Title: Cop Who Shot Philando Castile Had Special Training that Taught Him the Public is the Enemy Source:
Free Thought Project URL Source:http://thefreethoughtproject.com/co ... -training/#Iqsj1i8l3b7FzSPR.99 Published:Jul 14, 2016 Author:William Norman Grigg Post Date:2016-07-15 09:17:42 by Deckard Keywords:None Views:10874 Comments:51
Jeronimo Yanez, the St. Anthony, Minnesota Police Officer who fatally shot Philando Castile, underwent “Bulletproof Warrior” officer survival indoctrination that imparts what one police trainer calls a “paranoid” and“militaristic” mindset.
In May of 2014, reports the Minneapolis Star-Tribune, Yanez underwent a 20-hour seminar on “Street Survival” taught by Illinois-based Calibre Press, which teaches courses on the subject to police officers nationwide. The company’s “Street Survival Seminar” overview displays a monomaniacal focus on that most important of all policy considerations, “officer safety.” It treats every police encounter as a combat situation in which only one life truly matters – that of the government’s armed emissary, not that of the citizen who is supposedly being protected and served by him.
Although Calibre co-owner Jim Glennon has written that viewing “police as the enemy is not a healthy or helpful position for a society to take,” the courses presented by his company relentlessly teach officers that the public is their enemy. As one instructor summarized the course for the benefit of his students, “We’ve got to survive this job!”
“The goal and purpose of the Calibre Press Street Survival Seminar is twofold: Keep officers alive and give them the tools to enjoy a successful career in law enforcement,” explains the company’s promotional literature. “In order to accomplish this mission we need to tackle the realities and complexities of policing today for officers on the street … while placing the responsibility for winning right where it belongs – with the individual officer.”
A brief video excerpt from a “Street Survival” course shows a presenter lecturing officers about the need to visualize shooting someone as part of the “Psychological Game” necessary to “win” encounters with what trainees are told is an implacably hostile public.
“That’s winning, ladies and gentlemen,” he declares.
“Traffic stops kill police officers, injure police officers – that’s a fact,” insists another lecturer. “But – and I’ll say this – it’s our bread and butter for enforcement.”
Officer Yanez reportedly believed that Castile broadly resembled a suspect in a recent armed robbery. This may explain why he made what appears to be a “pretext stop.” It neither explains nor justifies why he opened fire on a citizen who was compliant, and who possessed a valid carry permit. The officer’s attorney insists that the mere presence of a gun was sufficient to trigger the officer’s lethal reaction – which makes sense, given that Yanez had been marinated in Calibre’s “officer safety” alarmism.
“The force used has to be `reasonable and necessary,’” “Street Survival” attendees are told. “And who judges if it is `reasonable and necessary’? It is to the officer’s standards.”
“Does the public understand, and are they trained in the dynamics of use of force as you and I are? No!” continues the harangue. This is why police must act as evangelists to the ignorant public, catechizing them about the sacred imperative of officer safety, and the duty of citizens to submit with docility in every encounter with the state’s agents of coercion.
“Teach them,” the lecturer exhorted. “Establish, articulate, and indoctrinate.”
In this depiction, the public are “sheep” – to be protected and, of course, sheared as their overseers see fit.
Interestingly in addition to the familiar instruction regarding officer safety and the “sheepdog mentality,” those who attend “Bulletproof” training events are also taught about “Threats to Democracy” – an examination of “the current relationship between law enforcement and the community they are sworn to protect while also identifying the most current threats to both.”
The “Street Survival” seminar Yanez attended was not the only training of this sort he received. He took a similar 20-hour “Officer Survival” course from a different company two years earlier. Just a few weeks before the fatal encounter with Castile, Yanez participated in a two-hour training course entitled “de-escalation.” This was his “only instruction in his four years with the department that appears to focus on that approach,” summarizes the Star-Tribune, which obtained his training records.
William Czech, who attended a two-day Bulletproof Warrior class at a Bloomington, Minnesota Ramada Inn, described himself as “horrified” by the course. Czech is a private citizen, not a police officer, and he attended the class following encounters between police and a relative who suffers from mental illness. The second day of the class was devoted to videos of shootouts between police and citizens, with narration by Calibre co-owner Glennon.
“Every time a video came up where the officer hesitated, he would stop and he would say, `This is a point where there should have been a reaction, he should have engaged,” Czech recalls.
While he admits that his course teaches officers that “hesitation will get you killed,” Glennon insists that Czech’s perception was “totally inaccurate.”
“That’s why we don’t let the press in” to the training seminars, Glennon added.
Michael Becar, executive director of the International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement, agrees with Czech’s supposedly untutored assessment of Calibre’s “officer survival” training.
“Everything they were doing made the police officers very paranoid,” he points out. “At some point, they wouldn’t even stop a car without three backups.”
Peter Kraska, chairman of the School of Justice Studies at Eastern Kentucky University, has described Calibre’s training seminars as “irresponsible” and “dangerous.” The actions of the program’s most notable graduate, Officer Jeronimo Yanez, demonstrate the lethal consequences of weaponizing the “officer safety” mindset.
ANY cop, whether or not they attended a “Street Survival Seminar” is going to approach that vehicle with caution.
That surely is not the case concerning Philando Castile where the officer approached the vehicle first demanding Castile produce id and upon Castile reaching for his id, the officer shoots Castile. There was no caution on the officer's part there. None.
"That surely is not the case concerning Philando Castile where the officer approached the vehicle first demanding Castile produce id and upon Castile reaching for his id, the officer shoots Castile. There was no caution on the officer's part there. None."
Who said that's what happened? Oh, yeah. The girlfriend.
She's also the one who said the cop stopped then for a broken taillight. That's a lie. There's police scanner audio where the cop says he's stopping them because the driver matches the BOLO alert for an armed robber.
Here's one for you. Why didn't the girlfriend start recording as soon as they were pulled over? What's to be gained by recording after the shooting?
Let me be the very first poster to tell you about your question: you are one stupid, fuckin' cretin.
You don't think at all. You think a government playbook shows fallacy and escapes by the citizenry. You are so far off base, there is nothing more to comment upon.
She didn't know there was a BOLO on her boyfriend. Therefore, she had no idea why they were being pulled over. Probably "driving while black". So I say she started recording as soon as the cop lights started flashing behind them, hoping to catch the cop harassing them. When things went to shit, the beginning of the video was edited out.
What remained was a one-sided voiceover "story" of what happened, putting her in a "poor me and my child" light.
She immediately opened a GoFundMe page with a goal of $75,000 to cover the distress of the encounter. Not gonna raise any money if people know you're riding around with an armed felon with your little girl in the back seat.
Again, you are STUPID; it is evident by the questions you are attempting to pursue as "why did she choose to record the event after the cop shot a bullet hole in the man that reached for his identification."
I can not believe you are so FUCKIN' STUPID. [edit: you are just plain and simple STUPID]
"why did she choose to record the event after the cop shot a bullet hole in the man that reached for his identification."
He was reaching for the gun on his lap after being told not to by the cop.
SHE said he was reaching for his ID because that fits with the innocent- black-man-executed-by-cop bullshit story designed to get sympathetic people to throw money her way.
He was reaching for the gun on his lap after being told not to by the cop.
You don't know that action other than a defensive statement by the cop.
SHE said he was reaching for his ID because that fits with the innocent- black-man-executed-by-cop bullshit story designed to get sympathetic people to throw money her way.
What is wrong with that statement? They were pulled over for a broken tail light. Keep in mind, that with advanced telecommunications that many of us poor tax payers pay for, the police already had no issue with the suspects in question when approaching the vehicle.
No they weren't. Did you listen to the audio from the police scanner? The cop said he was pulling them over because the driver matched the BOLO of an armed robber.
Under those circumstances, the cop is not going to wander up and treat this as a simple traffic stop. Especially when he gets to the driver's side window and sees a gun in the driver's lap.
If the cop's wild claim about "matching the description ..." is any valid testimony to your wee, wittle pea brain thaen you must be as STUPID as I originally thought.
In today's America, we face a twenty trillion dollar federal debt. Do you ever ask why? Probably not but I shall answer the question: because America IS a police state. Along with the goals of the police state, the cops have the capability to evaluate license plates BEFORE pulling cars over from the road. The car did not match any such description that you emotionally side with.
