November 25, 2025 • 41 mins
What if “within policy” still feels wrong to the people you serve? We sit down with retired LAPD lieutenant Jeff Weninger to unpack the uncomfortable gap between legal justification and moral legitimacy—and how that space erodes community trust. Jeff brings a rare mix of multiracial upbringing, street experience, and command-level reform to show why mindset shapes outcomes more than any statute or slogan.
We trace the path from Graham v. Connor’s narrow focus on the moment of force to a broader totality-of-circumstances view, and why that legal shift still isn’t enough without cultural change. Jeff pulls the curtain back on dehumanization, the “us versus them” mentality, and the startling share of shootings involving people in mental health crisis. He argues for tactics that buy time, gather family insights, and deploy mental health expertise, instead of relying on volume, posture, and hardware to force compliance. The proof point: departments that slow down see fewer injuries and better resolutions.
Jeff lays out a candid reform blueprint: civilianize key command roles like media strategy, academy design, and consent decree oversight; align policy with behavior through early post-incident debriefs; and train assessment into firearms qualifications to blunt contagious fire. We challenge the militarized look that broadcasts domination and explore what the UK gets right about patience and layered responses, even when guns aren’t part of the equation. For young people torn between activism and service, Jeff makes a hard-won case for changing the system from the inside, backed by a career of actionable solutions.
If you care about public safety, police accountability, mental health response, and building trust that lasts beyond a headline, this conversation offers a clear, practical path forward. Subscribe, share with a friend who’s wrestling with these questions, and leave a review with the one mindset shift you want to see next.
🔗 Connect with Jeff Wenninger
🌐 Website: https://lawenforcementconsultants.com/
Book: http://onthinicebook.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeff-wenninger-4247a854
Send us an anonymous text message
Every episode brings global perspectives and leadership insights. Click on the "Support the show" link above and keep the mission alive!
Search MindShift Power Podcast buy topic here: https://www.fatimabey.com/podcast-search
Explore more about my work beyond podcasting, check out the blog, share your thoughts, or become a guest! https://www.FatimaBey.com
I also have another podcast called The MindShifter Audio Blog!
Experience my written words like never before, as I personally narrate my blogs for a truly engaging audio journey. https://www.fatimabey.com/audioblog
Join the MindShift Universe—where real conversations spark transformation!
Follow me on social media: https://www.fatimabey.com/#1035650492
Thank you for listening!
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Fatima Bey (00:02):
Mind Shift PowerPoint.
This is Mind Shift PowerPodcast, the number one
critically acclaimed podcastwhere we have raw, unfiltered
conversations that shapetomorrow.
I'm your host, Fatima Bay, theMind Shifter.
And welcome everyone.
(00:22):
Today we have with us JeffWeninger, and he is a nationally
recognized expert in lawenforcement, a retired
lieutenant, and has over 33years of experience primarily
with the LAPD, and he is thefounder and CEO of Law
Enforcement Consultants LLC.
How are you doing today, Jeff?
Jeff Wenninger (00:42):
I'm doing just fine, thank you.
Fatima Bey (00:43):
So tell us why are you on this podcast today?
Jeff Wenninger (00:46):
Aaron Powell Well, I'm on this podcast
because I think the uh thingsthat I have to say will resonate
with your listeners in regardsto some of the challenges that
uh our society is facing inregards to the community and
policing relationship, um,because it impacts everybody.
Whether you're a parent oryou're a retiree or you're a
(01:08):
child growing up, yourexperiences and exposure to law
enforcement is important inregards to the impression that
you form in your mind about whothey are and what they
represent.
Fatima Bey (01:20):
Aaron Ross Powell Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Tell us a little bit about yourbackground.
Jeff Wenninger (01:24):
Well, I was uh my mother was a a teenage uh
young girl when when she becamepregnant with me, and she made a
decision to put me up foradoption.
And my uh folks, they weremarried for a number of years,
and they wanted four children,each one year apart, and they
weren't having any luck becomingpregnant, so they looked into
(01:45):
the adoption process, and rightabout the time they got approved
for adoption, lo and behold, mymother became pregnant with my
sister.
But they pr decided to proceedwith the adoption process and
they adopted me.
And then they adopted mybrother who's Japanese, and then
I have a foster sister who'sblack.
So I was born in uh Kent, Ohioin the Midwest, and was raised
during the 60s and 70s with amultiracial family.
(02:07):
And that's the type of umexperience that I brought into
my law enforcement and lawenforcement professional career,
which is very different thanthe peers and the people that I
worked with.
Fatima Bey (02:17):
Okay.
I think that makes you, to me,that makes you very interesting.
Um, you know, we you had all ofthat before you came to work
with the LAPD.
Um I think that gives you aunique perspective that the
average person doesn't have, andI just I love that.
So let me ask you this.
You've reviewed over 700 use offorce cases, and the public
(02:40):
often hears the phrase, theofficers' actions were within
policy.
From your insider'sperspective, talk about the
dangerous gaps between what islegally justified and what is
morally right, and how that gapis where community trust goes to
die.
Jeff Wenninger (02:58):
Well, you I think you hit it on the head
because uh the- I have alwayssaid this: just because you can
doesn't mean you should.
So the law to the law inregards to the assessment and
evaluation of an officer'sapplication of force is rather
lenient.
It's Graham versus Connor, it'sa 1989 Supreme Court case that
(03:19):
stipulates that it's Grahamversus Connor, which is
objective reasonableness.
And essentially what that is,is would an officer with similar
training and experience undersimilar circumstances acted in a
similar manner?
If the answer is yes, then it'sgoing to be in policy.
And the courts in evaluatingexcessive force cases so
(03:40):
narrowly limited the analysis tothe moment of threat right at
the moment that the officer madea decision to use lethal force.
And that's not always where theproblem lies.
It's the actions and decisionsthat led up to that fraction of
a second where you make thatdecision.
(04:00):
But that was not beinganalyzed.
So oftentimes you'd sit thereand go, you're telling me not
to, you know, you're telling methat my my eyes are lying to me,
that you're saying what thisofficer did, what I'm seeing in
this video or whatever it isthat you're evaluating is
appropriate and makes this okay.
And unfortunately, what thecourts were doing was just
(04:21):
looking at that moment.
But for instance, I'll give youa scenario.
If you have an officer and havean individual that's in a
vehicle, and that vehicle istrying to drive away, the
officer stands in front of thevehicle and then fires at the
individual driving it, which islethal force, with the
(04:41):
articulation that, well, I wasafraid I was going to get run
over, which would cause meserious bodily injury or death,
so then therefore I'm justifiedin using lethal force.
Well, you you created thatcircumstance.
Not only did you create thatcircumstance, but by and large,
the vast majority of lawenforcement agencies have
policies that prohibit you fromstanding in front of a vehicle
that's trying to flee, andyou're not to use lethal force
(05:03):
unless presented with a threatother than the vehicle itself as
the threat that your concern isgoing to cause you serious bile
injury or death, as i.e.,someone pointing a handgun out
of the vehicle at you.
So you know, you you create thecircumstances yourself.
And that's that's somethingthat that that law enforcement
(05:24):
has to be accountable to.
To to sit there and say that itwas justified, um it's it's
really hard to ask the communityto accept that.
And recently there was just aBarnes versus Felix uh case that
the Supreme Court ruled on, andthey they basically clarified
(05:46):
Graham versus Connor, saying,no, it's the totality of the
circumstances.
You are, as the courts, to beevaluating all of the officers'
actions all the way to themoment that the decision was
made to use lethal force.
So that has been expanded atthis point, and we'll see how
that is applied moving forward.
But I think that should givethe community and people that
(06:10):
have concerns a little bit ofpause and some peace in mind
relative to the Supreme Court'sassessment that no, in in order
to maintain a relationship withthe communities that you serve
and can meaning transparency andtrust, um, you you have to be
(06:30):
evaluating all aspects of theincident, not just that moment
when the force was used.
Fatima Bey (06:35):
Aaron Ross Powell Absolutely.
And I think that social mediaplays a very gigantic part in
that because people's opinionsare often based on a moment in a
video and not they don't knowthe full situation or the full
situation is hidden or just notrevealed yet, because sometimes
you just don't know yet.
And I think very often, and Ithink this goes beyond policing,
(06:58):
we we have to stop just takinga little snippet of a moment and
thinking that that's thetotality of everything.
It's not, it it almost neveris, actually.
You know, um, as you were justsaying, we we have to look at
more than just a moment.
And you're talking about fromthe uh the legal perspective,
but I I want the audience toknow that we need to take that
same mindset and apply it toother things.
(07:19):
You know, when we're looking atuh someone being shooting,
someone fighting, whatever thecase is, we need to look at more
than just a moment and assessthe entire situation because
that's the only way toadequately um make a decision
about something.
Jeff Wenninger (07:35):
Aaron Powell I'd just like to expand a little
bit because I'd often hear, andit's a justification, and I
don't know if it's a rationalebecause you're trying to build
up some armor to to be able tolive at the fact that you use
lethal force and perhaps youdidn't necessarily need to, but
although it's legally justified.
Um, you know, they say you youknow, you play stupid games, you
get stupid awards, you know.
I mean, and and it's thatthere's that kind of a mindset.
(07:57):
You know, it it's it's it's umand it really what it is, it's a
dehumanization of the of theperson that you use the lethal
force against.
And it's a lot easier to to useforce when you see people as
less than you, so to speak.
And unfortunately, that thatmindset takes you down a rabbit
hole where it just perpetuatesthat them versus us mentality.
(08:18):
You you have to look at thesituation and really evaluate
what is your role and yourfunction in this circumstance?
Because the reality is about36% of all officer-involved
shootings involve somebodysuffering from mental health
issues.
They're having a mental crisis.
So how self-aware are we aspolice officers in understanding
(08:43):
the impact of our mere presencein uniform at a scene
confronting somebody that'ssuffering a mental health
crisis, where we have our gunsdrawn, we have a beanbag shotgun
pointed at them, we have ataser with a laser dart on their
chest.
I mean, that would that wouldimpact you and I in a negative
way, the anxiety and and stuffand unpredictability of what we
(09:06):
may do in any split second basedon and we're fine.
Now, equate that to somebodythat's in a mental health
crisis.
So 36% of officer-involvedshootings involve those types of
people.
And it and it's unfortunatethat we're not really aligned
with the best practices and howto address this.
(09:27):
We're using our traditional lawenforcement tactics, which are
hyper-visilant-vigilant on forceto resolve incidents, rather
than being innovative andcreative and thinking outside
the box.
And sometimes working withpeople that may have better
levels of expertise in this areathan than we do.
And the the reality is a verysmall percentage of law
(09:49):
enforcement agencies in thiscountry have appropriate
training and have, and evenfewer have incorporated mental
health practitioners into theirresponses to these types of
calls.
So is is it any surprise thatwe don't have the optimal
outcomes?
No, it's not.
Um that's that's a huge gapwhere we where there's a big
(10:10):
learning curve that needs to beimplemented.
And in and then not only, and Isaw this with the LAPD, having
served there for just over 30years, the it's one thing to
have the training and to havethe policies and procedures in
place, which LAPD is in theforefront when it deals with
people suffering a mental healthcrisis.
(10:31):
They have the mental evaluationunit, which helps to assist in
these circumstances, thehandling of these types of
incidents.
But the problem is, is they'vehad it for almost two decades.
They still have third third oftheir shootings involve people
suffering from a mental healthcrisis.
So you ask, why is that?
(10:52):
Well, it goes back to themindset.
What controls the mindset?
The culture.
Culture eats training forlunch.
And unfortunately Oh, I likethe way you said that.
Fatima Bey (11:03):
That's a good quote.
Jeff Wenninger (11:04):
Unfortunately, you have you have the training,
you have the policies andprocedures, but that's that's
just that's fluff.
That doesn't mean anything ifyour culture is not aligned with
what the policies andprocedures and the training
happens to be.
And that's where there's a hugegap in law enforcement.
Fatima Bey (11:20):
Yeah.
And mindset is everything.
It's something I'm constantlytalking about on and off the
air, um, in everything I do.
Absolutely 100% mindset.
And I want to go back to whatyou said about dehumanizing
people, because I do think thatthat is the root of a lot of
them, a lot of stuff.
Shootings and other things andother four forms of excessive
force, because shootings is onlyone.
(11:42):
When we see people as lessthan, it is always going to be
an issue.
It's an issue for all of us,but it's a deeper issue when you
have authority and a weapon.
And um, yeah, that's that'sthat's everything.
And I also want to mention, yousaid uh, I think you said 36%.
Um, shootings have to do withpeople with mental health
(12:05):
issues.
And I didn't know that number,but I I also wonder what the
number is for people who wereautistic.
Because I think sometimes whenit comes to dealing with them,
it they're in the same boatbecause they're they're in the
same boat because they'remisunderstood.
They're not the same people,but they're in the same boat
because they're misunderstood.
(12:26):
And if you don't know thatyou're dealing with someone
with, you know, who um whosebrain is wired differently, they
don't understand what's goingon the same way you do, uh that
matters.
That I could see that beingdeadly.
Um, and I know I've seen, Ican't quote any right now, but I
know I've seen uh and heard ofsituations where that's been the
(12:48):
case.
And I I think it's I think itfalls under the same purview as
what you're saying.
Let me ask you this.
You dismiss uh surface levelreforms.
If you were given power to makeone change to a police
department's culture that wouldhave uh the biggest impact on
public trust, even if it's meantfiring 10% of your officers,
(13:09):
what would that one politicallyincorrect, brutally honest
change be?
Jeff Wenninger (13:14):
I would make large strides in the
civilianization of lawenforcement.
And I don't mean thatcommunications or in the
evidence room or that stuff.
I'm talking about people thathold command-level positions
that are civilians.
(13:35):
Never been to a police academy,uh, never carried a gun, never
handled a radio call, butthey're there because of their
expertise in the various areasthat law enforcement, in order
to be successful moving forwardin the 21st century, have to be
well versed in.
So for instance, I'll give youan example.
When I was at the LAPD underWilliam Bratton, when he was our
(13:58):
chief of police, he was he wasa rock star.
He was well ahead of his peersin his mindset.
So we were under a consentdecree.
And he brought in an attorney,Jerry Chaliff, who he made
equivalent of a deputy chief whois in charge of the consent
decree bureau.
(14:18):
He brought in Mary Grady, whowas a civilian who had decades
of experience managing ordealing with the media as a
reporter in Los Angeles.
Because let's be honest, one ofthe huge gaps that law
enforcement has and failuresthat they have is their
inability to manage thenarrative after a critical
(14:40):
incident.
They do not have much insightor self-awareness relative to
the impact of the informationthey're releasing as well as the
impact of the information theychoose not to release.
So you get you get some insightof somebody outside of the
organization.
Also brought in a civilianpsychologist who took over the
(15:03):
academy training as well as thetraining of in-service
personnel, oversaw thattraining.
So these are people that havehigher levels of expertise and
experience and education inthese areas that generally
nobody in the law enforcementorganization has.
So they're able to bring to thetable a perspective that's
(15:29):
different.
And I've always said this (15:30):
it's not about being right, it's
about getting it right.
And getting it right requiresthat you have as many
diversified opinions sitting atthe table when you're talking
about these critical issues thatare facing law enforcement
today.
And that is the huge changethat I would make.
Right now we hear, oh, we'redown X number of sworn personnel
(15:54):
and yada, yada, yada, yada.
I I suggest that if we were toremove the officers that are in
assignments that have absolutelynothing to do with their
training and experience as lawenforcement officers, and
replace them with people thathave specific specialized
(16:14):
expertise in those areas andfocus just sworn personnel to
handle the roles that arerequired to have sworn powers to
arrest and to use force and allthose sorts of things, then we
don't need these huge numbers aswe claim to.
There's a study in um, Ibelieve it was in Milwaukee,
(16:37):
where they had analysis done,and it came back that it said,
you know, hire you know, hire166 civilians and you only have
to hire like 26 police officersversus basically a flip-flop.
So I gotta tell you, in my33-year career, the greatest
things I ever learned were notfrom people that wore the badge
(16:59):
and carried a gun.
It was people that were wereexperts in the various air areas
that impacted my ability or thelaw enforcement organization's
ability to be able to optimallyserve the communities that they
serve.
Fatima Bey (17:14):
What I'm hearing is that, and it seems to be a re
repetitive uh principle fromyou, is the involvement of
community, the concept andinvolvement of community, and
how we need to be more communityfocused instead of brunt force
focused.
And there's times where bruntforce is absolutely needed.
There's times where thingswhere danger is there and you're
(17:37):
gonna have to shoot a gun.
You're gonna have to slamsomebody down to save a life.
Those things are real too.
But the I think if I I what Ihear you saying, if we switch
our mindset, and again, it'sabout a mind shift, switching
the mind shift from this is whatI'm supposed to do, to
community focus.
How can we work together onthis?
(17:58):
And because there are people inevery community, I truly
believe this.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Itruly believe that there are
people in every singlecommunity, I don't care black,
white, rich, poor, there arepeople in every single community
that want to be helpful.
Jeff Wenninger (18:13):
Oh, absolutely.
Fatima Bey (18:13):
And really want to see, want to see things done
right and want to see bad notmove forward.
Um, but if as long as we keepthis separatist mindset, and
that's what I'm choosing to callit right now, separatist
mindset of the police are bad orthe police, the community is
bad, both mindsets are bad, bothmindsets are self-defeating and
(18:36):
clash with each other.
And I think that's where 90% ofour issues are in that realm.
Um, but I love what I hear yousaying about we need to be
basically more communityfocused.
But what I hear from you is weneed to be more community
focused in a realistic way, notjust on paper and not just as an
idea.
(18:56):
Um, but actually, you know, Ilove the idea of integrating the
community and not getting ridof law enforcement completely,
but integrating the community towork with law enforcement.
I think that's a powerful,powerful um principle that
you're that you're speaking of.
And I think I I completelyagree with you.
Jeff Wenninger (19:15):
It lays the groundwork for the mindset that
you talk about.
The mindset has to it's it'snot just the the uh police
executives and the mi policemanagement personnel.
It it's even more importantwhere the grounds meet the
pavement, the police officers.
And w I worked I worked 77thDivision right after the riots,
(19:38):
the the Rodney King riots in theearly 90s.
The riots were in 1992 and andI started working Ramp in 1999.
And and I'll I'll give you aperfect example.
On one day, my my partner wasnot there.
And another officer, hispartner wasn't there.
And we were assigned to worktogether for that one day.
We worked together for one day.
(19:59):
And we were driving down thestreet and we saw a male white
and a female black and they wereholding hands.
And he says to me, My parentstaught me better than that.
And I said, What ex what do youmean by that?
And he goes, My parents taughtme not to have sex with animals.
So this kind of goes to whatyou talked about earlier.
(20:21):
Um the dehumanization ofpeople, first and foremost.
It talks about the you call itthe separatist situation.
Mindset.
Mindset, you know.
Um or I what I call is the themversus us type of type of
mentality.
Yeah.
And the reality that we have tobe honest with ourselves, that
(20:44):
our attitudes and beliefs willinfluence our actions and our
behaviors.
So I knew I never wanted towork with this guy again because
I knew that he and I workingtogether, getting out of the
same black and white police carto handle any type of call that
we may be addressing, hisactions and his behavior is
(21:05):
going to be reflective of me.
Uh, and I wasn't gonna havethat.
So unfortunately, althoughlisten, the vast majority of
police officers arewell-intentioned, good people
that have that have nothing butbut but good hearts.
But the problem with lawenforcement is there is an
underbelly that is allowed tocoexist, and it's there.
(21:27):
And I knew that this officerwas just one of a number that I
was going to have contact withthroughout my career.
And that proved to be true.
But what I used to take when Iworked 77th Division following
the riots, I I took it as aresponsibility of mine to, in
uniform as a police officer,take whatever opportunity I had
(21:51):
to interact with the communitymembers, and I chose primarily
children to interact with.
I would drive in when I hadsome downtime into the projects,
and I would throw the footballwith the kids there.
Really for two reasons.
To show them, one, that I'm notthe enemy, that I am human just
like they are.
And two, that I didn't see themas the enemy.
(22:14):
And I used to get ridiculed forthat.
The police culture looked at meas that's ridiculous.
What are you doing?
And I'm like, why wouldn't I dothis?
You know, the reality is the ameasure of of society is how
well it treats its marginalizedcommunities.
That that's that's really astrong measure.
And I've I always felt thateven if I can just reach one or
(22:37):
two kids where they would say,you know, that officer Wininger,
he was a good guy.
All cops aren't bad cops.
Then guess what?
It was well worth my time andenergy to do that.
And we need more policeofficers to have that type of
mindset.
We need to get away from what Icall this militarization.
I think it's ridiculous.
I live in a community of 4,100people, and the police officers
(22:59):
have these exterior ballisticflak jackets with their tasers
on their chest and all.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
It's like it looks like they'rein Beirut.
And you know, that that's notthat's not the image that we
need to be projecting to thecitizens that we serve and
protect, because the reality isthat image, it has an impact on
(23:20):
your mindset and what you seeyour role or your function as
being.
We really need to get in, getin tune with sociology and
psychology and pure andempirical evidence and start
driving our management of policeorganizations consistent with
what that stuff tells us.
And there's a huge void there.
Fatima Bey (23:39):
I agree.
Let me ask you this.
I'm gonna piggyback offsomething you just said.
You said you you talked aboutthe police with the tasers on
their chest and this basicallyuh I'm gonna say brunt force
look.
I'm not sure what other wordsto use right now, but this this
we're tough, we're here to kickass kind of uh uh appearance.
(24:00):
What effects does that have onthe community?
And let me be really specific.
If someone sees the police asuh brunt force not there to be
helpful, just there to harm,what is the danger of that
mindset of the people of thecommunity who therefore will not
call the police when they're introuble?
Jeff Wenninger (24:22):
Aaron Powell Well, it does.
It it just perpetuateseverything.
You know, and it and it evenmakes it worse in regards to how
the officers themselves thentreat the public.
Because how many times do wesee where you have an officer
who's yelling and usingexpletives and just demanding
that somebody do something as asif it's the uniform and the
(24:44):
badge is the reason in and ofitself that they should do
something?
You know, oftentimes, like wesaid, 36% of the time when
you're dealing with thesescenarios that become lethal
force incidents, that they'reit's somebody suffering from a
mental health crisis.
So you're not dealing withsomebody that's that's thinking
logically and rationally.
So to try to assert your powerthat way, it's ineffective.
(25:09):
It's not going to result in anoptimal outcome.
The responsibility is to standback and take time to assess, to
actually care.
So for instance, if you have aradio call that you answer and
you respond to it, and it'ssomebody that's acting violently
and say they're being reportedto be armed with a knife or a
(25:31):
hammer or what have you, familymembers have come out of the
house or the apartment and theindividual's still inside.
There's nobody else in therewith them.
And what what what is theexigency?
We have all time in the worldon our side to have the response
of mental health practitionersto help guide us and direct us
and to better address thissituation.
(25:53):
We have an unbelievableresource of knowledge, the
family members ask pertinentcorrupt questions, which we
don't often see.
You know, what is the mentalhealth crisis?
Does the person takemedication?
When was the last time theytook the medication?
Have they had this type ofincident before?
What worked in calming themdown?
(26:16):
How was it resolved?
All of these sorts of things,it's because knowledge and
information is going to make youbetter at your judgments and
how best to address thisparticular situation, because no
situation is the same.
And we don't see that.
We see this imposing ourauthority through the presence
(26:38):
of our uniform and our badge inthe deployment of our lethal and
less lethal, less lethal beingbeanbags, sponge guns and tasers
and those sorts of things, anddemanding compliance with what
we're verbally telling you todo.
And the the proof is in thepudding.
The data tells you it's noteffective.
(26:59):
It's all about mindset.
Right.
And when I did um I have aforthcoming book called On Thin
Ice, I went over to Europe.
I spent some time with theLondon Metropolitan Police,
where they don't generally carryguns.
But guess what?
They have the same types ofincidents where they're
confronting people with a weaponother than a firearm.
(27:22):
So they have in in the UK andWales, they had a total of five
officer-involved shootings in ayear.
They don't have any fewer ofthese incidents where officers
are confronting somebody that'sarmed with a something other
than a handgun, but they're ableto resolve them so much more
peacefully.
And when I was talking to them,it was about the mindset.
(27:45):
It's how they saw their role.
And that it wasn't about endingthis thing in an in in a time
frame that best um, you know,was accommodating to the police,
but it was about the bestoutcome.
And it was really interesting.
I I gleaned a lot ofinformation and knowledge from
(28:06):
them.
There's so much we can learnfrom those organizations over
there.
But the pushback is, well, theysociety they don't have guns
like we do here.
That's not the point.
We're talking about incidentswhere there a gun on the
suspects um um side of thingsdoesn't exist.
We're talking about theincidents that are similar to
what we oftentimes use lethalforce to resolve here.
(28:29):
Why is it that they don't?
Why is it that they have fewerofficer injuries than we do
handling those same sorts ofincidents when we're deploying
lethal force?
Tough questions.
Fatima Bey (28:40):
Mindset.
Mindset.
Let me ask you this, becausethis podcast is about the next
generation.
And looking at the nextgeneration, why should a young
person of color with a deepsense of justice choose to
become a police officer todayinstead of becoming an activist
fighting against the police?
Because we know that happens.
Uh, what is your brutallyhonest sales pitch for the
(29:02):
future of policing to the nextgeneration who's rightfully
skeptical?
Jeff Wenninger (29:08):
Well, you know, listen, I got into law
enforcement because I wasskeptical.
I was really in college, I wasconfronted by the police, who
then proceeded to beat me andtook me to jail and booked me
for resisting arrest,interfering in official
business, and disorderlyconduct.
I did nothing wrong.
(29:28):
I spent my entire summer'searnings on an attorney.
I refused to take any of theplea bargains, and I took it all
the way to a jury trial.
When I showed up for the jurytrial, they presented me with a
sixty dollar ticket.
If I was willing to sign it,they would drop all the charges.
I went ahead and did that.
About a year and a half later,the same law enforcement agency
(29:51):
that arrested me, theyadvertised for correction
officers in their city jail.
I applied.
I was hired.
Complete exoneration of anywrongdoing, right?
But what that did is thatchanged my entire trajectory of
my life.
If you at 18 would have told methat I was going to do a
33-year of law enforcement andhave a 33-year law enforcement
career in Los Angeles, I wouldhave told you you're nuts.
(30:12):
But that's ultimately whathappened.
Because I wanted to go into lawenforcement to make a
difference, to make it betterfrom within.
And it's it's it's about havingan influence from within and
being How have you made itbetter?
Pardon me?
Fatima Bey (30:26):
How have you made it better?
Jeff Wenninger (30:28):
Oh, well, you know, I spent a great deal of my
career working in forceincidents.
For Chief William Bratton andChief uh Charlie Beck, I used to
write their adjudication ofofficer-in-volved shooting cases
that's submitted to theHonorable War Police
Commissioners, who are theultimate adjudicators of all uh
officer-in-volved shootings andlethal force cases.
(30:50):
And then I went on to becomethe officer in charge of
detective entity thatinvestigates all
officer-involved shootings andlethal force cases.
And in doing this, I wrote thebrand new adjudication standard,
and it's a standard that isstill used today.
And not only that, but therewas a debrief model that I built
into it.
Prior to this new debrief modelbeing implemented, you could be
(31:11):
involved in an incident and youcould make mistakes, things
that needed to be corrected,things that if you were
confronted with a similarcircumstance, you would make
sure not to do again in thefuture in correcting your
conduct and your behavior.
Unfortunately, we didn'taddress any of those things
until a year later when the casewas adjudicated.
(31:33):
So my debrief model to addressthat, where you had a debrief of
all of the substantiallyinvolved personnel within 30
days of the incident, where youcould address deficiencies.
And what incident caused that?
We had one in Hollywooddivision where an officer
arrested an individual after ause of force, had him
handcuffed, and remain allowedhim to remain laying prone,
(31:57):
handcuffed, and the individualdied.
That was against our policiesand procedures.
We're required when as soon aspractical to sit them upright or
to have them laying on theirleft lateral because the
potential for someone dying frompositional asphyxia.
And unfortunately, this officerdid the exact same thing within
(32:18):
that year before that initialcase was adjudicated, and the
deficiency was never addressed.
So it's if it's I've donethings where I recognize areas
that we need to improve on, um,but at the same time, we um we
we're we're making it better forthe police officers because
they're better apt at being ableto perform their role and then
(32:40):
building trust with thecommunity, where the community
doesn't have to see this sort ofthing happen.
I mean, what trust kind oftrust do you have in in your
police department when the sameofficer is engaged in the exact
same behavior within a year andit re has the same deadly
result?
It's not it so it's those sortsof things that I was always
looking to try to improve and tohave an influence on.
(33:04):
Um I could go on and on.
Uh I did a number of studies,like uh um contagious fire
studies for the policedepartment and training and the
change of our qualificationcourse that built in and an
assessment element to it ratherthan just prior to that, what we
would have is everybody be onthe firing line and the targets
would turn and everybody wouldstart firing.
(33:25):
What are we doing?
What we're doing is we'reprogramming people to fire
whenever they hear otherofficers firing.
Well, what we built into it wasan assessment that everybody's
target's going to turn, butguess what?
You may have a no-shoot target.
So you don't just start firing.
You have to assess what youhave.
Well, I don't fire.
So I was responsible for thatbeing built in.
(33:48):
So I I've I've tried to tohold, I've I've tried to
implement things that hold off,give officers better training,
hold them more accountable within the hopes of building the
trust with the community that weserve.
Fatima Bey (34:00):
So what I hear, I'm what I'm extracting from
everything you just said is ifyou really want a system to be
better, get in and change it.
And just because you go in todo one thing, you may end up
doing another.
Because you didn't, it soundslike you didn't plan on doing
everything that you ended updoing.
And you have made a a what Iconsider a masterful difference.
(34:22):
Um, your difference wasn'tdirectly on the street, it was
above that so that it could beaffected on the street.
Um, I'm not sure what's thebest way for me to word that,
but uh that's what I hear is ifyou really want to see, and I
think this again goes beyondpolicing.
If you really want to see adifference in a system, you do
need to become a part of it.
(34:44):
And then from there, you mayend up in places you never
thought you would be, but youhave to first try.
Yeah, I mean it's it's that'sthat's what I extracted.
Jeff Wenninger (34:51):
And it's and it starts, it starts when you're on
the when you're out in thefield, when you're answering the
radio calls.
It it starts with how youconduct yourself.
But I found and I learned veryquickly that my scope of
influence was greater if Ipromoted.
And that's why I promoted.
And then the reputation that Ibuilt in the various assignments
(35:12):
that I held, which are a numberof them were coveted positions.
I was I had a seat at the tableto make a difference and to
make actionable solutionspracticable.
And because it's never perfect,but I gotta tell you what,
don't ever tell me no.
If you if you come to me with aproblem and you but but we
(35:33):
can't fix it, oh no.
Yes, we can.
We absolutely can.
I mean, and that came from meas a child.
You know, I I was extremelypigeon-toed.
I had to wear white leatherboots when I was a kid.
I was uh I had a speechimpediment.
I had to have speech therapy.
I'm dyslexic.
When I was in fifth grade, Iwas reading at a first grade
level.
And I overcame all of that togo on and achieve uh, you know,
(35:58):
higher educational um degreesand and things like that, um,
and to have the type of careerthat I have and be an author of
a book.
So, you know, don't tell me no.
Um it's it's about lawenforcement is about
accountability.
Enough of the excuses.
Fatima Bey (36:14):
I love you.
Now, let me ask you this.
I ask every guest, what advicedo you have for the youth of the
world today?
Jeff Wenninger (36:23):
Advice for the youth of the world.
Well, I think it's importantthat people identify something
to pursue that they'repassionate about, that they can
have an impact within, and thatis actually feasible.
And it's about when if you lookat those three things where you
have the overlap, that'll tellyou what you need to be focusing
(36:44):
on.
And one thing that I learnedfrom my parents, and that I I
pass on to my my uh son, is thatno matter what it is that you
strive to achieve, be the bestat it you possibly can.
And that will that will takeyou a long way.
And it's not about being thebest at it.
(37:06):
It's about being the best thatyou can be, the be the best
version of yourself.
When I'm comprising a team,when I ran the Rampart Gang Unit
after the Rampart scandal andcorruption issues that they've
they dealt with, when I chose mypersonnel, it wasn't always the
officers with the with the bestuh arrest records and those
(37:26):
sorts of things.
I was looking for diversifiedexperiences, people that held
themselves to a higher standard,that had an unbelievable work
ethic, but most importantly, hadintegrity.
A man is only as good as hisword, and you always want to be
a good man and a good woman.
So that's those are those arethe things that I would try to
(37:46):
expound on anybody that's youngmoving forward in any endeavor
that they're trying toaccomplish.
Fatima Bey (37:52):
Aaron Powell Wonderful advice.
Um now for the audiencelistening right now, he does
have a book called Anthenice.
And uh the the conversationyou've heard today is bits and
pieces of some of the stuff hehas in there, but really only uh
like tiny little morsels of alot of what he has to say.
(38:13):
Um so I think I'm lookingforward to the book, and I think
that people should read it.
So tell us how can we find youand how can they find your book?
Jeff Wenninger (38:22):
Okay.
Well, the book, if you go to onthinicebook.com, you can put in
your email address and get andget put on the uh the waiting
list, and you'll be getting theupdated emails.
Book's gonna be coming out nextmonth.
Um, and it's it's a book thatwhether you're a suburban
housewife, you're a lawenforcement executive or law
(38:45):
enforcement officer, active orretired, or you're a legislator,
this book has something thatyou can learn.
And it's about my my uniquepersonal background, my
professional experiences, and mypractical insights.
But most importantly, theactionable solutions that I
suggest can be implemented or atleast considered or should be
(39:09):
part of the discussion and whatneeds to be done for law
enforcement to be successfulmoving forward in the 21st
century.
Fatima Bey (39:15):
Aaron Powell And why should a teenager read your
book?
Jeff Wenninger (39:17):
Aaron Powell Because it it deals with the
future of law enforcement.
And as a teenager, whether youit resonates or aligns with you
in this moment on your daily,day-to-day basis, um, it
actually does impact you becauseyou may or may not have direct
contact with law enforcement.
(39:37):
But what it does is it givesyou an insider's perspective
about law enforcement.
Only about 20% of people havedirect contact with law
enforcement officers.
The vast majority of them formtheir opinions based on what
they see on social media, in thenews, or what they read in the
newspaper.
So this is an insider'sperspective that can help help
you understand a law enforcementofficer, a law enforcement
(40:00):
officer that looks like me, thatI guarantee you, if you look at
me, you're going to think thatI'm very different than what I
share in the book.
Because the reality is thatunfortunately, regardless of
whether you're the police oryou're the citizens viewing the
police, we impose ourstereotypes.
And you know, there were timeswhere I would be confronted
(40:21):
with, oh, there's the white,blue-eyed KKK hood wearing, you
know, police officer, blah,blah, blah.
Couldn't have been the furthestthing from the truth.
You know, I was raised in afamily.
I had a foster sister who wasblack.
For for two and a half years, Idated a deputy sheriff who who
was black, who I'm still very,very close with.
Um and and the the reality iswe can't make these assumptions
(40:43):
about people.
Once we we have the insight tostop doing that, then then we
can really make the themeaningful work for the progress
that's needed moving forward.
Fatima Bey (40:54):
Absolutely.
Well, Jeff Weninger, thank youso much for coming on today.
I really, really appreciate uhyou taking the time to to speak
to um to speak to our youth andto the world.
And um I love I wish I couldmake this conversation longer
because you have so much to say.
Uh, you really do.
You really do have a lot to saythat I think that people should
(41:15):
listen to, uh, which is one ofthe reasons I have you on here.
So once again, thank you somuch for coming on.
Jeff Wenninger (41:20):
Oh, I appreciate it.
And I like I like you said, wewe could talk for hours.
Absolutely.
Fatima Bey (41:27):
You've been listening to My Shift Power
Podcast for complete show noteson this episode, and to join our
global movement, find us atfatima bay.com.
Until next time, alwaysremember there's power in
shifting your thinking.
Mind Shift PowerPoint.
This is Mind Shift PowerPodcast, the number one
critically acclaimed podcastwhere we have raw, unfiltered
conversations that shapetomorrow.
I'm your host, Fatima Bay, theMind Shifter.
And welcome everyone.
(00:22):
Today we have with us JeffWeninger, and he is a nationally
recognized expert in lawenforcement, a retired
lieutenant, and has over 33years of experience primarily
with the LAPD, and he is thefounder and CEO of Law
Enforcement Consultants LLC.
How are you doing today, Jeff?
Jeff Wenninger (00:42):
I'm doing just fine, thank you.
Fatima Bey (00:43):
So tell us why are you on this podcast today?
Jeff Wenninger (00:46):
Aaron Powell Well, I'm on this podcast
because I think the uh thingsthat I have to say will resonate
with your listeners in regardsto some of the challenges that
uh our society is facing inregards to the community and
policing relationship, um,because it impacts everybody.
Whether you're a parent oryou're a retiree or you're a
(01:08):
child growing up, yourexperiences and exposure to law
enforcement is important inregards to the impression that
you form in your mind about whothey are and what they
represent.
Fatima Bey (01:20):
Aaron Ross Powell Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Tell us a little bit about yourbackground.
Jeff Wenninger (01:24):
Well, I was uh my mother was a a teenage uh
young girl when when she becamepregnant with me, and she made a
decision to put me up foradoption.
And my uh folks, they weremarried for a number of years,
and they wanted four children,each one year apart, and they
weren't having any luck becomingpregnant, so they looked into
(01:45):
the adoption process, and rightabout the time they got approved
for adoption, lo and behold, mymother became pregnant with my
sister.
But they pr decided to proceedwith the adoption process and
they adopted me.
And then they adopted mybrother who's Japanese, and then
I have a foster sister who'sblack.
So I was born in uh Kent, Ohioin the Midwest, and was raised
during the 60s and 70s with amultiracial family.
(02:07):
And that's the type of umexperience that I brought into
my law enforcement and lawenforcement professional career,
which is very different thanthe peers and the people that I
worked with.
Fatima Bey (02:17):
Okay.
I think that makes you, to me,that makes you very interesting.
Um, you know, we you had all ofthat before you came to work
with the LAPD.
Um I think that gives you aunique perspective that the
average person doesn't have, andI just I love that.
So let me ask you this.
You've reviewed over 700 use offorce cases, and the public
(02:40):
often hears the phrase, theofficers' actions were within
policy.
From your insider'sperspective, talk about the
dangerous gaps between what islegally justified and what is
morally right, and how that gapis where community trust goes to
die.
Jeff Wenninger (02:58):
Well, you I think you hit it on the head
because uh the- I have alwayssaid this: just because you can
doesn't mean you should.
So the law to the law inregards to the assessment and
evaluation of an officer'sapplication of force is rather
lenient.
It's Graham versus Connor, it'sa 1989 Supreme Court case that
(03:19):
stipulates that it's Grahamversus Connor, which is
objective reasonableness.
And essentially what that is,is would an officer with similar
training and experience undersimilar circumstances acted in a
similar manner?
If the answer is yes, then it'sgoing to be in policy.
And the courts in evaluatingexcessive force cases so
(03:40):
narrowly limited the analysis tothe moment of threat right at
the moment that the officer madea decision to use lethal force.
And that's not always where theproblem lies.
It's the actions and decisionsthat led up to that fraction of
a second where you make thatdecision.
(04:00):
But that was not beinganalyzed.
So oftentimes you'd sit thereand go, you're telling me not
to, you know, you're telling methat my my eyes are lying to me,
that you're saying what thisofficer did, what I'm seeing in
this video or whatever it isthat you're evaluating is
appropriate and makes this okay.
And unfortunately, what thecourts were doing was just
(04:21):
looking at that moment.
But for instance, I'll give youa scenario.
If you have an officer and havean individual that's in a
vehicle, and that vehicle istrying to drive away, the
officer stands in front of thevehicle and then fires at the
individual driving it, which islethal force, with the
(04:41):
articulation that, well, I wasafraid I was going to get run
over, which would cause meserious bodily injury or death,
so then therefore I'm justifiedin using lethal force.
Well, you you created thatcircumstance.
Not only did you create thatcircumstance, but by and large,
the vast majority of lawenforcement agencies have
policies that prohibit you fromstanding in front of a vehicle
that's trying to flee, andyou're not to use lethal force
(05:03):
unless presented with a threatother than the vehicle itself as
the threat that your concern isgoing to cause you serious bile
injury or death, as i.e.,someone pointing a handgun out
of the vehicle at you.
So you know, you you create thecircumstances yourself.
And that's that's somethingthat that that law enforcement
(05:24):
has to be accountable to.
To to sit there and say that itwas justified, um it's it's
really hard to ask the communityto accept that.
And recently there was just aBarnes versus Felix uh case that
the Supreme Court ruled on, andthey they basically clarified
(05:46):
Graham versus Connor, saying,no, it's the totality of the
circumstances.
You are, as the courts, to beevaluating all of the officers'
actions all the way to themoment that the decision was
made to use lethal force.
So that has been expanded atthis point, and we'll see how
that is applied moving forward.
But I think that should givethe community and people that
(06:10):
have concerns a little bit ofpause and some peace in mind
relative to the Supreme Court'sassessment that no, in in order
to maintain a relationship withthe communities that you serve
and can meaning transparency andtrust, um, you you have to be
(06:30):
evaluating all aspects of theincident, not just that moment
when the force was used.
Fatima Bey (06:35):
Aaron Ross Powell Absolutely.
And I think that social mediaplays a very gigantic part in
that because people's opinionsare often based on a moment in a
video and not they don't knowthe full situation or the full
situation is hidden or just notrevealed yet, because sometimes
you just don't know yet.
And I think very often, and Ithink this goes beyond policing,
(06:58):
we we have to stop just takinga little snippet of a moment and
thinking that that's thetotality of everything.
It's not, it it almost neveris, actually.
You know, um, as you were justsaying, we we have to look at
more than just a moment.
And you're talking about fromthe uh the legal perspective,
but I I want the audience toknow that we need to take that
same mindset and apply it toother things.
(07:19):
You know, when we're looking atuh someone being shooting,
someone fighting, whatever thecase is, we need to look at more
than just a moment and assessthe entire situation because
that's the only way toadequately um make a decision
about something.
Jeff Wenninger (07:35):
Aaron Powell I'd just like to expand a little
bit because I'd often hear, andit's a justification, and I
don't know if it's a rationalebecause you're trying to build
up some armor to to be able tolive at the fact that you use
lethal force and perhaps youdidn't necessarily need to, but
although it's legally justified.
Um, you know, they say you youknow, you play stupid games, you
get stupid awards, you know.
I mean, and and it's thatthere's that kind of a mindset.
(07:57):
You know, it it's it's it's umand it really what it is, it's a
dehumanization of the of theperson that you use the lethal
force against.
And it's a lot easier to to useforce when you see people as
less than you, so to speak.
And unfortunately, that thatmindset takes you down a rabbit
hole where it just perpetuatesthat them versus us mentality.
(08:18):
You you have to look at thesituation and really evaluate
what is your role and yourfunction in this circumstance?
Because the reality is about36% of all officer-involved
shootings involve somebodysuffering from mental health
issues.
They're having a mental crisis.
So how self-aware are we aspolice officers in understanding
(08:43):
the impact of our mere presencein uniform at a scene
confronting somebody that'ssuffering a mental health
crisis, where we have our gunsdrawn, we have a beanbag shotgun
pointed at them, we have ataser with a laser dart on their
chest.
I mean, that would that wouldimpact you and I in a negative
way, the anxiety and and stuffand unpredictability of what we
(09:06):
may do in any split second basedon and we're fine.
Now, equate that to somebodythat's in a mental health
crisis.
So 36% of officer-involvedshootings involve those types of
people.
And it and it's unfortunatethat we're not really aligned
with the best practices and howto address this.
(09:27):
We're using our traditional lawenforcement tactics, which are
hyper-visilant-vigilant on forceto resolve incidents, rather
than being innovative andcreative and thinking outside
the box.
And sometimes working withpeople that may have better
levels of expertise in this areathan than we do.
And the the reality is a verysmall percentage of law
(09:49):
enforcement agencies in thiscountry have appropriate
training and have, and evenfewer have incorporated mental
health practitioners into theirresponses to these types of
calls.
So is is it any surprise thatwe don't have the optimal
outcomes?
No, it's not.
Um that's that's a huge gapwhere we where there's a big
(10:10):
learning curve that needs to beimplemented.
And in and then not only, and Isaw this with the LAPD, having
served there for just over 30years, the it's one thing to
have the training and to havethe policies and procedures in
place, which LAPD is in theforefront when it deals with
people suffering a mental healthcrisis.
(10:31):
They have the mental evaluationunit, which helps to assist in
these circumstances, thehandling of these types of
incidents.
But the problem is, is they'vehad it for almost two decades.
They still have third third oftheir shootings involve people
suffering from a mental healthcrisis.
So you ask, why is that?
(10:52):
Well, it goes back to themindset.
What controls the mindset?
The culture.
Culture eats training forlunch.
And unfortunately Oh, I likethe way you said that.
Fatima Bey (11:03):
That's a good quote.
Jeff Wenninger (11:04):
Unfortunately, you have you have the training,
you have the policies andprocedures, but that's that's
just that's fluff.
That doesn't mean anything ifyour culture is not aligned with
what the policies andprocedures and the training
happens to be.
And that's where there's a hugegap in law enforcement.
Fatima Bey (11:20):
Yeah.
And mindset is everything.
It's something I'm constantlytalking about on and off the
air, um, in everything I do.
Absolutely 100% mindset.
And I want to go back to whatyou said about dehumanizing
people, because I do think thatthat is the root of a lot of
them, a lot of stuff.
Shootings and other things andother four forms of excessive
force, because shootings is onlyone.
(11:42):
When we see people as lessthan, it is always going to be
an issue.
It's an issue for all of us,but it's a deeper issue when you
have authority and a weapon.
And um, yeah, that's that'sthat's everything.
And I also want to mention, yousaid uh, I think you said 36%.
Um, shootings have to do withpeople with mental health
(12:05):
issues.
And I didn't know that number,but I I also wonder what the
number is for people who wereautistic.
Because I think sometimes whenit comes to dealing with them,
it they're in the same boatbecause they're they're in the
same boat because they'remisunderstood.
They're not the same people,but they're in the same boat
because they're misunderstood.
(12:26):
And if you don't know thatyou're dealing with someone
with, you know, who um whosebrain is wired differently, they
don't understand what's goingon the same way you do, uh that
matters.
That I could see that beingdeadly.
Um, and I know I've seen, Ican't quote any right now, but I
know I've seen uh and heard ofsituations where that's been the
(12:48):
case.
And I I think it's I think itfalls under the same purview as
what you're saying.
Let me ask you this.
You dismiss uh surface levelreforms.
If you were given power to makeone change to a police
department's culture that wouldhave uh the biggest impact on
public trust, even if it's meantfiring 10% of your officers,
(13:09):
what would that one politicallyincorrect, brutally honest
change be?
Jeff Wenninger (13:14):
I would make large strides in the
civilianization of lawenforcement.
And I don't mean thatcommunications or in the
evidence room or that stuff.
I'm talking about people thathold command-level positions
that are civilians.
(13:35):
Never been to a police academy,uh, never carried a gun, never
handled a radio call, butthey're there because of their
expertise in the various areasthat law enforcement, in order
to be successful moving forwardin the 21st century, have to be
well versed in.
So for instance, I'll give youan example.
When I was at the LAPD underWilliam Bratton, when he was our
(13:58):
chief of police, he was he wasa rock star.
He was well ahead of his peersin his mindset.
So we were under a consentdecree.
And he brought in an attorney,Jerry Chaliff, who he made
equivalent of a deputy chief whois in charge of the consent
decree bureau.
(14:18):
He brought in Mary Grady, whowas a civilian who had decades
of experience managing ordealing with the media as a
reporter in Los Angeles.
Because let's be honest, one ofthe huge gaps that law
enforcement has and failuresthat they have is their
inability to manage thenarrative after a critical
(14:40):
incident.
They do not have much insightor self-awareness relative to
the impact of the informationthey're releasing as well as the
impact of the information theychoose not to release.
So you get you get some insightof somebody outside of the
organization.
Also brought in a civilianpsychologist who took over the
(15:03):
academy training as well as thetraining of in-service
personnel, oversaw thattraining.
So these are people that havehigher levels of expertise and
experience and education inthese areas that generally
nobody in the law enforcementorganization has.
So they're able to bring to thetable a perspective that's
(15:29):
different.
And I've always said this (15:30):
it's not about being right, it's
about getting it right.
And getting it right requiresthat you have as many
diversified opinions sitting atthe table when you're talking
about these critical issues thatare facing law enforcement
today.
And that is the huge changethat I would make.
Right now we hear, oh, we'redown X number of sworn personnel
(15:54):
and yada, yada, yada, yada.
I I suggest that if we were toremove the officers that are in
assignments that have absolutelynothing to do with their
training and experience as lawenforcement officers, and
replace them with people thathave specific specialized
(16:14):
expertise in those areas andfocus just sworn personnel to
handle the roles that arerequired to have sworn powers to
arrest and to use force and allthose sorts of things, then we
don't need these huge numbers aswe claim to.
There's a study in um, Ibelieve it was in Milwaukee,
(16:37):
where they had analysis done,and it came back that it said,
you know, hire you know, hire166 civilians and you only have
to hire like 26 police officersversus basically a flip-flop.
So I gotta tell you, in my33-year career, the greatest
things I ever learned were notfrom people that wore the badge
(16:59):
and carried a gun.
It was people that were wereexperts in the various air areas
that impacted my ability or thelaw enforcement organization's
ability to be able to optimallyserve the communities that they
serve.
Fatima Bey (17:14):
What I'm hearing is that, and it seems to be a re
repetitive uh principle fromyou, is the involvement of
community, the concept andinvolvement of community, and
how we need to be more communityfocused instead of brunt force
focused.
And there's times where bruntforce is absolutely needed.
There's times where thingswhere danger is there and you're
(17:37):
gonna have to shoot a gun.
You're gonna have to slamsomebody down to save a life.
Those things are real too.
But the I think if I I what Ihear you saying, if we switch
our mindset, and again, it'sabout a mind shift, switching
the mind shift from this is whatI'm supposed to do, to
community focus.
How can we work together onthis?
(17:58):
And because there are people inevery community, I truly
believe this.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but Itruly believe that there are
people in every singlecommunity, I don't care black,
white, rich, poor, there arepeople in every single community
that want to be helpful.
Jeff Wenninger (18:13):
Oh, absolutely.
Fatima Bey (18:13):
And really want to see, want to see things done
right and want to see bad notmove forward.
Um, but if as long as we keepthis separatist mindset, and
that's what I'm choosing to callit right now, separatist
mindset of the police are bad orthe police, the community is
bad, both mindsets are bad, bothmindsets are self-defeating and
(18:36):
clash with each other.
And I think that's where 90% ofour issues are in that realm.
Um, but I love what I hear yousaying about we need to be
basically more communityfocused.
But what I hear from you is weneed to be more community
focused in a realistic way, notjust on paper and not just as an
idea.
(18:56):
Um, but actually, you know, Ilove the idea of integrating the
community and not getting ridof law enforcement completely,
but integrating the community towork with law enforcement.
I think that's a powerful,powerful um principle that
you're that you're speaking of.
And I think I I completelyagree with you.
Jeff Wenninger (19:15):
It lays the groundwork for the mindset that
you talk about.
The mindset has to it's it'snot just the the uh police
executives and the mi policemanagement personnel.
It it's even more importantwhere the grounds meet the
pavement, the police officers.
And w I worked I worked 77thDivision right after the riots,
(19:38):
the the Rodney King riots in theearly 90s.
The riots were in 1992 and andI started working Ramp in 1999.
And and I'll I'll give you aperfect example.
On one day, my my partner wasnot there.
And another officer, hispartner wasn't there.
And we were assigned to worktogether for that one day.
We worked together for one day.
(19:59):
And we were driving down thestreet and we saw a male white
and a female black and they wereholding hands.
And he says to me, My parentstaught me better than that.
And I said, What ex what do youmean by that?
And he goes, My parents taughtme not to have sex with animals.
So this kind of goes to whatyou talked about earlier.
(20:21):
Um the dehumanization ofpeople, first and foremost.
It talks about the you call itthe separatist situation.
Mindset.
Mindset, you know.
Um or I what I call is the themversus us type of type of
mentality.
Yeah.
And the reality that we have tobe honest with ourselves, that
(20:44):
our attitudes and beliefs willinfluence our actions and our
behaviors.
So I knew I never wanted towork with this guy again because
I knew that he and I workingtogether, getting out of the
same black and white police carto handle any type of call that
we may be addressing, hisactions and his behavior is
(21:05):
going to be reflective of me.
Uh, and I wasn't gonna havethat.
So unfortunately, althoughlisten, the vast majority of
police officers arewell-intentioned, good people
that have that have nothing butbut but good hearts.
But the problem with lawenforcement is there is an
underbelly that is allowed tocoexist, and it's there.
(21:27):
And I knew that this officerwas just one of a number that I
was going to have contact withthroughout my career.
And that proved to be true.
But what I used to take when Iworked 77th Division following
the riots, I I took it as aresponsibility of mine to, in
uniform as a police officer,take whatever opportunity I had
(21:51):
to interact with the communitymembers, and I chose primarily
children to interact with.
I would drive in when I hadsome downtime into the projects,
and I would throw the footballwith the kids there.
Really for two reasons.
To show them, one, that I'm notthe enemy, that I am human just
like they are.
And two, that I didn't see themas the enemy.
(22:14):
And I used to get ridiculed forthat.
The police culture looked at meas that's ridiculous.
What are you doing?
And I'm like, why wouldn't I dothis?
You know, the reality is the ameasure of of society is how
well it treats its marginalizedcommunities.
That that's that's really astrong measure.
And I've I always felt thateven if I can just reach one or
(22:37):
two kids where they would say,you know, that officer Wininger,
he was a good guy.
All cops aren't bad cops.
Then guess what?
It was well worth my time andenergy to do that.
And we need more policeofficers to have that type of
mindset.
We need to get away from what Icall this militarization.
I think it's ridiculous.
I live in a community of 4,100people, and the police officers
(22:59):
have these exterior ballisticflak jackets with their tasers
on their chest and all.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
It's like it looks like they'rein Beirut.
And you know, that that's notthat's not the image that we
need to be projecting to thecitizens that we serve and
protect, because the reality isthat image, it has an impact on
(23:20):
your mindset and what you seeyour role or your function as
being.
We really need to get in, getin tune with sociology and
psychology and pure andempirical evidence and start
driving our management of policeorganizations consistent with
what that stuff tells us.
And there's a huge void there.
Fatima Bey (23:39):
I agree.
Let me ask you this.
I'm gonna piggyback offsomething you just said.
You said you you talked aboutthe police with the tasers on
their chest and this basicallyuh I'm gonna say brunt force
look.
I'm not sure what other wordsto use right now, but this this
we're tough, we're here to kickass kind of uh uh appearance.
(24:00):
What effects does that have onthe community?
And let me be really specific.
If someone sees the police asuh brunt force not there to be
helpful, just there to harm,what is the danger of that
mindset of the people of thecommunity who therefore will not
call the police when they're introuble?
Jeff Wenninger (24:22):
Aaron Powell Well, it does.
It it just perpetuateseverything.
You know, and it and it evenmakes it worse in regards to how
the officers themselves thentreat the public.
Because how many times do wesee where you have an officer
who's yelling and usingexpletives and just demanding
that somebody do something as asif it's the uniform and the
(24:44):
badge is the reason in and ofitself that they should do
something?
You know, oftentimes, like wesaid, 36% of the time when
you're dealing with thesescenarios that become lethal
force incidents, that they'reit's somebody suffering from a
mental health crisis.
So you're not dealing withsomebody that's that's thinking
logically and rationally.
So to try to assert your powerthat way, it's ineffective.
(25:09):
It's not going to result in anoptimal outcome.
The responsibility is to standback and take time to assess, to
actually care.
So for instance, if you have aradio call that you answer and
you respond to it, and it'ssomebody that's acting violently
and say they're being reportedto be armed with a knife or a
(25:31):
hammer or what have you, familymembers have come out of the
house or the apartment and theindividual's still inside.
There's nobody else in therewith them.
And what what what is theexigency?
We have all time in the worldon our side to have the response
of mental health practitionersto help guide us and direct us
and to better address thissituation.
(25:53):
We have an unbelievableresource of knowledge, the
family members ask pertinentcorrupt questions, which we
don't often see.
You know, what is the mentalhealth crisis?
Does the person takemedication?
When was the last time theytook the medication?
Have they had this type ofincident before?
What worked in calming themdown?
(26:16):
How was it resolved?
All of these sorts of things,it's because knowledge and
information is going to make youbetter at your judgments and
how best to address thisparticular situation, because no
situation is the same.
And we don't see that.
We see this imposing ourauthority through the presence
(26:38):
of our uniform and our badge inthe deployment of our lethal and
less lethal, less lethal beingbeanbags, sponge guns and tasers
and those sorts of things, anddemanding compliance with what
we're verbally telling you todo.
And the the proof is in thepudding.
The data tells you it's noteffective.
(26:59):
It's all about mindset.
Right.
And when I did um I have aforthcoming book called On Thin
Ice, I went over to Europe.
I spent some time with theLondon Metropolitan Police,
where they don't generally carryguns.
But guess what?
They have the same types ofincidents where they're
confronting people with a weaponother than a firearm.
(27:22):
So they have in in the UK andWales, they had a total of five
officer-involved shootings in ayear.
They don't have any fewer ofthese incidents where officers
are confronting somebody that'sarmed with a something other
than a handgun, but they're ableto resolve them so much more
peacefully.
And when I was talking to them,it was about the mindset.
(27:45):
It's how they saw their role.
And that it wasn't about endingthis thing in an in in a time
frame that best um, you know,was accommodating to the police,
but it was about the bestoutcome.
And it was really interesting.
I I gleaned a lot ofinformation and knowledge from
(28:06):
them.
There's so much we can learnfrom those organizations over
there.
But the pushback is, well, theysociety they don't have guns
like we do here.
That's not the point.
We're talking about incidentswhere there a gun on the
suspects um um side of thingsdoesn't exist.
We're talking about theincidents that are similar to
what we oftentimes use lethalforce to resolve here.
(28:29):
Why is it that they don't?
Why is it that they have fewerofficer injuries than we do
handling those same sorts ofincidents when we're deploying
lethal force?
Tough questions.
Fatima Bey (28:40):
Mindset.
Mindset.
Let me ask you this, becausethis podcast is about the next
generation.
And looking at the nextgeneration, why should a young
person of color with a deepsense of justice choose to
become a police officer todayinstead of becoming an activist
fighting against the police?
Because we know that happens.
Uh, what is your brutallyhonest sales pitch for the
(29:02):
future of policing to the nextgeneration who's rightfully
skeptical?
Jeff Wenninger (29:08):
Well, you know, listen, I got into law
enforcement because I wasskeptical.
I was really in college, I wasconfronted by the police, who
then proceeded to beat me andtook me to jail and booked me
for resisting arrest,interfering in official
business, and disorderlyconduct.
I did nothing wrong.
(29:28):
I spent my entire summer'searnings on an attorney.
I refused to take any of theplea bargains, and I took it all
the way to a jury trial.
When I showed up for the jurytrial, they presented me with a
sixty dollar ticket.
If I was willing to sign it,they would drop all the charges.
I went ahead and did that.
About a year and a half later,the same law enforcement agency
(29:51):
that arrested me, theyadvertised for correction
officers in their city jail.
I applied.
I was hired.
Complete exoneration of anywrongdoing, right?
But what that did is thatchanged my entire trajectory of
my life.
If you at 18 would have told methat I was going to do a
33-year of law enforcement andhave a 33-year law enforcement
career in Los Angeles, I wouldhave told you you're nuts.
(30:12):
But that's ultimately whathappened.
Because I wanted to go into lawenforcement to make a
difference, to make it betterfrom within.
And it's it's it's about havingan influence from within and
being How have you made itbetter?
Pardon me?
Fatima Bey (30:26):
How have you made it better?
Jeff Wenninger (30:28):
Oh, well, you know, I spent a great deal of my
career working in forceincidents.
For Chief William Bratton andChief uh Charlie Beck, I used to
write their adjudication ofofficer-in-volved shooting cases
that's submitted to theHonorable War Police
Commissioners, who are theultimate adjudicators of all uh
officer-in-volved shootings andlethal force cases.
(30:50):
And then I went on to becomethe officer in charge of
detective entity thatinvestigates all
officer-involved shootings andlethal force cases.
And in doing this, I wrote thebrand new adjudication standard,
and it's a standard that isstill used today.
And not only that, but therewas a debrief model that I built
into it.
Prior to this new debrief modelbeing implemented, you could be
(31:11):
involved in an incident and youcould make mistakes, things
that needed to be corrected,things that if you were
confronted with a similarcircumstance, you would make
sure not to do again in thefuture in correcting your
conduct and your behavior.
Unfortunately, we didn'taddress any of those things
until a year later when the casewas adjudicated.
(31:33):
So my debrief model to addressthat, where you had a debrief of
all of the substantiallyinvolved personnel within 30
days of the incident, where youcould address deficiencies.
And what incident caused that?
We had one in Hollywooddivision where an officer
arrested an individual after ause of force, had him
handcuffed, and remain allowedhim to remain laying prone,
(31:57):
handcuffed, and the individualdied.
That was against our policiesand procedures.
We're required when as soon aspractical to sit them upright or
to have them laying on theirleft lateral because the
potential for someone dying frompositional asphyxia.
And unfortunately, this officerdid the exact same thing within
(32:18):
that year before that initialcase was adjudicated, and the
deficiency was never addressed.
So it's if it's I've donethings where I recognize areas
that we need to improve on, um,but at the same time, we um we
we're we're making it better forthe police officers because
they're better apt at being ableto perform their role and then
(32:40):
building trust with thecommunity, where the community
doesn't have to see this sort ofthing happen.
I mean, what trust kind oftrust do you have in in your
police department when the sameofficer is engaged in the exact
same behavior within a year andit re has the same deadly
result?
It's not it so it's those sortsof things that I was always
looking to try to improve and tohave an influence on.
(33:04):
Um I could go on and on.
Uh I did a number of studies,like uh um contagious fire
studies for the policedepartment and training and the
change of our qualificationcourse that built in and an
assessment element to it ratherthan just prior to that, what we
would have is everybody be onthe firing line and the targets
would turn and everybody wouldstart firing.
(33:25):
What are we doing?
What we're doing is we'reprogramming people to fire
whenever they hear otherofficers firing.
Well, what we built into it wasan assessment that everybody's
target's going to turn, butguess what?
You may have a no-shoot target.
So you don't just start firing.
You have to assess what youhave.
Well, I don't fire.
So I was responsible for thatbeing built in.
(33:48):
So I I've I've tried to tohold, I've I've tried to
implement things that hold off,give officers better training,
hold them more accountable within the hopes of building the
trust with the community that weserve.
Fatima Bey (34:00):
So what I hear, I'm what I'm extracting from
everything you just said is ifyou really want a system to be
better, get in and change it.
And just because you go in todo one thing, you may end up
doing another.
Because you didn't, it soundslike you didn't plan on doing
everything that you ended updoing.
And you have made a a what Iconsider a masterful difference.
(34:22):
Um, your difference wasn'tdirectly on the street, it was
above that so that it could beaffected on the street.
Um, I'm not sure what's thebest way for me to word that,
but uh that's what I hear is ifyou really want to see, and I
think this again goes beyondpolicing.
If you really want to see adifference in a system, you do
need to become a part of it.
(34:44):
And then from there, you mayend up in places you never
thought you would be, but youhave to first try.
Yeah, I mean it's it's that'sthat's what I extracted.
Jeff Wenninger (34:51):
And it's and it starts, it starts when you're on
the when you're out in thefield, when you're answering the
radio calls.
It it starts with how youconduct yourself.
But I found and I learned veryquickly that my scope of
influence was greater if Ipromoted.
And that's why I promoted.
And then the reputation that Ibuilt in the various assignments
(35:12):
that I held, which are a numberof them were coveted positions.
I was I had a seat at the tableto make a difference and to
make actionable solutionspracticable.
And because it's never perfect,but I gotta tell you what,
don't ever tell me no.
If you if you come to me with aproblem and you but but we
(35:33):
can't fix it, oh no.
Yes, we can.
We absolutely can.
I mean, and that came from meas a child.
You know, I I was extremelypigeon-toed.
I had to wear white leatherboots when I was a kid.
I was uh I had a speechimpediment.
I had to have speech therapy.
I'm dyslexic.
When I was in fifth grade, Iwas reading at a first grade
level.
And I overcame all of that togo on and achieve uh, you know,
(35:58):
higher educational um degreesand and things like that, um,
and to have the type of careerthat I have and be an author of
a book.
So, you know, don't tell me no.
Um it's it's about lawenforcement is about
accountability.
Enough of the excuses.
Fatima Bey (36:14):
I love you.
Now, let me ask you this.
I ask every guest, what advicedo you have for the youth of the
world today?
Jeff Wenninger (36:23):
Advice for the youth of the world.
Well, I think it's importantthat people identify something
to pursue that they'repassionate about, that they can
have an impact within, and thatis actually feasible.
And it's about when if you lookat those three things where you
have the overlap, that'll tellyou what you need to be focusing
(36:44):
on.
And one thing that I learnedfrom my parents, and that I I
pass on to my my uh son, is thatno matter what it is that you
strive to achieve, be the bestat it you possibly can.
And that will that will takeyou a long way.
And it's not about being thebest at it.
(37:06):
It's about being the best thatyou can be, the be the best
version of yourself.
When I'm comprising a team,when I ran the Rampart Gang Unit
after the Rampart scandal andcorruption issues that they've
they dealt with, when I chose mypersonnel, it wasn't always the
officers with the with the bestuh arrest records and those
(37:26):
sorts of things.
I was looking for diversifiedexperiences, people that held
themselves to a higher standard,that had an unbelievable work
ethic, but most importantly, hadintegrity.
A man is only as good as hisword, and you always want to be
a good man and a good woman.
So that's those are those arethe things that I would try to
(37:46):
expound on anybody that's youngmoving forward in any endeavor
that they're trying toaccomplish.
Fatima Bey (37:52):
Aaron Powell Wonderful advice.
Um now for the audiencelistening right now, he does
have a book called Anthenice.
And uh the the conversationyou've heard today is bits and
pieces of some of the stuff hehas in there, but really only uh
like tiny little morsels of alot of what he has to say.
(38:13):
Um so I think I'm lookingforward to the book, and I think
that people should read it.
So tell us how can we find youand how can they find your book?
Jeff Wenninger (38:22):
Okay.
Well, the book, if you go to onthinicebook.com, you can put in
your email address and get andget put on the uh the waiting
list, and you'll be getting theupdated emails.
Book's gonna be coming out nextmonth.
Um, and it's it's a book thatwhether you're a suburban
housewife, you're a lawenforcement executive or law
(38:45):
enforcement officer, active orretired, or you're a legislator,
this book has something thatyou can learn.
And it's about my my uniquepersonal background, my
professional experiences, and mypractical insights.
But most importantly, theactionable solutions that I
suggest can be implemented or atleast considered or should be
(39:09):
part of the discussion and whatneeds to be done for law
enforcement to be successfulmoving forward in the 21st
century.
Fatima Bey (39:15):
Aaron Powell And why should a teenager read your
book?
Jeff Wenninger (39:17):
Aaron Powell Because it it deals with the
future of law enforcement.
And as a teenager, whether youit resonates or aligns with you
in this moment on your daily,day-to-day basis, um, it
actually does impact you becauseyou may or may not have direct
contact with law enforcement.
(39:37):
But what it does is it givesyou an insider's perspective
about law enforcement.
Only about 20% of people havedirect contact with law
enforcement officers.
The vast majority of them formtheir opinions based on what
they see on social media, in thenews, or what they read in the
newspaper.
So this is an insider'sperspective that can help help
you understand a law enforcementofficer, a law enforcement
(40:00):
officer that looks like me, thatI guarantee you, if you look at
me, you're going to think thatI'm very different than what I
share in the book.
Because the reality is thatunfortunately, regardless of
whether you're the police oryou're the citizens viewing the
police, we impose ourstereotypes.
And you know, there were timeswhere I would be confronted
(40:21):
with, oh, there's the white,blue-eyed KKK hood wearing, you
know, police officer, blah,blah, blah.
Couldn't have been the furthestthing from the truth.
You know, I was raised in afamily.
I had a foster sister who wasblack.
For for two and a half years, Idated a deputy sheriff who who
was black, who I'm still very,very close with.
Um and and the the reality iswe can't make these assumptions
(40:43):
about people.
Once we we have the insight tostop doing that, then then we
can really make the themeaningful work for the progress
that's needed moving forward.
Fatima Bey (40:54):
Absolutely.
Well, Jeff Weninger, thank youso much for coming on today.
I really, really appreciate uhyou taking the time to to speak
to um to speak to our youth andto the world.
And um I love I wish I couldmake this conversation longer
because you have so much to say.
Uh, you really do.
You really do have a lot to saythat I think that people should
(41:15):
listen to, uh, which is one ofthe reasons I have you on here.
So once again, thank you somuch for coming on.
Jeff Wenninger (41:20):
Oh, I appreciate it.
And I like I like you said, wewe could talk for hours.
Absolutely.
Fatima Bey (41:27):
You've been listening to My Shift Power
Podcast for complete show noteson this episode, and to join our
global movement, find us atfatima bay.com.
Until next time, alwaysremember there's power in
shifting your thinking.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.