About Our Guest

Fatima Bey: 0:02

Mind Shift PowerPoint. This is Mind Shift Power Podcast, the number one critically acclaimed podcast where we have raw, unfiltered conversations that shape tomorrow. I'm your host, Fatima Bay, the Mind Shifter. And welcome everyone. Today we have with us Jeff Weninger, and he is a nationally recognized expert in law enforcement, a retired lieutenant, and has over 33 years of experience primarily with the LAPD, and he is the founder and CEO of Law Enforcement Consultants LLC. How are you doing today, Jeff?

Jeff Wenninger: 0:42

I'm doing just fine, thank you.

Fatima Bey: 0:43

So tell us why are you on this podcast today?

Jeff Wenninger: 0:46

Aaron Powell Well, I'm on this podcast because I think the uh things that I have to say will resonate with your listeners in regards to some of the challenges that uh our society is facing in regards to the community and policing relationship, um, because it impacts everybody. Whether you're a parent or you're a retiree or you're a child growing up, your experiences and exposure to law enforcement is important in regards to the impression that you form in your mind about who they are and what they represent.

Fatima Bey: 1:20

Aaron Ross Powell Absolutely. Absolutely. Tell us a little bit about your background.

Jeff Wenninger: 1:24

Well, I was uh my mother was a a teenage uh young girl when when she became pregnant with me, and she made a decision to put me up for adoption. And my uh folks, they were married for a number of years, and they wanted four children, each one year apart, and they weren't having any luck becoming pregnant, so they looked into the adoption process, and right about the time they got approved for adoption, lo and behold, my mother became pregnant with my sister. But they pr decided to proceed with the adoption process and they adopted me. And then they adopted my brother who's Japanese, and then I have a foster sister who's black. So I was born in uh Kent, Ohio in the Midwest, and was raised during the 60s and 70s with a multiracial family. And that's the type of um experience that I brought into my law enforcement and law enforcement professional career, which is very different than the peers and the people that I worked with.

Fatima Bey: 2:17

Okay. I think that makes you, to me, that makes you very interesting. Um, you know, we you had all of that before you came to work with the LAPD. Um I think that gives you a unique perspective that the average person doesn't have, and I just I love that. So let me ask you this. You've reviewed over 700 use of force cases, and the public often hears the phrase, the officers' actions were within policy. From your insider's perspective, talk about the dangerous gaps between what is legally justified and what is morally right, and how that gap is where community trust goes to die.

Jeff Wenninger: 2:58

Well, you I think you hit it on the head because uh the- I have always said this: just because you can doesn't mean you should. So the law to the law in regards to the assessment and evaluation of an officer's application of force is rather lenient. It's Graham versus Connor, it's a 1989 Supreme Court case that stipulates that it's Graham versus Connor, which is objective reasonableness. And essentially what that is, is would an officer with similar training and experience under similar circumstances acted in a similar manner? If the answer is yes, then it's going to be in policy. And the courts in evaluating excessive force cases so narrowly limited the analysis to the moment of threat right at the moment that the officer made a decision to use lethal force. And that's not always where the problem lies. It's the actions and decisions that led up to that fraction of a second where you make that decision. But that was not being analyzed. So oftentimes you'd sit there and go, you're telling me not to, you know, you're telling me that my my eyes are lying to me, that you're saying what this officer did, what I'm seeing in this video or whatever it is that you're evaluating is appropriate and makes this okay. And unfortunately, what the courts were doing was just looking at that moment. But for instance, I'll give you a scenario. If you have an officer and have an individual that's in a vehicle, and that vehicle is trying to drive away, the officer stands in front of the vehicle and then fires at the individual driving it, which is lethal force, with the articulation that, well, I was afraid I was going to get run over, which would cause me serious bodily injury or death, so then therefore I'm justified in using lethal force. Well, you you created that circumstance. Not only did you create that circumstance, but by and large, the vast majority of law enforcement agencies have policies that prohibit you from standing in front of a vehicle that's trying to flee, and you're not to use lethal force unless presented with a threat other than the vehicle itself as the threat that your concern is going 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 the circumstances yourself. And that's that's something that that that law enforcement has to be accountable to. To to sit there and say that it was justified, um it's it's really hard to ask the community to accept that. And recently there was just a Barnes versus Felix uh case that the Supreme Court ruled on, and they they basically clarified Graham versus Connor, saying, no, it's the totality of the circumstances. You are, as the courts, to be evaluating all of the officers' actions all the way to the moment that the decision was made to use lethal force. So that has been expanded at this point, and we'll see how that is applied moving forward. But I think that should give the community and people that have concerns a little bit of pause and some peace in mind relative to the Supreme Court's assessment that no, in in order to maintain a relationship with the communities that you serve and can meaning transparency and trust, um, you you have to be evaluating all aspects of the incident, not just that moment when the force was used.

Fatima Bey: 6:35

Aaron Ross Powell Absolutely. And I think that social media plays a very gigantic part in that because people's opinions are often based on a moment in a video and not they don't know the full situation or the full situation is hidden or just not revealed yet, because sometimes you just don't know yet. And I think very often, and I think this goes beyond policing, we we have to stop just taking a little snippet of a moment and thinking that that's the totality of everything. It's not, it it almost never is, actually. You know, um, as you were just saying, we we have to look at more than just a moment. And you're talking about from the uh the legal perspective, but I I want the audience to know that we need to take that same mindset and apply it to other things. You know, when we're looking at uh someone being shooting, someone fighting, whatever the case is, we need to look at more than just a moment and assess the entire situation because that's the only way to adequately um make a decision about something.

Jeff Wenninger: 7:35

Aaron Powell I'd just like to expand a little bit because I'd often hear, and it's a justification, and I don't know if it's a rationale because you're trying to build up some armor to to be able to live at the fact that you use lethal force and perhaps you didn't necessarily need to, but although it's legally justified. Um, you know, they say you you know, you play stupid games, you get stupid awards, you know. I mean, and and it's that there's that kind of a mindset. You know, it it's it's it's um and it really what it is, it's a dehumanization of the of the person that you use the lethal force against. And it's a lot easier to to use force when you see people as less than you, so to speak. And unfortunately, that that mindset takes you down a rabbit hole where it just perpetuates that them versus us mentality. You you have to look at the situation and really evaluate what is your role and your function in this circumstance? Because the reality is about 36% of all officer-involved shootings involve somebody suffering from mental health issues. They're having a mental crisis. So how self-aware are we as police officers in understanding the impact of our mere presence in uniform at a scene confronting somebody that's suffering a mental health crisis, where we have our guns drawn, we have a beanbag shotgun pointed at them, we have a taser with a laser dart on their chest. I mean, that would that would impact you and I in a negative way, the anxiety and and stuff and unpredictability of what we may do in any split second based on and we're fine. Now, equate that to somebody that's in a mental health crisis. So 36% of officer-involved shootings involve those types of people. And it and it's unfortunate that we're not really aligned with the best practices and how to address this. We're using our traditional law enforcement tactics, which are hyper-visilant-vigilant on force to resolve incidents, rather than being innovative and creative and thinking outside the box. And sometimes working with people that may have better levels of expertise in this area than than we do. And the the reality is a very small percentage of law enforcement agencies in this country have appropriate training and have, and even fewer have incorporated mental health practitioners into their responses to these types of calls. So is is it any surprise that we don't have the optimal outcomes? No, it's not. Um that's that's a huge gap where we where there's a big learning curve that needs to be implemented. And in and then not only, and I saw this with the LAPD, having served there for just over 30 years, the it's one thing to have the training and to have the policies and procedures in place, which LAPD is in the forefront when it deals with people suffering a mental health crisis. They have the mental evaluation unit, which helps to assist in these circumstances, the handling of these types of incidents. But the problem is, is they've had it for almost two decades. They still have third third of their shootings involve people suffering from a mental health crisis. So you ask, why is that? Well, it goes back to the mindset. What controls the mindset? The culture. Culture eats training for lunch. And unfortunately Oh, I like the 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 and procedures, but that's that's just that's fluff. That doesn't mean anything if your culture is not aligned with what the policies and procedures and the training happens to be. And that's where there's a huge gap in law enforcement.

Fatima Bey: 11:20

Yeah. And mindset is everything. It's something I'm constantly talking about on and off the air, um, in everything I do. Absolutely 100% mindset. And I want to go back to what you said about dehumanizing people, because I do think that that is the root of a lot of them, a lot of stuff. Shootings and other things and other four forms of excessive force, because shootings is only one. When we see people as less than, 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's that's everything. And I also want to mention, you said uh, I think you said 36%. Um, shootings have to do with people with mental health issues. And I didn't know that number, but I I also wonder what the number is for people who were autistic. Because I think sometimes when it comes to dealing with them, it they're in the same boat because they're they're in the same boat because they're misunderstood. They're not the same people, but they're in the same boat because they're misunderstood. And if you don't know that you're dealing with someone with, you know, who um whose brain is wired differently, they don't understand what's going on the same way you do, uh that matters. That I could see that being deadly. Um, and I know I've seen, I can't quote any right now, but I know I've seen uh and heard of situations where that's been the case. And I I think it's I think it falls under the same purview as what you're saying. Let me ask you this. You dismiss uh surface level reforms. If you were given power to make one change to a police department's culture that would have uh the biggest impact on public trust, even if it's meant firing 10% of your officers, what would that one politically incorrect, brutally honest change be?

Jeff Wenninger: 13:14

I would make large strides in the civilianization of law enforcement. And I don't mean that communications or in the evidence room or that stuff. I'm talking about people that hold command-level positions that are civilians. Never been to a police academy, uh, never carried a gun, never handled a radio call, but they're there because of their expertise in the various areas that law enforcement, in order to be successful moving forward in the 21st century, have to be well versed in. So for instance, I'll give you an example. When I was at the LAPD under William Bratton, when he was our chief of police, he was he was a rock star. He was well ahead of his peers in his mindset. So we were under a consent decree. And he brought in an attorney, Jerry Chaliff, who he made equivalent of a deputy chief who is in charge of the consent decree bureau. He brought in Mary Grady, who was a civilian who had decades of experience managing or dealing with the media as a reporter in Los Angeles. Because let's be honest, one of the huge gaps that law enforcement has and failures that they have is their inability to manage the narrative after a critical incident. They do not have much insight or self-awareness relative to the impact of the information they're releasing as well as the impact of the information they choose not to release. So you get you get some insight of somebody outside of the organization. Also brought in a civilian psychologist who took over the academy training as well as the training of in-service personnel, oversaw that training. So these are people that have higher levels of expertise and experience and education in these areas that generally nobody in the law enforcement organization has. So they're able to bring to the table a perspective that's different. And I've always said this: it's not about being right, it's about getting it right. And getting it right requires that you have as many diversified opinions sitting at the table when you're talking about these critical issues that are facing law enforcement today. And that is the huge change that I would make. Right now we hear, oh, we're down X number of sworn personnel and yada, yada, yada, yada. I I suggest that if we were to remove the officers that are in assignments that have absolutely nothing to do with their training and experience as law enforcement officers, and replace them with people that have specific specialized expertise in those areas and focus just sworn personnel to handle the roles that are required to have sworn powers to arrest and to use force and all those sorts of things, then we don't need these huge numbers as we claim to. There's a study in um, I believe it was in Milwaukee, where they had analysis done, and it came back that it said, you know, hire you know, hire 166 civilians and you only have to hire like 26 police officers versus basically a flip-flop. So I gotta tell you, in my 33-year career, the greatest things I ever learned were not from people that wore the badge and carried a gun. It was people that were were experts in the various air areas that impacted my ability or the law enforcement organization's ability to be able to optimally serve 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 from you, is the involvement of community, the concept and involvement of community, and how we need to be more community focused instead of brunt force focused. And there's times where brunt force is absolutely needed. There's times where things where danger is there and you're gonna have to shoot a gun. You're gonna have to slam somebody down to save a life. Those things are real too. But the I think if I I what I hear you saying, if we switch our mindset, and again, it's about a mind shift, switching the mind shift from this is what I'm supposed to do, to community focus. How can we work together on this? And because there are people in every community, I truly believe this. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I truly believe that there are people in every single community, I don't care black, white, rich, poor, there are people 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 not move forward. Um, but if as long as we keep this separatist mindset, and that's what I'm choosing to call it right now, separatist mindset of the police are bad or the police, the community is bad, both mindsets are bad, both mindsets are self-defeating and clash with each other. And I think that's where 90% of our issues are in that realm. Um, but I love what I hear you saying about we need to be basically more community focused. But what I hear from you is we need to be more community focused in a realistic way, not just on paper and not just as an idea. Um, but actually, you know, I love the idea of integrating the community and not getting rid of law enforcement completely, but integrating the community to work 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 completely agree with you.

Jeff Wenninger: 19:15

It lays the groundwork for the mindset that you talk about. The mindset has to it's it's not just the the uh police executives and the mi police management personnel. It it's even more important where the grounds meet the pavement, the police officers. And w I worked I worked 77th Division right after the riots, the the Rodney King riots in the early 90s. The riots were in 1992 and and I started working Ramp in 1999. And and I'll I'll give you a perfect example. On one day, my my partner was not there. And another officer, his partner wasn't there. And we were assigned to work together for that one day. We worked together for one day. And we were driving down the street and we saw a male white and a female black and they were holding hands. And he says to me, My parents taught me better than that. And I said, What ex what do you mean by that? And he goes, My parents taught me not to have sex with animals. So this kind of goes to what you talked about earlier. Um the dehumanization of people, first and foremost. It talks about the you call it the separatist situation. Mindset. Mindset, you know. Um or I what I call is the them versus us type of type of mentality. Yeah. And the reality that we have to be honest with ourselves, that our attitudes and beliefs will influence our actions and our behaviors. So I knew I never wanted to work with this guy again because I knew that he and I working together, getting out of the same black and white police car to handle any type of call that we may be addressing, his actions and his behavior is going to be reflective of me. Uh, and I wasn't gonna have that. So unfortunately, although listen, the vast majority of police officers are well-intentioned, good people that have that have nothing but but but good hearts. But the problem with law enforcement is there is an underbelly that is allowed to coexist, and it's there. And I knew that this officer was just one of a number that I was going to have contact with throughout my career. And that proved to be true. But what I used to take when I worked 77th Division following the riots, I I took it as a responsibility of mine to, in uniform as a police officer, take whatever opportunity I had to interact with the community members, and I chose primarily children to interact with. I would drive in when I had some downtime into the projects, and I would throw the football with the kids there. Really for two reasons. To show them, one, that I'm not the enemy, that I am human just like they are. And two, that I didn't see them as the enemy. And I used to get ridiculed for that. The police culture looked at me as that's ridiculous. What are you doing? And I'm like, why wouldn't I do this? You know, the reality is the a measure of of society is how well it treats its marginalized communities. That that's that's really a strong measure. And I've I always felt that even if I can just reach one or 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 and energy to do that. And we need more police officers to have that type of mindset. We need to get away from what I call this militarization. I think it's ridiculous. I live in a community of 4,100 people, and the police officers have these exterior ballistic flak jackets with their tasers on their chest and all. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's like it looks like they're in Beirut. And you know, that that's not that's not the image that we need to be projecting to the citizens that we serve and protect, because the reality is that image, it has an impact on your mindset and what you see your role or your function as being. We really need to get in, get in tune with sociology and psychology and pure and empirical evidence and start driving our management of police organizations 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 off something you just said. You said you you talked about the police with the tasers on their chest and this basically uh I'm gonna say brunt force look. I'm not sure what other words to use right now, but this this we're tough, we're here to kick ass kind of uh uh appearance. What effects does that have on the community? And let me be really specific. If someone sees the police as uh brunt force not there to be helpful, just there to harm, what is the danger of that mindset of the people of the community who therefore will not call the police when they're in trouble?

Jeff Wenninger: 24:22

Aaron Powell Well, it does. It it just perpetuates everything. You know, and it and it even makes it worse in regards to how the officers themselves then treat the public. Because how many times do we see where you have an officer who's yelling and using expletives and just demanding that somebody do something as as if it's the uniform and the badge is the reason in and of itself that they should do something? You know, oftentimes, like we said, 36% of the time when you're dealing with these scenarios that become lethal force incidents, that they're it's somebody suffering from a mental health crisis. So you're not dealing with somebody that's that's thinking logically and rationally. So to try to assert your power that way, it's ineffective. It's not going to result in an optimal outcome. The responsibility is to stand back and take time to assess, to actually care. So for instance, if you have a radio call that you answer and you respond to it, and it's somebody that's acting violently and say they're being reported to be armed with a knife or a hammer or what have you, family members have come out of the house or the apartment and the individual's still inside. There's nobody else in there with them. And what what what is the exigency? We have all time in the world on our side to have the response of mental health practitioners to help guide us and direct us and to better address this situation. We have an unbelievable resource of knowledge, the family members ask pertinent corrupt questions, which we don't often see. You know, what is the mental health crisis? Does the person take medication? When was the last time they took the medication? Have they had this type of incident before? What worked in calming them down? How was it resolved? All of these sorts of things, it's because knowledge and information is going to make you better at your judgments and how best to address this particular situation, because no situation is the same. And we don't see that. We see this imposing our authority through the presence of our uniform and our badge in the deployment of our lethal and less lethal, less lethal being beanbags, sponge guns and tasers and those sorts of things, and demanding compliance with what we're verbally telling you to do. And the the proof is in the pudding. The data tells you it's not effective. It's all about mindset. Right. And when I did um I have a forthcoming book called On Thin Ice, I went over to Europe. I spent some time with the London Metropolitan Police, where they don't generally carry guns. But guess what? They have the same types of incidents where they're confronting people with a weapon other than a firearm. So they have in in the UK and Wales, they had a total of five officer-involved shootings in a year. They don't have any fewer of these incidents where officers are confronting somebody that's armed with a something other than a handgun, but they're able to resolve them so much more peacefully. And when I was talking to them, it was about the mindset. It's how they saw their role. And that it wasn't about ending this thing in an in in a time frame that best um, you know, was accommodating to the police, but it was about the best outcome. And it was really interesting. I I gleaned a lot of information and knowledge from them. There's so much we can learn from those organizations over there. But the pushback is, well, they society they don't have guns like we do here. That's not the point. We're talking about incidents where there a gun on the suspects um um side of things doesn't exist. We're talking about the incidents that are similar to what we oftentimes use lethal force to resolve here. Why is it that they don't? Why is it that they have fewer officer injuries than we do handling those same sorts of incidents when we're deploying lethal force? Tough questions.

Fatima Bey: 28:40

Mindset. Mindset. Let me ask you this, because this podcast is about the next generation. And looking at the next generation, why should a young person of color with a deep sense of justice choose to become a police officer today instead of becoming an activist fighting against the police? Because we know that happens. Uh, what is your brutally honest sales pitch for the future of policing to the next generation who's rightfully skeptical?

Jeff Wenninger: 29:08

Well, you know, listen, I got into law enforcement because I was skeptical. I was really in college, I was confronted by the police, who then proceeded to beat me and took me to jail and booked me for resisting arrest, interfering in official business, and disorderly conduct. I did nothing wrong. I spent my entire summer's earnings on an attorney. I refused to take any of the plea bargains, and I took it all the way to a jury trial. When I showed up for the jury trial, 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 that arrested me, they advertised for correction officers in their city jail. I applied. I was hired. Complete exoneration of any wrongdoing, right? But what that did is that changed my entire trajectory of my life. If you at 18 would have told me that I was going to do a 33-year of law enforcement and have a 33-year law enforcement career in Los Angeles, I would have told you you're nuts. But that's ultimately what happened. Because I wanted to go into law enforcement to make a difference, to make it better from within. And it's it's it's about having an influence from within and being How have you made it better? 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 force incidents. For Chief William Bratton and Chief uh Charlie Beck, I used to write their adjudication of officer-in-volved shooting cases that's submitted to the Honorable War Police Commissioners, who are the ultimate adjudicators of all uh officer-in-volved shootings and lethal force cases. And then I went on to become the officer in charge of detective entity that investigates all officer-involved shootings and lethal force cases. And in doing this, I wrote the brand new adjudication standard, and it's a standard that is still used today. And not only that, but there was a debrief model that I built into it. Prior to this new debrief model being implemented, you could be involved in an incident and you could make mistakes, things that needed to be corrected, things that if you were confronted with a similar circumstance, you would make sure not to do again in the future in correcting your conduct and your behavior. Unfortunately, we didn't address any of those things until a year later when the case was adjudicated. So my debrief model to address that, where you had a debrief of all of the substantially involved personnel within 30 days of the incident, where you could address deficiencies. And what incident caused that? We had one in Hollywood division where an officer arrested an individual after a use of force, had him handcuffed, and remain allowed him to remain laying prone, handcuffed, and the individual died. That was against our policies and procedures. We're required when as soon as practical to sit them upright or to have them laying on their left lateral because the potential for someone dying from positional asphyxia. And unfortunately, this officer did the exact same thing within that year before that initial case was adjudicated, and the deficiency was never addressed. So it's if it's I've done things 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 for the police officers because they're better apt at being able to perform their role and then building trust with the community, where the community doesn't have to see this sort of thing happen. I mean, what trust kind of trust do you have in in your police department when the same officer is engaged in the exact same behavior within a year and it re has the same deadly result? It's not it so it's those sorts of things that I was always looking to try to improve and to have an influence on. Um I could go on and on. Uh I did a number of studies, like uh um contagious fire studies for the police department and training and the change of our qualification course that built in and an assessment element to it rather than just prior to that, what we would have is everybody be on the firing line and the targets would turn and everybody would start firing. What are we doing? What we're doing is we're programming people to fire whenever they hear other officers firing. Well, what we built into it was an assessment that everybody's target's going to turn, but guess what? You may have a no-shoot target. So you don't just start firing. You have to assess what you have. Well, I don't fire. So I was responsible for that being built in. So I I've I've tried to to hold, I've I've tried to implement things that hold off, give officers better training, hold them more accountable with in the hopes of building the trust with the community that we serve.

Fatima Bey: 34:00

So what I hear, I'm what I'm extracting from everything you just said is if you really want a system to be better, get in and change it. And just because you go in to do one thing, you may end up doing another. Because you didn't, it sounds like you didn't plan on doing everything that you ended up doing. And you have made a a what I consider a masterful difference. Um, your difference wasn't directly on the street, it was above that so that it could be affected on the street. Um, I'm not sure what's the best way for me to word that, but uh that's what I hear is if you really want to see, and I think this again goes beyond policing. If you really want to see a difference in a system, you do need to become a part of it. And then from there, you may end up in places you never thought you would be, but you have to first try. Yeah, I mean it's it's that's that'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 the field, when you're answering the radio calls. It it starts with how you conduct yourself. But I found and I learned very quickly that my scope of influence was greater if I promoted. And that's why I promoted. And then the reputation that I built in the various assignments that I held, which are a number of them were coveted positions. I was I had a seat at the table to make a difference and to make actionable solutions practicable. 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 a problem and you but but we can't fix it, oh no. Yes, we can. We absolutely can. I mean, and that came from me as a child. You know, I I was extremely pigeon-toed. I had to wear white leather boots when I was a kid. I was uh I had a speech impediment. I had to have speech therapy. I'm dyslexic. When I was in fifth grade, I was reading at a first grade level. And I overcame all of that to go on and achieve uh, you know, higher educational um degrees and and things like that, um, and to have the type of career that I have and be an author of a book. So, you know, don't tell me no. Um it's it's about law enforcement 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 advice do 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 important that people identify something to pursue that they're passionate about, that they can have an impact within, and that is actually feasible. And it's about when if you look at those three things where you have the overlap, that'll tell you what you need to be focusing on. And one thing that I learned from my parents, and that I I pass on to my my uh son, is that no matter what it is that you strive to achieve, be the best at it you possibly can. And that will that will take you a long way. And it's not about being the best at it. It's about being the best that you 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 and corruption issues that they've they dealt with, when I chose my personnel, it wasn't always the officers with the with the best uh arrest records and those sorts of things. I was looking for diversified experiences, people that held themselves to a higher standard, that had an unbelievable work ethic, but most importantly, had integrity. A man is only as good as his word, and you always want to be a good man and a good woman. So that's those are those are the things that I would try to expound on anybody that's young moving forward in any endeavor that they're trying to accomplish.

Fatima Bey: 37:52

Aaron Powell Wonderful advice. Um now for the audience listening right now, he does have a book called Anthenice. And uh the the conversation you've heard today is bits and pieces of some of the stuff he has in there, but really only uh like tiny little morsels of a lot of what he has to say. Um so I think I'm looking forward to the book, and I think that people should read it. So tell us how can we find you and how can they find your book?

Jeff Wenninger: 38:22

Okay. Well, the book, if you go to on thinicebook.com, you can put in your email address and get and get put on the uh the waiting list, and you'll be getting the updated emails. Book's gonna be coming out next month. Um, and it's it's a book that whether you're a suburban housewife, you're a law enforcement executive or law enforcement officer, active or retired, or you're a legislator, this book has something that you can learn. And it's about my my unique personal background, my professional experiences, and my practical insights. But most importantly, the actionable solutions that I suggest can be implemented or at least considered or should be part of the discussion and what needs to be done for law enforcement to be successful moving 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 you it resonates or aligns with you in this moment on your daily, day-to-day basis, um, it actually does impact you because you may or may not have direct contact with law enforcement. But what it does is it gives you an insider's perspective about law enforcement. Only about 20% of people have direct contact with law enforcement officers. The vast majority of them form their opinions based on what they see on social media, in the news, or what they read in the newspaper. So this is an insider's perspective that can help help you understand a law enforcement officer, a law enforcement officer that looks like me, that I guarantee you, if you look at me, you're going to think that I'm very different than what I share in the book. Because the reality is that unfortunately, regardless of whether you're the police or you're the citizens viewing the police, we impose our stereotypes. And you know, there were times where I would be confronted with, oh, there's the white, blue-eyed KKK hood wearing, you know, police officer, blah, blah, blah. Couldn't have been the furthest thing from the truth. You know, I was raised in a family. I had a foster sister who was black. For for two and a half years, I dated a deputy sheriff who who was black, who I'm still very, very close with. Um and and the the reality is we can't make these assumptions about people. Once we we have the insight to stop doing that, then then we can really make the the meaningful work for the progress that's needed moving forward.

Fatima Bey: 40:54

Absolutely. Well, Jeff Weninger, thank you so much for coming on today. I really, really appreciate uh you taking the time to to speak to um to speak to our youth and to the world. And um I love I wish I could make this conversation longer because you have so much to say. Uh, you really do. You really do have a lot to say that I think that people should listen to, uh, which is one of the reasons I have you on here. So once again, thank you so much for coming on.

Jeff Wenninger: 41:20

Oh, I appreciate it. And I like I like you said, we we could talk for hours. Absolutely.

Fatima Bey: 41:27

You've been listening to My Shift Power Podcast for complete show notes on this episode, and to join our global movement, find us at fatima bay.com. Until next time, always remember there's power in shifting your thinking.