking down on illegal gambling operations in Akron.

The Ohio Casino Control Commission teamed up with the Akron Police Department on May 6 to serve search warrants at two businesses located at 141 E. York St. And 1283 E. Talbot Ave. Investigators say the businesses were operating illegal gaming machines after complaints from from the community triggered the investigation.

During the raids, authorities seized or disabled about 27 suspected illegal slot machines, along with an undisclosed amount of cash.

Officials say illegal casinos hurt local communities and stress the importance of partnering with the local police to enforce Ohio gaming laws.

The investigation remains ongoing.

Statewide, this is amazing.

The commission says it has now rated more than 181 locations and seized or disabled nearly 8,000 illegal slot machines, more than the total number of slot machines inside Ohio's four legal casinos combined.

That's amazing.

Just up the road in Cleveland, the Rock and Roll hall of Fame expansion is moving right along, and according to the CEO Greg Harris, it's both on time and on budget.

Now the project adds about 50,000 square feet of new space designed to bring in more live music, educational programs and community events.

The goal is to open things up with a certificate of occupancy by October, with the first major events in early December.

One of the cooler additions?

A new park connecting the Rock hall to the Great Lakes Science center, which will operate in partnership with with the Cleveland Metro Parks.

The bottom line is this isn't just a facelift.

It's a bigger play to drive tourism events and economic impact across Northeast Ohio, which is great to hear.

I actually went to the Rock hall last year after kind of getting there when it was open up, and it still seems to be a bit if you've ever been to a Hard Rock Cafe, it's kind of like one of those with a much bigger exit through the gift shop.

Now the one thing I saw that I thought was cool is on one of the floors they actually have drums and guitars and basses.

So if you're a musician and you go there and you're like, man, I'm dying to make some music, you can.

There was a big section on Saturday Night Live, which I thought was interesting because you know, it's the Rock and Roll hall of Fame.

It's not the Comedy hall of Fame, but they had a lot of glimpses of bands that have played there.

But they had a lot of, like, costumes.

Like, here's the Prince that Fred Armistat wore when he, you know, made fun of Prince.

And I'm like, yeah, I'd rather actually just see the stuff that Prince wore than the stuff that the guy imitating Prince wore.

So I'm always kind of mixed feelings on the Rock hall, but it's an easy.

If you go there, you can.

There are a bunch of different apps you can use to find cheap parking, and it's always fun to see.

The other thing I thought that drove me nuts that they have changed is a lot of the stuff that you can read.

Like, here are the handwritten lyrics from Jim Morrison.

Those were hung about calf high, so you have to kind of stand on your head to read these, where they used to be in kind of like a cabinet almost, or like a jewelry display where you could look through it and read it.

And there were a couple times I wanted to look at stuff and it was just way too low.

So I hope, you know, it'll be interesting to see what they do with this.

I wish they would quit inducting people that don't play rock music into the rock hall.

You know, Dolly Parton even said, look, I'm not a rocker.

Don't induct me.

And we did anyway.

Meanwhile, Ted Nugent, who was one of the biggest acts in the 70s, isn't in there because, well, you know, politics.

If you've ever been down to the north side, you know, you got Luigi's, you got Jilis and things like that.

Well, there's also a place there called the Northside Marketplace.

And a story came out about Akron Honey because they've officially pulled its products from the Northside Marketplace after the owner, Brent Wesley, says the business went months without receiving payments for products sold inside the marketplace.

He explained that the north side uses a centralized checkout system where vendors receive payouts after customer purchases are processed.

He says the system worked for years, but around 2023, payments became inconsistent.

After reviewing his records, Wesley claims the north side owed Akron honey more than $20,000 in unpaid sales at one point.

He says recent partial payments reduced the balance to around 1,700.

But the larger concern, accountability and how vendor funds were being handled.

According to Wesley, vendor revenue was reportedly being deposited into a shared account before payouts were distributed, something he says was never clearly addressed.

After speaking publicly about the issue, he says multiple other vendors reached out describing similar payment delays.

The Northside Marketplace owner Justin Lepley acknowledged the delays in a Facebook statement, saying vendors have every right to feel frustrated.

He cited ongoing financial and cash flow problems and said the marketplace is working with the city of Akron and local funding partners to stabilize operations.

Yeah, okay, we kind of figured that.

A former employee also told wkyc, that's Channel three, that vendor payment complaints have been happening for quite some time, saying the problems affected not only vendors but but employees and outside contractors as well.

So it sounds like Mr. Lepley needs a class in income and outcome.

And I get it.

You know, you can't have any sales if you don't have a store and you got to pay the rent first or whatever's going on.

So I go out to him.

But this isn't good and it's cool to have that little marketplace.

If you go in, they have all sorts of T shirts about Akron, Ohio and things like that and it says for now Akron Honey Products will stay out of the Northside Marketplace.

And Wesley says any return would depend on rebuilding trust and improving transparency.

A shooting scare at Summit Mall on Friday afternoon led to one arrest, but police say there was no active shooter and no injuries.

According to Akron and Fairlawn police, gunfire broke out around 3pm in the mall parking lot after a 17 year old suspect got into an altercation with a group of juveniles.

Investigators say the teen fired two shots into the air before trying to flee on foot.

Officers quickly apprehended the suspect and took him into custody.

Police searched the mall, found no additional threats and confirmed there were no victims.

Once again, can we learn like how to have a dialogue and maybe, you know, listen to each other before we pull out the, you know, 45 and start shooting people.

One more shooting, this one was deadly.

It was at the Noisy Oyster in Akron's Merriman Valley and it left one man dead and another one injured.

Police say the shooting happened Monday night around 8:14 after an argument between a third 31 year old man, Eric Schaefer, and Larnell Neely Jr escalated into a physical confrontation.

Investigators say Neely allegedly shot Schaefer multiple times and Shaffer was taken to the Cleveland Clinic Akron General, where he later died from his injuries.

A 35 year old bystander was also hurt but suffered non life threatening injuries.

Police say Neely fled the scene, but officers later found clothing believed to belonged to him during their search.

Hours later he turned himself in at Summit County Jail is now charged with murder and felonious assault, and a judge has set his bond at $1 million.

Schaefer's family released a statement saying they are devastated by the loss and asked for privacy as they grieve.

The noisy Oyster said its staff is heartbroken and announced the bar will temporarily close.

Akron Mayor Seamus Malik and Police Chief Brian Harding both praised officers for their quick response, while Harding called the shooting senseless violence that has no place in this community.

I would agree.

Let's take a quick look at the calendar.

The nexstar National Talent Competition is going on this weekend at the Civic Theater.

If you're a guitar player, the Satch VI Band is is at the Northfield Racino with the Hydra 2026 tour.

Molly Tuttle and Maggie Rose are at the Kent stage.

That's May 15th.

The one I wanted to mention that's new is May 19th.

The state of the City address.

This is the mayor will be giving this is his third, you know, kind of address speech.

This starts at five doors open at four at the Civic Theater.

I might have to go to that, but some great things coming to Akron.

For more information, go to akronpodcast.com events and if you go check out something, go out.

You can see at the top of the screen there.

Be on the show.

You can leave some feedback.

Let us know what you saw and how the concert was Mayor Malik announced the release of an independent review of the Akron Police Department's use of force policies along with a public dashboard that will track the city's progress in implementing reforms.

That sounds cool.

The review, conducted by the Police Executive research forum, outlines 58 recommendations aimed at improving accountability, transparency, officer training, oversight, de escalation and safety procedures.

It is safe to assume that the police union.

Yeah, not happy about it.

City officials said 18 of the recommendations have already been implemented.

Key proposals include combining all use of force policies into one clear document.

That sure sounds like common sense, emphasizing principles like the sanctity of life.

Here's a novel idea.

And proportional use of force.

Improving that.

That's a tough one.

Again, when you got some crazy guy on drugs with a weapon, I would not want to be in their shoes.

And I really tip my hat to all police officers and really all first responders.

Improving officer training and supervision.

Yeah, I would say that maybe firing people who have a history of, you know, shooting people.

There's a novel idea that's just my own.

And expanding public transparency through monthly dashboard updates.

That sounds great.

I'm all for transparency as long as it's 100% transparent.

Like body cams, never get turned off, that kind of thing.

Malik said, the goal is to improve outcomes in difficult situations while building public trust.

Yeah, that's a good goal.

Brian Harding said, the department is focused on putting recommendations into action and ensuring officers have the tools and guidance needed to make sound decisions.

Craig Morgan added, the long term follow through will be critical, you think, to modernizing the department and maintaining the transparency.

Now, this report was 134 pages.

I did not read it.

I tried.

And so what I did is we're going to play.

It's about a 20 minute clip.

And what I did was I had AI go through and read it and summarize it for us.

So with that, I give you Kyle and Sheila.

When you see a headline about a police use of force incident, what percentage of everyday police calls do you think actually end in violence?

Probably a lot higher than the reality, I'd guess.

Right.

You'd think maybe 10%, 5%.

Well, if you look at the 2025 data for Akron, Ohio, that number is actually 0.22%, which is incredibly low.

It is, but here's the catch.

Even that tiny, tiny fraction of a percent is.

Well, it's artificially inflated.

Right.

Today we are opening up this massive, totally independent review from April 2026 by the Police Executive Research Forum, usually just called PRF.

Yeah, exactly.

PRF.

And they did this exhaustive evaluation of the Akron Police Department or apd.

And what makes this specific document such a gold mine is that it deliberately ignores all the political noise.

Thank goodness.

Yeah.

I mean, it doesn't just focus on those highly publicized, polarizing incidents that, you know, dominate the news cycle.

Right, the stuff you see on Twitter.

Exactly.

Instead, it evaluates the entire invisible machinery of the department.

We are talking about the policies, the training standards, the union dynamics.

Or nuts and bolts.

Yeah.

The foundational architecture that dictates exactly how an officer behaves on your street long before a situation ever has the chance to escalate.

And that is exactly the angle we are taking today.

We are bypassing the politics entirely.

Absolutely.

For you, the citizen, the core question is just really straightforward.

Based on this document, do you have to worry about unnecessary police violence in your neighborhood?

Right.

What's the actual risk?

Yeah.

What is the actual likelihood of force being used?

And what concrete systems are in place to prevent things from going wrong?

Okay, let's untack this.

To really gauge that risk, we first have to look at the raw numbers.

The 0.22%.

Yeah.

And when you analyze the data PRF compiled.

It reveals this staggering disconnect between public perception and statistical reality.

The baseline numbers in the report are very sobering.

Since 2019, APD officers have been involved in seven fatal and seven non fatal.

Shootings, which is obviously deeply serious.

Every single one of those is a tragedy.

Right.

They leave a lasting impact on the community.

But you have to zoom out to look at the broader day to day operations to understand the systemic risk.

Right, the everyday calls.

Yeah.

Because in 2025 alone, APD officers responded to 127,524 calls for service.

That is a massive volume.

It's huge.

And out of all those hundreds of thousands of interactions, only 280 involved some type of use of force.

That is where that 0.22% figure comes from.

But what's fascinating here is that the.22% figure is not even a true representation of how often physical force is applied.

Wait, really?

Yeah, it's actually a data anomaly.

It's driven entirely by this specific rule on the books.

APD policy P 2021 032.

I read that section and I couldn't quite believe how it plays out in reality.

It's strange.

Right?

This policy establishes an incredibly broad definition of what constitutes reportable force.

Yeah.

Under this policy, if an officer uses force, they obviously write a report.

But if a second officer simply steps in to assist, just to help out.

Right.

Maybe they just help secure the scene or put a hand on a suspect's shoulder without actually using any real physical coercion.

Right.

That second officer is also required to write a full use of force report.

Yes.

And then the tracking system logs it as multiple officers using force in a.

Single incident when physically only one officer actually did anything.

Exactly.

That is the exact mechanism of the inflation.

You basically have administrative red tape duplicating the data.

That's like a hospital counting a nurse handing out a band aid as a full surgical procedure.

It's a great analogy.

I mean, it totally distorts the data.

But reading this, my immediate thought was why does a clerical issue actually matter to the average person living in Akron?

It's just bad paperworker.

Well, it matters because that bad paperwork actively fuels community distrust.

Oh, because of the transparency dashboard.

Exactly.

You have citizens looking at the city's public dashboard, seeing these inflated numbers and genuinely concluding that police are just using force all the time.

Wow.

Yeah.

Meanwhile, you have the officers out on patrol feeling deeply misunderstood and frankly, unfairly vilified because they know the reality on the street is much, much lower.

So it creates this wedge of mutual suspicion simply because the reporting system is badly designed.

Precisely.

Which is why PRFS strongly recommends moving to a tiered reporting system to accurately categorize different levels of interaction and fix this exact issue.

Okay, so that data issue perfectly explains the public relations problem, but let's look.

At the actual street level, the tactical side.

Yeah.

When an officer actually does put hands on someone, what standard is used to judge if that force was right or wrong?

This leads us into what is, well, a really strange psychological quirk inside the apd.

The Supreme Court thing.

Yes.

So the PRF reviewers noted this highly unusual detail during their interviews.

At least one officer from every single rank cohort, from the newest rookies fresh out of the academy, all the way up to the veteran captain.

They all did the exact same thing.

They did.

They spontaneously brought up a specific 1989 Supreme Court case called Graham v. Connor, completely unprompted.

I mean, the reviewers would just ask a general question about force and the officers would immediately pivot to a 35 year old Supreme Court ruling.

Yeah.

Graham v. Connor is the case that established the legal standard of objective reasonableness.

Which means what exactly?

It basically asks, would a reasonable officer on the scene possessing the exact same information have acted the same way in that split second?

Okay, that sounds fair enough.

It does.

But here is the critical issue.

That standard is a legal baseline designed strictly to determine criminal liability.

Oh, I see.

The PRF report uses a great sports analogy to explain this.

Graham is the minimum qualifying time you need to enter a race.

Right.

It keeps your actions constitutional, so you don't go to federal prison.

But qualifying for the race doesn't mean you ran a good race.

So basically, the entire department is aiming for a date?

That's one way to look at it.

Yeah.

They're looking back at an incident and asking was it legal?

Instead of asking was it avoidable?

That feels incredibly backward for public safety.

And reading further into their actual rulebook, it gets worse.

You're talking about the retreat clause.

Yes.

APD actually has a no duty to retreat clause explicitly written into their use of force policy.

Which is completely contradictory to modern policing standards.

Right.

Because modern de escalation tactics tell officers to use time to use distance, distance to find cover, create space.

Exactly.

If a situation is escalating with a person in crisis, stepping behind a police Cruiser and waiting 10 minutes is often the smartest thing you can do to save a life.

Absolutely.

But their own policy is implicitly telling them, you don't have to back down, you can stand your ground.

And that is exactly why PRF strongly recommends tearing that no duty or treat clause right out of the policy.

Just get rid of it.

Get rid of it.

It serves absolutely no productive purpose in modern law enforcement.

Instead, PRF says APD needs to add explicit foundational commitments to the sanctity of human life and the concept of proportionality.

So changing the whole mindset.

Yes, the overarching goal here is to shift the department's psychology away from just trying to avoid civil lawsuits and toward actively preventing harm before it ever happens.

Now, if you were listening to this right now, you might be wondering if the department is currently only aiming for the legal minimum, who is actually holding them accountable when things go wrong?

That is the million dollar question.

We have to look at how these use of force incidents are reviewed internally.

And frankly, the statistics here dropped my jaw.

The internal review numbers are staggering.

They really are.

And they highlight a profound structural issue.

Okay, get this.

In 2024 APD supervisors reviewed 301 separate use of force incidents.

Those incidents involved 773 officers.

Out of all of those reviews, exactly one single incident was found to be out of policy.

What?

One.

One.

That is an out of policy rate of 1/3 of 1%.

It's incredibly low.

The report actually compares them to Hillsborough, Oregon.

It's a smaller department, but their out of policy rate was 4.1%, nearly 12 and a half times higher than Akron's,.

Which is a huge discrepancy.

So if you are doing the math in your head, you are probably thinking, how is it possible that 99.6% of the time the police investigate the police and find no wrongdoing?

It immediately sounds like a cover up.

It completely sounds like one.

It does.

But the report points out it's actually a structural flaw.

If we connect this to the bigger picture, it comes down to a massive structural conflict of interest.

Explain that.

So in Akron, unlike in other major Ohio cities like Cleveland or Columbus, every single sworn member of the department is in the exact same union.

FOP Lodge, hashtag7.

Wait, let me stop you there, because I want to make sure I understand the mechanics of this.

From the rookie officer out on patrol all the way up to the captains who are tasked with reviewing their conduct.

They all share the same collective bargaining unit.

Wow.

Precisely.

Think about the psychological dynamic of that.

Right.

Right now, a captain is reviewing the use of force report of a junior officer.

But next Tuesday, that same captain and that same junior officer are sitting next to each other at the exact same union meeting.

They're paying the exact same dues and voting on the same union leadership.

Oh, man.

That is.

Yeah.

You cannot objectively judge someone when your financial and professional protections are inextricably tied to the exact same organization.

Exactly.

Creates a massive blind spot.

Even if every single One of those 300 in policy findings was 100% factually correct and justified, the structure itself creates the appearance of preordained outcomes.

Yes, it looks exactly like the fox growing the hen house.

And that just shatters any remaining public trust.

Which is why PR's recommendation here is absolute.

You have to separate supervisors into their own bargaining unit to restore a baseline of objectivity.

But wait, Akron does have external civilian oversight, right?

They do, yeah.

The voters approved the Office of the Independent police auditor, or OIPA, back in 2022.

I think something like 62% of voters wanted this civilian board.

They did.

So why aren't they providing that accountability?

The OIPA dynamic is fascinating.

It turns out the OIPA actually agreed with the police department that force was legally justified 97% of the time.

Wow, 97%.

Right.

But the OIPA also has a public mandate to look for ways to improve the department.

And because they were elected by 62% of the voters, there's immense political pressure on them to.

Well, to look busy.

To prove they are holding the police accountable.

Exactly.

So in their attempt to show the public that they are doing something, they essentially flood the police department with recommendations.

How many are we talking about?

Over just a seven month period, the OIPA issued 209 separate recommendations to APD.

209 Recommendations in seven months?

Yeah.

Imagine being a police chief trying to operationalize 209 new rules in half a year.

It's an impossible task.

And this is a classic organizational failure.

Right.

When oversight boards issue massive amounts of redundant, unpredictable prioritize recommendations, it just becomes ambient noise.

It just becomes paperwork.

Exactly.

The department gets completely overwhelmed, and as a survival mechanism, they simply start ignoring all of it.

So the truly high value life saving feedback gets lost in the flood of bureaucratic memos.

Precisely.

So how do we fix the ambient noise?

How do we make civilian oversight actually effective?

Instead of just performative, PRF recommends creating a Critical Incident Review Board or cirb.

Okay, what does that do?

This would be a specialized group that acts as a filter.

Instead of the OIPA throwing 200 memos over the fence, they bring their most critical high value recommendations to the cirb.

Oh, I see.

The board then sits down and actually figures out how to implement those specific prioritized changes operationally.

Okay, so the Public perception is skewed by terrible data tracking.

The standard for using force is stuck at the legal minimum of Graham v. Connor.

And the oversight is completely bogged down by a union conflict of interest and an avalanche of memos.

That's the summary.

We've diagnosed the plumbing of the department.

So what are the actual tangible rule changes that PRF is demanding to keep citizens safe right now?

What is going into the new playbook?

Let's start with some of the specific physical tactics, because there are some very surprising gaps in APD's current policy.

Like what, for instance?

Head strikes.

You mean an officer physically punching a suspect in the head?

Exactly.

Currently, APD has no explicit restrictions on officers using closed fist punches to the head as a compliance tool against a resisting subject.

Which seems incredibly dangerous.

It is.

I mean, a punch to the head isn't just about pain.

You can easily cause a traumatic brain injury, a fractured skull, or worse, just trying to get someone to put their hands behind their back.

It is lethal force adjacent.

PRF demands this be explicitly banned.

Go.

Head strikes should never ever be used just to make someone physically comply with an order.

They should only be authorized if the officer is facing an immediate deadly force threat and is literally fighting for their life.

Now here's where it gets really interesting to me.

Looking at the tactical changes, the Taser section surprised me.

The ECWs?

Yeah, right.

The report calls them ECWs or electronic control Weapons.

It specifically calls out using Tasers on fleeing suspects.

Yes.

My initial thought reading this was, isn't stopping a fleeing suspect the exact purpose of a Taser?

To stop someone running away without having to tackle them?

That is a very common misconception, actually.

But Tasers are currently being used in highly dangerous ways.

How so?

PRF recommends strict new rules.

First, flight alone can no longer justify a TASER deployment.

Really?

Yeah.

Just because someone is running away does not mean an officer can taser them.

When you hit someone with a Taser while they are sprinting, their entire body locks up.

Oh, right.

They hit the pavement with zero ability to brace their fall.

The risk of them cracking their skull in the concrete and suffering a fatal secondary injury is incredibly high.

Wow.

Which perfectly explains the next rule regarding bicycles.

Yes.

PRF states Tasers must be expressly prohibited against people riding bicycles, scooters, or any.

Moving conveyance because of the crash.

Exactly.

The secondary injuries from the resulting crash can easily be fatal.

Additionally, they're calling for a stripped 5 second standard cycle limit.

Explain the medical reasoning behind the 5 second limit for us.

When a TASER is deployed, it delivers a 5 second electrical cycle that incapacitates the muscles.

Right.

Sometimes officers hold the trigger down, delivering continuous or back to back cycles.

Medically, prolonged electrical exposure severely stresses the heart and restricts breathing.

That sounds awful.

By enforcing a strict 5 second limit, it forces the officer to stop, let the person breathe, and actively reassess the threat before ever pulling the trigger again.

That makes total sense.

We also need to talk about medical emergencies because this is where a lot of these use of force incidents turn tragic.

They really do.

The report highlights PRF's 15 principles for reducing the risk of restraint related death.

Very often, police encounter someone in a medical or behavioral emergency, an MBE.

Right.

This could be someone in a diabetic crisis, someone suffering a severe mental health break, or someone under the influence of powerful narcotics.

And the core issue is the misinterpretation of that crisis.

Exactly.

The problem is officers often mistake the bizarre or erratic behavior of a medical crisis for intentional, malicious non compliance.

And the physical tools used to handle that perceived non compliance can be lethal if misused.

Like the wrap restraint.

Take the wrap restraint for example.

It's a device that immobilizes the legs and torso, essentially locking a person into a rigid seated position.

But the script doesn't just say it immobilizes them, it points out severe medical risks.

Why does tying someone's legs and torso together lead to a medical emergency?

It comes down to positional asphyxia.

Okay, imagine a suspect has been running, they are exhausted, and maybe they are under the influence of severe narcotics.

Their body desperately needs oxygen.

Right.

They're breathing heavy.

Now imagine placing them in a wrap restraint locked in a seated position.

Where their chest is compressed, their diaphragm physically cannot extend.

Oh, man.

They literally lose the mechanical ability to draw breath.

So the wrap isn't just a heavy set of handcuffs.

It's a medical ticking clock.

Exactly.

Which is why PRF notes that tools like the WRAP need incredibly strict operational guidelines.

Like what kind of rules?

They must have rigid time limits.

The person must be under constant medical monitoring for any signs of breathing distress.

And the restraint must absolutely never be used as a punitive measure.

It's just a temporary safety tool.

Right?

Not a punishment for resisting.

So what does this all mean?

We have all these necessary tactical changes.

Banning head strikes for compliance, restricting tasers on fleeing suspects, strictly monitoring the wrap restraint.

This is a lot of changes.

It is, but.

But how do you actually make officers follow these rules in the chaos of a live incident?

It all hinges on one foundational concept that the report hammers home.

The critical decision making model or the cdm.

The cdm.

Now, APD has been trained on this model, but right now it's basically just a poster on the wall.

It's a checkbox in an annual training seminar.

Nobody is really using it.

Right.

PRF is saying the CDM must become the required everyday framework for every single supervisor investigating a use of force incident.

So it's about looking at the entire timeline of the event, not just the final second where the punch was thrown or the trigger was pulled.

Precisely.

Supervisors must evaluate the upstream decisions.

Give me an example of that.

Let's say an officer shoots a suspect who charged at them with a knife in the final millisecond.

That force is entirely justified.

Right.

They had to defend themselves.

But the CDM forces the supervisor to look upstream.

Did the officer use distance when they first arrived on the scene?

Oh, I see.

Did they attempt to communicate and de escalate from behind cover?

Or did they rush aggressively into the room screaming commands and inadvertently create the jeopardy themselves?

Because if you only look at the final millisecond, almost any use of force can look justified.

Exactly.

The CDM forces the department to ask, how did we get to this point and could we have prevented it entirely?

This has been an incredibly eye opening dive into the actual mechanics of a police department.

It's complex, for sure.

And it shows that answering that core question, are citizens at risk of unnecessary violence?

Isn't really about taking political size or shouting slogans.

No, it's not.

It's about fixing the plumbing.

It's about establishing tiered reporting so the public actually has real uninflated data.

It's about separating union bargaining units so that internal accountability actually means something.

It's about writing explicit, undeniable rules that restrict head strikes and tasers against fleeing suspects.

All those tangible changes.

And most importantly, it's about demanding that officers aim for excellence and the preservation of life, not just basic legal immunity.

And that leads to a really profound question for everyone listening to ponder as we wrap up.

Yeah, what's that?

If a police department successfully shifts its entire culture, if they move from constantly looking backward and asking were we legally justified to use force?

To instead looking forward and asking, did we miss an opportunity to prevent this entirely?

That's a massive shift.

It is.

How does that fundamentally redefine the everyday psychological contract between you, the citizen, and the people sworn to protect you?

That invisible machinery we talked about at the beginning, it dictates everything about how safe you feel in your own city.

It does.

Think about what that kind of proactive life preserving trust would actually look like in your neighborhood and what it would take to build it.

Something to really mull over.

Thanks for joining us on this deep dive into the perf report.

We'll catch you next time.