As I said, I abhor this kind of ugliness. Realistically, raised as I was--with and by criminals, getting to know cops (my mother was in prison for armed robbery, had my oldest sister in there), the majority of people will side with the police precisely because of how much the police see, experience, risk--to protect that majority, i.e. most people do not relate to someone who commits a crime 'as an equal' but see themselves rather as good people being protected by good cops.
Do I like it? No, of course not. Do I close my eyes to the reality? No, I never had the luxury. Neither, however, do I see the cops as either white or black in a moral sense.
Your second quoting me? That was my point--same as yours: If they have seen so much hypocrisy, so many atrocities, so much violence, and some have done so much themselves either in self-defense or offensively to avoid having to use self-defense, is it a 'surprise' when some go off their nut? Not to me, it isn't.
What I find more reprehensible are those who have little to no real, inside knowledge of how cops think, feel, act (outside of media reports) and yet take an either/or stance with evidence to support a different, realistic view.
It reminds me of The Rodney King beating which someone also video-taped.
I was an editor for a college paper, sitting in an editorial meeting, when the subject came up. A young, privileged, angry white young man said, "You don't know what happened; you weren't there!"
The video showed what several police did to one unarmed black man; a video he had seen too, and still his viewpoint was "the criminal deserved it."
All I could do--and it wasn't much--was write as essay, a prose poem, have them published--and hand out copies at a protest rally. I handed a copy of the poem to a black officer who took it from me readily. He stood reading it, then looking in my eyes said, "Is that how you really saw it?" I was just as matter-of-fact, looking into his eyes, I said, "Yes, that's how I saw it." He nodded at me, kept the poem, and walked away to do his job: Make sure our peaceful protest remained that way.
That protest barely made the news, buried beneath so much trash talking from "both sides"; I occupied neither as I don't see life as something with sides like geometric shapes on par with squares.
Some have posited for many years that police on the beat should periodically be pulled and put in different positions so this kind of thing is less likely to happen; they should be given the kind of duties to lead to a more balanced view of those they encounter, have to give a ticket to or arrest. So cops who've spent a year going on a lot of domestics, for instance, would work in The Community Centers and go to schools, take part in activities with children, and so forth.
(Spending time with school children in poor neighborhoods, for instance, might help some police become more cognizant of how these very children will grow into the adults they encounter breaking the law.)
That doesn't happen, however; most cops still spend most of their career in one position, or move up within the same line of work, so if they were on the street as a beat cop they may move up the line to detective--still dealing with the ugliness of human nature, "externalizing it" in cases like this, leaving someone dead, unnecessarily... as often happens with soldiers in wars when they don't stop at what they have to do but go further, raping or murdering the innocent whom they no longer are able to see as human.
It is a complicated psychological, not just legal matter which demands more thought, less reaction--and not just on the part of the cops; not just on part of their supervisors on up the chain of command.
It demands more serious thought from those of us who do so much talking, so quick to condemn what we do not understand but merely detest or fear.