reforms are the same people who are suggesting we do more to support the people of ukraine. certainly the imf played an important role in offering economic assistance to the people of ukraine, and more assistance could be provided if the imf had access to greater resources. the imf would have greater access to resources if congress would follow through with passing these imf reforms. open and shut case, and we are hopeful that congress will do the right thing here and act on those imf reforms. >> let's do the week ahead before we go. on monday, we mentioned what i think will be the highlight of an eventful week, the visit of prince william to the white house. in the afternoon on monday, the president will take an interview withhe colbert report stephen colbert at george washington university. [inaudible] i believe so, yes.

he had a great clip in promoting the president's participation in the show on monday. he said he was traveling to washington and he was hoping to book his favorite 1990's alternative band, the presidents of the united states of america. been aid there had mistake and he booked the actual president of the united states of america. it was for a clever. -- very clever. [inaudible] i don't know. [inaudible] >> why the change of heart? >> change you can believe in, right? [laughter] on tuesday the president will deliver an event for the senior executive service at the washington hilton. the senior executive service is comprised of federal workers. , urginge, tennessee

congress to pass a comprehensive bill to get the job done. wednesday, the president will host a white house summit on early education. the summit will convene prominent business leaders, philanthropists, elected officials and members of the public committed to the expansion of high-quality early childhood education opportunities for children across the country from birth through school entry. announce new will efforts to enhance and expand programsity preschool in high need communities. the president will highlight new to invest in and expand access to high-quality early learning opportunities in communities across the country. the vice president will. also participate and deliver remarks --also participate and deliver remarks.

on thursday, the president will join a meeting of the president's export council. the president expert counsel advises the president on policies and programs that affect u.s. trade performance and promote export expansion. this is something the president spent a lot of time talking about on his recent trip to asia. on friday, the president will attend meetings at the white house. thank you all. have an excellent weekend. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> you heard [indiscernible] respond about the pentagon. ashton carter was introduced houseduring the white

ceremony. congressman mac thornberry, chairman elect of the house armed services committee, offered a statement on the nomination which says in part if confirmed, his challenge will be to resist the micromanagement of the white house staff that has plagued his three predecessors and speak candidly to congress and the american people on what is required to defend the country. adam smith offered these remarks -- king abdullah of jordan has been visiting washington, d.c. this week, holding meetings on capitol hill. today president obama greeted him at the white house where they discussed a number of ongoing issues in the middle east, the top being defeating isis. after that meeting they had these remarks for reporters in the oval office. >> it's a great pleasure once again to welcome my friend, his majesty king abdulla and the delegation from jordan to the oval office.

jordan is one of our most effective and capable and steadfast partners. my personal friendship with his majesty is something i greatly appreciate. him fornjoy talking to his honesty and good counsel. discussionxtensive about some of the challenges we faced in the region. at the top of the list was our efforts to ultimately destroy isil, in iraq and syria. rocksolid been a partner in that coalition to and the jordanian military has been working with the u.s. and

other militaries from around the world in making slow but steady progress, providing assistance to baghdad, providing assistance to opposition inside syria and to begin rolling back some of the gains isil made. long-termze this is and extremely complex challenge, but it's one we feel optimistic we will be able to succeed in. gratituded my strong to his majesty for all the efforts that his men and women in uniform have made. fact thatlk about the this is not just a military campaign, this is also a diplomatic and social and political efforts. it's a matter of winning over hearts and minds and isolating the extremists in the region. i think jordan is an important leader in that. his majesty shared with me some

of the ideas about organizing within islam to make sure the overwhelming majority of within theiruslims region and their own communities step-by-step isolate and ultimately eradicate this strain that has done so much damage in the region. we had a chance to discuss some of the other regional issues of great importance. aboutre concern continuing tensions between israelis and palestinians, and jordan has been a strong partner in working with us to try to broker a genuine two state solution and peace between the israelis and palestinians. andhe aftermath of gaza some of the challenges in

jerusalem, the environment has not been conducive for the sort of initiatives we would like to see. we are going to continue to share ideas, recognizing that ultimately what will be good for the israelis and palestinians will be their capacity to live together side by side in peace and security and for palestinians to have their own state. i have briefed his majesty about our negotiations with iran and indicated to him that we would prefer no deal to a bad deal, but we continue to hold up the that we can eliminate the risk of iran obtaining a nuclear weapon and give iran an opportunity to rejoin the community of nations. whether iran seizes an opportunity or not is something we have not been able to determine, but we will keep trying over the next several months and continue to keep

jordan apprised. we had the chance to discuss some of the important security issues that have extended beyond syria and iraq, including boko -shabab, what is happening in north africa, and how we can more effectively craft the working partnerships terroralitions to counter erro wherever it may appear. because jordan is such an important partner, because they carry such an important burden, including accommodating hundreds of thousands of syrians who have been displaced because of the proud civil war, i'm very of the support we have been able to continue to provide jordan, a country that consistently steps up and meet its responsibilities.

we are going to continue with understanding, but that we are going to be increasing the and we are going to providing an additional loan guarantee, all of which is designed to reinforce the political and economic reforms taking place inside of jordan so that not only can the people of jordan prosper and be self-sufficient, but they can forinue to provide an achor important efforts that enhance u.s. national security over the long haul. greatajesty, you are a friend and partner. we appreciate your visit. we wish you and your family well. is a student son here and i understand just finished classes. hopefully he will be able to enjoy a good holiday season,

although i understand exams are actually after the holidays. that's a bad deal. it means he's got to do a little bit of studying during the break. if you allow, mr. president, thank you very much, on behalf of all of us in jordan to thank you, the american people, congress for as you mentioned the very gracious support to jordan, the budget support. hosting almost 1.5 million syrian refugees, this will have a chairman this impact on jordanians. from all of us, a very gracious thank you to you and your people for this very timely support for our country. jordanians, americans have been standing shoulder to shoulder

against extremism for many years. to a new level with his coalition against isil, and our troops are very proud to be working together combating the isil in syria and iraq. we are working together to support our friends in iraq and iraqi government. this is something we will continue to do with great pride. wethe president alluded to, have a long-term commitment to bring a comprehensive solution to the syrian crisis. we had spent some time on seeing how we could move the process forward. we would also like to thank the president very much on his continued efforts to bring the israelis and palestinians closer together. we need to be able to find a solution between the israelis

and palestinians as we move through this global challenge of extremism that all of us face, muslims, christians, jews, hindus, . a generational fight where all of us are fighting extremism all over the world, and we all have to fight together as a united front. we're very proud of this relationship with united states. isil,not just against it's across our region. i'm very proud of this relationship, very proud of that personal friendship and of the president's vision to alleviate the suffering of the region and his steadfast commitment to muslims across the world. much.nk you so thank you, everybody.

you very much. zine, theforbes" maga bureau of labor statistics reported the strongest payroll additions in years. the number is far greater than the 230,000 economists were predicting. unemployment rates remain steady at 5.8%, the lowest level since the recession. >> and compton recently retired house newse correspondent. on her over 40 years covering the white house and the administrations of gerald ford through barack obama -- >> we watched him talk to a group of second graders. andy came interrupted the president. i was stunned. i wrote down 9:07 a.m. nobody interrupts the president, even in front of second graders.

the president said he felt he had to go. he went into a side room. then we discovered it was two plane crashes in new york. [indiscernible] we were now outside the school. said stay right here, the president will talk. to scare thent children, but he did go into the cafeteria. he said it is an apparent terrorist attack and i must return to washington. we raced to the plane. the door slammed. and then he pentagon was hit. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern and pacific, c-span's "q&a." thehe memorial fund of national law enforcement museum hosted a panel discussion on police training and the use of force yesterday in washington. the event came hours after new york city officials said there would be no indictment in the case of eric garner.

>> conversations on law enforcement. focus is on topical law enforcement issues on the minds of many. tonight's conversation is entitled when police shoot, a dialogue on the use of force. we are proud to be jointly hosting tonight's event with a new and hopefully long-term arner, the memorial foundation, builders of the magnificent martin luther king jr. memorial. i want to begin by thanking our event sponsor, target corporation, which has been one of our top supporters over many .ears several of target's officials have traveled from headquarters in minneapolis to be with us tonight, and we are very grateful. they are deeply committed to promoting safe communities across the united states and

tonight's discussion is intended to help foster that very important goal. for those of you not familiar with our organization, the national law enforcement officer's memorial fund is heads up, the national law enforcement museum. we are a nonprofit organization formed in 1984. our mission is to tell the story of american law enforcement and make it safer for those who serve. our vision is to inspire all citizens to value law enforcement. 1991 we established the national monuments in washington, d.c. to honor the service and sacrifice of our peace officers. blocks fromd a few here in the historic judiciary square. the names of more than 20,000 officers who have sacrificed their lives in law enforcement service are inscribed on the walls of that monument. we're now in the midst of

building a national law enforcement museum and the street from the monument -- across the street from the monument. it is intended to help our citizens understand and appreciate the vital role of policing in america. interactive exhibits, the museum will allow visitors to walk in the shoes of a police officer and better understand what they do and how and why they do it. of the major exhibits plan for the museum is a use of force judgment training simulator that allows visitors to experience a virtual situation that involves life-threatening split-second decisions just like our officers sometimes have to make. about why police shoot. in recent months, there have been several high-profile events involving the use of lethal force by law enforcement professionals.

each time, the questions were asked, why wasn't there another option? why were so many shots fired? tonight we pose these questions and others to a couple of veteran law enforcement professionals. ofwill examine the impact police shooting, especially one that ends in death, can have on the community in which it occurs. the u.s. department of justice tells us among the millions of persons who come in contact with an officer, force is used or threatened by law enforcement less than 2% of the time. majority of police professionals will go their entire career without ever firing their weapons in the light duty. to most americans who watched the news and cop shows and movies, that is not common perception. peopleng to the fbi, 461 were justifiably killed by law enforcement officers in 2013.

all but three by gunfire. some look at those numbers and look at the number of violent offenders confronted by police each year and argued that figure shows great restraint. others are mortified that so many lives are taken each year by trained professionals. , everyer what the number time an officer is compelled to shoot and kill someone, it is a terrible tragedy for all involved. tonight we will explore the many , the increased use of body cameras and less lethal weaponry by officers will be discussed, as will community oriented policing. most of all, we want to have an open-minded conversation that will lead to a stronger public safety partnership between law enforcement officers and the citizens they serve. i'm very pleased

and proud to introduce my new good friend, harry johnson, president of the memorial foundation. [applause] >> good evening. on behalf of the builders of the martin luther king memorial, where dr. king stands together with the jefferson memorial and the washington monument, we built the martin luther king memorial so the world would have a place to honor and that is it -- and visit one of our heroes of this great majestic country. first a memorial to a man of peace, a man of color, and in non-president to be set in a prominent place of the national

mall and among the pantheon of great leaders in our country. we built it and not just to recognize the life and legacy of dr. king, but also to accentuate the four major themes of the memorial. justice, hope, democracy, and love. so tonight, how proud we are to be and partner with craig floyd of the law enforcement museum and target to have a dialogue about when police shoot and a dialogue on the use of force, and hopefully bring to the forefront those four tenets of the king memorial. justice, the belief that we are all do justice under the laundry got us a color, the belief that we as americans have the competent expectation that we can be better, that we can expect better, and that we can do better for ourselves and for a future. love, the universal doctrine that we are all god's people and that we share love, belief, as

much as we love those that we have within us. and finally, we understand that ferguson is not an island unto itself, but a reality in every city. but if we apply the four tenets of the memorial, we will make better families, better communities, better cities, better states, and indeed have a better nation in the world. god bless you and let's speak together tonight. i bring to the podium jeff johnson, a world-renowned author, commentator, and a good friend of the memorial. jeff johnson, it's your show. >> thank you. [applause] the check is in the mail. [laughter] i didn't know who he was talking about it first. it is an honor and privilege to be here and moderate the discussion. i'm not going to stay at the

podium. i will join our panel sitting down. but i do want to frame -- i don't think there has ever been a panel that i have moderated that needs less framing in lieu of what our country is looking at and many of us have listened on the way over all of the commentary and the reviewing of what is happening in new york even right now. they grand jury has failed to indict officers in the eric garner killing. it seems that very sharp lines have been drawn in communities all over the country. whether it is in new york, ferguson or even now in cleveland, as city officials and public safety officials are determining what the next steps are, investigations around the

shooting of a 12-year-old, there off and isn't a lot -- there often isn't a lot of reasonable conversation. i'm hoping that the conversation we have tonight will not only be reasonable, but a conversation that begins to point at the practices that we are seeing in certain parts of the country, potential solutions, and even the framework of how those of us who are in this room serve as ambassadors for how we move forward in creating more effective policing, practices, the mobilization for more effective policy, and greater relationships. but not even talking of about allowing there a level of engagement, it helps to bring those things about him as a former activist and youth activist, we understand that even though some policy works

well sometime, there is an opportunity to see better policy . sometimes that better policy only comes when there is unrest. what does that unrest look like? how does it become effective? and when does it become counterproductive? i hope he can have an honest discussion. i hope you all are involved in that honest discussion. as a moderator, i hate panels where you wait until the last five minutes to open up the floor to discussion with the audience and then you hurry up and try to get 35 questions in two minutes and 16 seconds. it never works. my goal is to involve you in the discussion as quickly as we can because i think we have a more robust and true community conversation when that happens. we have a great panel that is with us and i would like to introduce them before i take my seat. to my immediate left is tom stryker.

mr. stryker is a principal with greenwood stryker, formally the kernel and chief of the cincinnati police department. i was the national youth director when there was a great deal of strife in cincinnati over the killing of a young man and protests ensued. there was a great deal of unrest in the city under colonel stryker's leadership. he now travels the country as a consultant engaging communities in best practices and how to do effective collaborative policy as well as government accountability. please, a round of applause for tom stryker. [applause] to his left is cedric alexander, the coo. he has a rich history. he was working with the -- as the federal security director

with tsa and has worked with the state of new york. please give him a round of applause. [applause] and last but certainly not least is reverend tom watson. he is the chief minister, that means pastor -- [laughter] of washington memorial training ministry in new orleans, louisiana. he is an activist and manifests the prophetic word. for those of you who don't know what that means, he operates in speaking the words so that we can move and engage in communities. he comes from i think a legacy of men and women of god who understand that we can't afford to be apolitical but it is necessary for churches to engage in the communities that they help bring about the change is necessary. please give him a round of

applause. [applause] so if i can join you all -- mr. stryker, i would like to start with you. i think there are so many directions we can go into this conversation and the first one, when we start talking about why do police shoot, why do officers shoot, talk a little bit about, for those in the audience who don't understand, what training do your officers receive and by a large can we assume that officers receive as it relates to the use of force and the discharge of their weapons in particular. >> there are a lot of training that goes into this and it is not something that is specific to use of force only. agencies that do it properly actually teach decision-making and that is something that has to be woven through the very fabric of all the training that

all of their officers receive. so i have to be able to make a decision over whether or not i will approach you based on constitutional grounds, and my here to introduce myself? am i here for unofficial reason, official reason and the context of this stop? what is the reason and/or the context of the stop? is it a stop? do i have a reason to hold you here? is her the things we have to look at going all the way back before the actual use of force occurs. if it is a shots fired incident or chemical irritant. we have to teach officers to make those decisions in context of their position as a police officer, a public official, a person with an enormous authority and power. an amount of authority and power that no one else in the united states has. no one has more than a police officer has, not even the president of the united states. that is a frightening thought on one hand. on the other hand, it is something that we all know we

need in this nation to protect the rights and liberties of everyone. so we have this group of people with this anonymous amount of authority and power that have to be able to make decisions from the very beginning of a stop, the context of that stop, all the way through to the point where there is interaction between an officer and a person and if that interaction goes awry, how does that officer make that decision. it's not just, oh, boy, i get to use police force now. there has to be a decision-making process that unfolds very quickly. one of our hosts, craig floyd said it in the beginning. this is something that can happen in a split second. and then the decision about what type of force and the actual source that -- actual force that is used. then what is the review process? do we say, ok, is this justified or not justified? we actually go back and look at these situations, take a look at these -- take a look at what happened.

we have to be able to extract exactly what occurred, what lessons are there, how can we apply those lessons to training to help the decision-making process in the future so we can hopefully alleviate the new for an officer to use force. that should be the ultimate goal of any police agency. >> let me build on that a little bit. i want to stay with this training thread before we gone on to other parts of the conversation. as someone who has trained people, i understand through a training process i realize that there are certain people i am training that don't necessarily have the skills necessary to do what it is i am training them to do.

how often do we find in these types of trainings through assessment processes that these people probably have more responsibility than almost anybody in the job that they do but they just don't have the decision-making skills necessary? do we find within police training that there are those who are assessed to say, wait a minute, you don't really possess the decision-making skills possible, necessary to be in those life-and-death situations, this series situations and as a result you do not make it through the training course, through the academy? is that a litmus test for

success in the academy? is that a litmus to remain on the street? if not, should it be? >> let me say this. when we think about police training and we send a young man or young woman through six months of a police academy, on average, there is a piece of that training that requires self tactics, firearm tactics if you will. if i started class today of 30 men and women who have applied to become police officers, there are background checks and all of that that goes along with it. so as an extensive background, investigation, prior history, driving, arrests, whatever the case may have to be, it is a pretty extensive background investigation. so we get a person who is not a class of 30 or 40 police officers. and that is probably after we have gone through, believe this or not, probably up to about a thousand applications.

i'm sure chief stryker saw this as well. you have 40 positions that are open. you have a thousand people to apply. and when the process is over with, you may end up with 30 or 40 candidates for a police academy. so it is a pretty rigorous search of investigative or background process. so you bring these men and women into an academy program and you teach them state law, constitutional law, self-defense, firemen -- firearms, all of that. somewhere in there, you will probably lose 10% to 20% of that 30 or 40. through attrition, failure at firearms, failure at self-defensive tactics, exams or those that decide this is not for me. at the and of the day, you may have 24 or 25 of those candidates, maybe 30 of them to graduate from your academy. then you send them off to a

training program with senior officers. once they complete that process, field training process, then he or she generally in many cities across the country are assigned to go out on patrol. and you have trained them by state standards. by my standards, but by state standards. and those standards are you generally be -- are generally pretty high. throughout the course of their career, i have seen a young man or woman police officer who, within the first week of the job, made the comment engaged in a firefight. i have seen people do 35 years and never have to draw their weapon. you have training two or three times a year of firearms qualifications in many departments which is not required by may but is required by the state. and they complete firearm training. but the complicated part of all

this is that what is very unique, and chief stryker is alluded to this, what is very unique about policing -- you can start out the morning to a call for a cat in a tree or you can and the day using deadly force. most men and women who leave home every day hope more than anything else, and i have in in this more than 30 years, most folks that i have come in contact with and i have come in contact with thousands in my career, they don't leave home every day to do harm to anyone. but oftentimes, because of the nature of the job itself, the unpredictability of it, you could find yourself engaged in a shooting and eat is that moment in time and in each incident that occurs, they are also different. that is what makes it really complicated because there are so many variables just that go into the time that the moment you pull that trigger.

but do we train? yes. but here is the question. actually going forward. my question is this in light of everything that has happened. are we training enough? and are we training young men and women as well, too, to be critical thinkers? because i think that's the real key here. because you are going to have to make split-second decisions. oftentimes, before you have to make that's what decision, there are other decisions that can be made. when those opportunities present themselves, and my trained well enough, have i seen enough scenarios, as best as we can provide, opportunities for men and women out there, police officers, if they have to make a decision and those are in-the-moment kind of decisions, can we train them better?

i truly believe that we can. >> i think that is a great point. i want to build on something that you said. even if you had all the training in the world, there's still perceptions that officers bring into situations similar to what we all bring into situations. and those perceptions help drive that decision-making. hence so how are leased apartments -- you can only speak to your experience -- how are police departments dealing with the undeniable biases that police officers as people bring into policing? >> part of what is meant to have to happen, in the recruitment process, i think we are going to have to find -- in

recruiting police officers is a tough job, by the way. with a thousand applicants, you only get 30 or 40, there is something to be said about that. you train them to a standard. but here is what i know and i have been saying this for some years now -- we are going to have to train our men and women in our academies to think differently about the job as well, too. because when you really think about it, this job is really 80% public and 20% everything else. it is not 80% running after bad guys. >> i want to get to that. i want you to stay right there for a second and deal with do police departments currently deal with the biases that we as individuals have in the office. they don't.

>> here's the thing. i just had this conversation today. we all come with biases. you and i do, too, and they may not be around race to the could be around gender. it could be around sexual orientation. it could be around religion. it could be a number of variables. the important thing that we have to do in our training academies that we have not been doing is that we got to bring into those classrooms, into the scenarios, and even part of the selection process, opportunities for us to begin to confront our biases. unless that is part of the curriculum or the training, i'm not going to move past that because the scary part is it's not the guy who is consciously racist or sexist. the guy that frightens me is the one who is most unconscious of it and comes out and ask out in -- and acts out in different places. >> they both write me. [laughter] -- they both write frighten me. [laughter] i agree with you but i figure it is important to make sure that we deal with the fact

that those who are overtly racist are equally as scary when in many cases those who are overtly racist are policing communities of people who those isms look like. chief stryker, can we accept the fact that we do have problems when the decision-making and whether it is excessive force, whether it is processing threats , is affected by those isms and we don't have departments dealing with it. from a policy standpoint, training standpoint, what are the correct ways for us to begin dealing with these biases and not allowing them to be the 800 pound girl in the room that we failed to talk about -- 800-pound gorriilla in the room that we fail to talk about.

>> it has to be foremost in the mind of everybody in the united states that this is something that is intolerable. you can't have these isms that create bias in policing, especially in a position where people hold so much power and authority. i used to think training and i still believe that training is a big aspect of it, but who does the training and what is the training is the most critical. what about this room here? how many people in this room have to offer training? do they bring community people to address police officers, be it new recruits or somebody that has 40 years experience in policing, 30 or 40 years experience in policing who can

really learn from having a true dialogue with people about that 800-pound gorilla? in 2001, the trains were going along good, everything seemingly fine, suddenly we have an incident where an officer shoots and kills a young man, lied about shooting and killing that young man and exactly what occurred. next thing you know, we are headlines on cnn and around the world, here's the city of racism and riots in the city i? -- in the city and why? two days ago, we were fat and happy lazy. nobody wants to talk about that because it's uncomfortable. one of the solutions we found in the aftermath of that in our dealings with the community is that the relationships that we had in our community which we thought were very good and very powerful, we came to realize

that they were superficial relationships. we didn't have true relationships with the people in our community. this is something we found takes real work, a tremendous amount of effort. you have to have a lot of thick skin, especially if you are in the position that perhaps is in the crosshairs, if you will, the police. you have to be able to hear what people have to say and know and understand that these are not just excuses the people are throwing out there i feel like the police have a bias against me because of my race, because of my gender, because of my sexual orientation. that's just what you are thinking, just an excuse. the reality is that these are excuses and people really believe -- whether or not it is true, it doesn't matter. there is a perception out there that exists and something that requires constant vigilance, not just by the police agency but more so by the entire community. look at the reaction we have around this country by this single or incident and how powerful that incident is.

the actions of one police officer brought the attention of the entire world -- the entire world to our city. the entire world. look at what it has done here and incidents since then. and look at how social media has changed how we address these situations and we have to pay attention to them. we cannot say right or wrong and walk away from them. we have to address this situations. the world has to change and with it policing has to move in that same direction. >> i appreciate the comments. i remember. i grew up in cleveland. my dad lived in cincinnati at that time and there was a huge dichotomy. the cincinnati police department at that time was an award-winning police department. but certain communities would

have said quite the opposite. so i think there is always truth and misperception on both sides. in new orleans, which has had a ton of controversy as it relates to the police department, before and after katrina, as it relates to levels of brutality, of misconduct, so on and so forth, how have you found effective ways to bring -- to breach that gap that mr. strecker's talking about -- mr. stryker is talking about? and then health community members understand what real policing looks like? how do you help find that balance and have you seen success with that? >> i can't measure any actual success, but i can say that,

through our not-for-profit, annually we put on a summit called the summit on the bright of the african-american male. we have taken different approaches to engaging the community at large, government, political officials, and particularly law enforcement, from the u.s. attorney to every day cops and the like. one of the things we realized is that new orleans, like many communities, is the tale of two cities where we have those who function well and don't have any issues with police harassment and the like, biases and the like, but then there are those even like myself who -- i'm a native, but as you say, every day cops go out and wonder if they will survive getting home. as an african american male, i feel that way sometimes.

i'm hunted. that is a personal kind of thing. i hope i will not be stopped by police or something silly and end up in another direction. collectively, collaboratively, we have engaged levels of government, mayor's office, city council, state reps, state senators and the lay, even our congressman -- and the like, even our punishment, cedric richmond, and faith leaders, every day grassroots leaders, and our mantra is to say that the connect is going to happen, the trust is going to happen between police and community. it must be bottom-up. it cannot be top-down. a canopy the mayor and it cannot be the governor. a cannot be elected officials giving a mandate on how to fix this. so we have done over the years, and i have a report that i don't

mind sharing the airport -- sharing with the audience, on how we have brought everyday leaders to hash out and to dialogue together in think tanks that go on for 48 hours so to speak. the point i am making is that it's a matter of connecting those voices that are never heard, the ones that are now protesting and screaming and hollering cynically and somewhat politically engaged, bring them together to have this kind of dialogue. but the on the dialogue, putting some reasonable, productive though it's together, takeaways that we can work on with police. let me give you one example. in 1994, new orleans had about 400,000 citizens. that was before katrina. but we were called and still get called the murder capital of the

world if you will. that is based on the per capita population. in 1994, we had 420 murders on the streets. the storefront church where i started out, fortunately i was able to move a little bit beyond that to a church front, but at the storefront level, we were in a neighborhood near a major housing development. what our church did and our not-for-profit, we did a protest on city hall. it was peaceful. for jobs. we sat down with community leaders, with the chief of police, with other elected officials and faith leaders and community leaders, and we were able to throw the police department and the whole city government, bring a police substation right in the neighborhood to begin to build trust between police, between community leaders, between everyday citizens. so my point is that we have engaged the community at the

grassroots level to connect to the police department. it is not an easy task but it is one worth doing. again, be on the protests, you have to have some measurable ways that you are going to work through these processes so that you are in it for the long haul. it is easy to protest but you have to have some long and short-term goals to bring connections together between police and community and neighborhoods. >> let me ask you this. any of the three we can answer this. chief stryker said something interesting. look at what this isolated incident has done around the country. i understood the point that was being made. but i think the folks in ferguson, the folks that are now protesting in new york, those that were on the highway in los angeles and oakland, those in other cities don't view this as an isolated incident at all. >> i know i don't. >> incident connected to incident connected to incident connected to incident.

what often happens when these discussions takes place is there seems to be a very defensive nature taken by law enforcement. and that defensive nature in some cases because there are legal issues at hand. and there is a specific incident that will result in an indictment or a non-indictment. sometimes perceive a larger did -- a larger disconnect. when people talk about only 2% of policeman interactions and up in shooting, it still too many. if we know that to be too many and we see time after time after time after time -- i'm sorry this is such a long set up for the question -- we see police officers not being indicted.

we see processes that we find that we don't feel like prosecutors are doing their job. we feel like there are grand jury's that haven't been given the right information. we feel like the system doesn't work for us in certain communities. how have you seen them deal with those realities and conversations? i don't think that communities are prepared to hear lipservice in the name of community relationships when it feels like police officer seldom get held on about -- get held accountable for shooting brackets. -- black kids. >> is not just in new orleans. if you google it, we have been notorious. it's never been isolated in my lifetime from choking civilian to shooting. after katrina, for instance, henry glover, he was not only shot as an unarmed citizen trying to survive after the storm, but his body was burned. shot and burned.

of the five or so officers -- or maybe it is four. i believe they are all free now on appeals. they won officer who shot him is off on appeals. the officer that burned him is doing 17 years but still going through the appeal. how do you think we feel in the community? here is an unarmed man burned and shot. in orleans, it is never isolated. and again, i believe it can get better. he mentioned training, the cultural sensitivity that is necessary, and here we have a population that is over 60% african-american. the police -- the new police chief who is african-american, i believe he is trying hard to mend some of the fences.

but it is never isolated in my community. i believe the biggest crisis coupled with training is one of credible leadership. when that later of the police department and that mayor who hires him can be trusted and are transparent, and we are people of feeling. you can feel that you can trust what they are saying. then things begin to get a little bit better. but at points in new orleans, post and pre-katrina, it has never been an isolated incident. so there is no easy answer to this. and i live by a principal -- where there is no competition, there is no resolution. so we have to continue to confront the issues collectively and be on the protesting have that kind of purposeful intervention and prevention of initiatives that can begin to turn some of this around.

>> i don't disagree with that at all. i want to clarify something. my point was not to say an isolated incident that this only happens once in a while. my point is that the issue of distrust, the issue of discord between police agencies in some segments of our communities is so enormous and has been in place for so long that a singular incident can set something off like this and have worldwide effects. this tells me this is at a critical point in the history of america. there are no two ways about it. >> evening -- even calling it a singular incident, in many ways, it creates -- >> i understand that. i am not isolating anything at all. it certainly, who expects it in ferguson, missouri? >> they would. >> exactly, but would the world expected in ferguson, missouri?

that is the enormity of this issue. most people didn't even know there was a ferguson, missouri. who knew where sanford, florida was? i would like to think the people knew were cincinnati was. but one of the questions need to be asked here is are you that comfortable in your community that you believe this is something that will happen somewhere else and not happen here? if that is the case, you probably don't believe to be in the position of power and authority. you probably need to get out of the way and let some the else in here and realize that this is something that dramatically affects each and every one of us as americans. there are no two ways about it. >> this will continue to be a complicated situation until as a nation we start talking about race. because at the backdrop of all of this, we are talking about race. all of this stems from there. if we look at policing in this country and you put it in a historical context, what we are

talking about tonight has been going on since the beginning of policing. and those names of people who have illegally lost their lives to police officers, we have forgotten them. but we remember those who we are talking about today. but there are those before i was born, before you were born who died at the hands of police, sometimes even more violently, right? so this is a long-standing issue in this country and particularly with communities of color. so when you start something you said early on, jeff, the whole perception these, some of this is perception. some of it is reality. it all depends on where you stand for fair use it in america.

but this is for a lot of people reality. so there is this history. there are these legacies. there are these stories that have been told from generation to generation about policing. so in policing really became more integrated than what it is now, 40 or 50 years ago, we still have these same problems a large cities in this country. but part of the issue is training, yes, but it's also a leadership void in a lot of these departments because you really have to set an expectation to the men and women who work for you. you train them well, but you also have expectations. but you cannot predict if you got 1200 or 1300 people that work for you, like i did, i

can't promise anybody that someone is not going to got tonight and do something foolish. hopefully, they won't. but we can't guarantee that. we have to have policies and those employees must know what the philosophy of that chief is and what the expectation is when it comes to the treatment of people, all people. >> i don't think any citizen is looking for police leadership to say that they can promise their officers won't do anything. i think what they are looking for is to know that accountability will come to that officer in the event that something does and that they don't feel like officers will be able to hide behind the blue shield before they are forced into a level of accountability. >> there is a community called policing and then there is this community in which they serve. what you have over here is a fraternity, an organization called policing were people take care of each other. they go out and confront dangerous things every day.

it builds a relationship, a camaraderie like no other. it is like the military. you depend on each other to get home at the end of each shift. but he also have a community over here. if they don't feel connected to you -- you know who i always thought my biggest backup would be when i got in trouble? not when i got on the radio and called for help, but if i saw a citizen saw me getting my but kate, that they would come over and help. they are going to get to me first. if i have a relationship with them, that will happen. what happened in ferguson, missouri, and i know this happened because i sat there with the chief after it occurred , and from the time of that shooting on august 9 until i got there, they had never met with the community. >> yes. >> a week later, and when i got to town i said, look, chief, let's speak with some community members and he wound up some folks. but they had never met with the community. post that shooting, that is evidence of a community and a police department that is totally disconnected. let me tell you another significant piece. the day of that shooting, you have to remember that that is a small town of 23,000 people, 55

police officers. that's all. all of those police officers are not on the street. maybe 30 of them are on uniformed patrol. how was it, i should know virtually everybody in the community? nobody was able to name the officer was. how many people that we see out on the scene, how long did darren wilson stand there? we all went weeks without knowing his name. and community oriented policing, they would have been like, that was alexander. the tall officer that comes through here all the time. something.

they could not relate to who it was. that is a total disconnect, even in a situation -- >> that is not new. how should, how do you see police departments dealing with the fact that it is a whole lot harder to shoot somebody you know? you are able, with that decision making peace, to have a better sense of who is a threat and you know the people in the community. i have talked to people with community policing programs. one police officer know, this kit is a baby. he might be six feet tall at thirteen. this kid is 443 inches but he is a killer. -- this kid is 443 but he is a killer. do we understand when we have percentages of officers that live in communities, the officers have a different perception. policing my community versus occupying their community.

>> this is a multifaceted issue. i will say one thing, that you got part of the answer yourself. when a police agency has a community policing program, that's a problem. is a program where there are six officers? or is a philosophy? a philosophy woven through the agency. this is how we function. this is how we operate. you are part of that community that you serve. you are not an independent warrior sent in to keep the peace. you are part of the community you serve. you become part of it.

that has to be mandated everywhere from the chief through the agency so that when the reverend walks out into an issue and the police shows up, he can look at him and say, let me explain what is going on. >> that becomes part of police culture. also part of your evaluation process. this is, as much as what your score is at the shooting range, what your relationship is with people in the community. there is a dual responsibility. the community being able to engage with their police as well. they don't always have to agree come up what they have to be able to do is be in communication and have contact with each other. something is going to go awry, just by the nature of the job. if they are able to sit down and communicate because they can communicate, that makes it better. >> why does it feel that police leadership are looking at 0 --

two options? a zero tolerance or community policing option? it almost seems as if the moment there is a spike in crime, the responses zero tolerance. in many cases, you can't have zero tolerance entity policing at the same time. what is it seemed, from the outside looking in, we see political pressure -- why does it seem, from the outside looking in, that we have political pressure to have zero tolerance? >> we have an emerging crime rate and he or she needs to get reelected. that is a reality as well. here's another piece we need to

be aware of writ when you talk about police living in communities or cities, we have police unions that are very strong and powerful. they push back very strongly on that. it is not just police, often times. it is also other entities, whether elected officials, unions, etc. one of the most important things that can happen, into striker -- and chief stryker spoke to this, is developing a philosophy and that becomes part of the culture.

we are going to see change in policing and it is going to happen fast. we are at a place right now, in light of everything that has happened and will happen, there is going to be change. i think the president and attorney general are positioning us for the change. it's going to be pushed back. in different places. we still have to fight at it to read we did not get here overnight. the most important thing is for us as a community, an entire community -- one thing we know we have to have is public safety. police are not going away. neither our communities. >> i want to open the floor after these questions. none of these are easy. when you talk about getting to that place, there is a slogan thrown around which is, no justice, no peace. more and more, it is seeming to

be the case. let me ask this. if we look at the majority of cases over the last 10 years that have involved police shootings, and we understand in many cases there have been few indictments that have come from local judges or state judges. in many cases, when there was an indictment, it ended up being federal investigations that came in and overturned rulings made by local justices. are we saying those shootings were justified? or can we acknowledge that in many cases there is a flawed process by way of grand jury, in many cases there are incestuous

relationships between prosecutors and police, and we have to provide amenities with other options including special prosecutors as the rule rather than the exception. >> great question to read knows a boy answer. -- great question. no civil answer. we are talking about perception. the reason people do not by the decision in ferguson, the reason they do not buy it, is because people do not trust the criminal justice system. not just police. they don't trust the court or judge. they don't even trust their governor. that has been their daily experience in that community. those people have been horribly mistreated by the criminal justice community in ferguson. there is no question about it.

i don't need to be biased by it. this is not about black or white. it is about what has been wrongly done in that community. michael brown was just a tipping point. that is all he was. he was the tipping point. it was coming eventually. it happened on his time on this earth. the problem is, if you remember, a few weeks later in st. louis, a robber fires three shots at a police officer. the police officer returns fire and kills him. you can getting more justifiable than that. the problem with the outrage of the community was, the police must have thrown down a gun on the ground. these people are not irrational or illogical.

they are smart as anybody else. they support police as much as anybody else. the fact that there was no trust in their whole criminal justice system, that speaks volumes. >> that is not just perception. if we are honest, in the teams i'm span -- same time span, -- >> the one with the knife. >> different than even what the video showed. within 16 seconds of the police pulling up, the young man was shot. he was not lunging towards them, despite that was said. there are reality issues, not just perception issues. how do citizens feel comfortable when in many cases the only option provided in certain cases are a grand jury or judge, neither of which they trust? there is not a rule that says that a special prosecutor come in during searching -- certain situations.

how do we manage that? where there is civilian review, do we see more effective accountability of officers? >> i would say this. could a special prosecutor coming in making difference? maybe, maybe not. cincinnati, a special prosecutor was brought into prosecute the young man who shot and killed a young man and lied about it. he did a poor job. i was a witness to this man admitting he lied. i was never called as a witness. the officer was found not guilty. moved onto a suburban agency, healed as an exceptional police officer. how do we explain this? i don't think we have an

explanation for that. there was one way to prove the officer had lied. we had started to put -- mounted cameras -- dash-mounted cameras. we only had them in 15 cars. what is the chance that that car went through that intersection and recorded the entire incident? can we win the lottery tonight? guess what happened. that one car with one camera drove through that intersection at that exact point, the exact millisecond when the officer fired the trigger career that is how we were able to say the liar -- trigger. that is how we were able to see the officer was lying to read his story -- as lying. the officer gave a convoluted

statements that made it just a file for him to have fired his weapon. as a police chief, knowing that i have an officer who is not truthful, without that technology, i could not have said we have a dishonest police officer. my point here is, technology can help this in the future. body mounted cameras. i see people walking around with them on their chests. if i am training an officer, i am -- where's my camera pointed? it is pointed there. i am talking to you here. i'm getting a recording of that screen while my decision-making is based on what your actions are. we have to not only have this technology, we have to require officers to wear them had mounted -- head mounted.

i don't want a picture of the lawn. i want a picture of what the officer is viewing. we need not only cameras on officers but to make the officer, require officers to wear them so that we are recording exactly what the officer is looking at. so the officer has a clear opportunity to explain what he or she did and why he or she did it. those are the critical questions that have to be answered. as quickly as possible, that information needs to be disseminated to the community's of the community can understand what the police do and why they do it. like what you talked about at the beginning and what these two gentlemen have talked about. exactly. >> that happened in new orleans. >> let's be honest, even when the camera is on, there are people in new york who would say, we

have video. there is still a perception between what is excessive force and what is not. and how prosecutors are connected. i think there could even be debate among the audience right now about, was the force used against eric garner excessive? there would be members of the law enforcement community who would say it is not. others who say, it is. the video was their favorite human one may have the technology, there are still our perception issues -- even when we have the technology, there still our perception issues. that alone could be a discussion. the gentleman who are helping me with the mic, if you would stand at the bottom of the stairwell. if you have a question, if you

would begin to get in line so they do not have to run around so we can get as many questions as possible, that would be brilliant. as you are getting in line, i would like to ask the reverend -- there are two sides of this. i think we have admitted there are issues of policy and training. there's also a community site side of this. what are we saying to citizens, young people in particular, about how to engage police officers and how to know your rights, but also how to behave in a way, even if an officer is wrong, you can walk away from an incident? without the police officer using force or pulling their gun? how do you communicate to citizens, even in the face of bad law enforcement, how to walk away from a situation?

>> that is a powerful piece because it goes back to training. the training is definitely necessary beyond the basic training. i'm a military guy. you go through basic and then you are on your way. i believe the training has to be community training. there are pockets in our community that i think would be open and accessible to understanding some of the dynamics you mentioned. how do you deal with dialoguing with police?

how are uses of in your day to day operation with the police officer who pulled you over? my understanding is the officer in ferguson told the young man, brown and his partner, to get on the sidewalk. maybe that kind of dialogue, if it would have taken place appropriately, maybe would -- we would not be talking about ferguson. sensitivity training, curriculums. for instance, with our young people. we have a curriculum that is well known called faking for change. how to think what you do and how you do it. not just with police but life. in terms of everyday living. you mentioned, i don't know if you are being prophetic.

that something down the pike will bring about this best change. maybe there is having -- something we don't know about. what does that mean for the community? i understand what that means for law enforcement, from the president to the u.s. attorney. we are going to have some sweeping changes. what does that mean for the community? how do we ensure, jeff, that at the local level, the neighborhood level, there is leadership built up and trained, ready to go, ready to understand here are ways to build better relationships with law enforcement. >> we have to be honest that a lot of this stuff is not new. we all know the deal. jay has had money to talk about these coalitions to reduce violence. or has been community policing

dollars at the federal level for quite some time. there has to be a well at the local level to make that happened. i want to make sure we get to these questions. as we do that, there are rules. the first rule is, ask a question. second rule, ask a question. the third rule, ask a question. we proved that everybody who came in the room it is brilliant. you don't have to prove it. if you can come a it to one of our panelists, -- if you can, directed to one of our panelists. please do not hold the might. it is proven if you hold the mike, you talk 30% longer.

>> i want to ask the panelists -- probably be chief can take this. the issue of the militarization of the police force vis-a-vis the infusion of resources into communities that are underserved. there is perception that there is money for militarization but not for education, jobs, and community development. >> how do we do with -- a lot of those materials come from the federal governments wars everywhere else. how do we balance those resources coming but other resources not coming?

>> i think that is a question beyond us as chiefs. that is surplus military acquit meant that we did not buy. every police department does not have that equipment. agencies that have it, part of what you are going to see happen, part of the chain you are going to see happen with this, there is going to be accountability attached to it. the material is not just going to be shipped from the department of defense. it has to go through a process. you have to show calls and training. you cannot use it in civil disturbances such as ferguson be read that will not be allowed anymore. we will see some sweeping change their. that is nothing that chiefs across the country are funded to do. that is just equipment that has been given to them if they choose to have it. the way that has been done the past has been wrong.

you can't just take it and say, give it to a local police agency. without some training or some policies being written as to when you utilize it. >> you talked about that not being able to happen. there's not any policy in place right now that the departments will be held accountable for using the equipment properly. >> there is nothing in place right now. i think the chief would agreement with me. if there is a department that misused it like we saw in ferguson, they would be insane. >> there may be people out there who may do that. >> you and i both know -- that is great, but we know insane is a perception.

there are police departments that can justify the use of that equipment based on situations that are happening. what currently is the witness -- litmus? what situation has to exist for it to be used? >> police agencies are ruled by local governments. officers or agencies would have the equipment. i think cedric will agree with me. they will have the equipment for extraordinary situations. we have a sniper who is helping -- hurting people. we have to get close to that person.

these are the types of situations that were visualized. i don't believe that they were intended for everyday use. i think that agencies that use it responsibly don't use it for everyday. >> it is a misstep on the part of the government to not have more stringent guidelines and say, specifically -- you are handing out heavy weapons. >> we can say that now, 2020. we are in the situation where you have to have common sense. communities need to help make these decisions for agencies. if the community -- agency is not allowing the community to help them make that decision, they are allowing them to to fail. >> my question is, will why do i look threatening just as i am standing here leaning on something?

i noticed a break in at 3:00 a.m.. the police showed up. i'm standing just like i am right here, well lit in a well lit cab. the officer slid into the parking lot, got his shotgun out, and leveled it at me. had i moved, i'm not so sure i could have told you the story. they taught me not to point a gun. my question is, why don't they receive that training? >> i can't speak for the officer, why he or she perform the duty the way they did. listening to it from your perspective, it does not sound like a reasonable response. i would offer you this. if it ever happens again, and you have the courage to call the police again, here is where i am.

i'm going to keep the phone open. i'm on the phone. please tell whoever is responding, i am the good guy. i am the witness. but it is difficult. people ask this all the time of police chiefs. i had this happen, why did it happen? i can only ask the officer what he or she was thinking. at the time. they may have a reasonable response. then again, they may not. i doubt they could have a response that was reasonable enough to satisfy you. it could not for me if it was me in that situation. i guarantee you. >> did you report the officer? >> i did not. i was happy to be alive. [laughter] >> i'm going to be honest.

if i am white, i do a lot more reporting. [laughter] just being honest and dealing with the 800 pound gorilla in the room. i know that there are a lot of black men, if they were white, treated the way they are treated as black men they would pick up the phone and , give a badge number quicker. as a citizen, what are our rights and responsibilities? as it relates to how we are treated by the police, and if we feel we are treated unfairly, what really is our options? internally how is that viewed? ,obviously that is department by department. >> a responsible, progressive agency will have the opportunity for you to make a complaint about any police officer at any time, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.

you can make it anonymously. over the phone, online, however you want to do it. that agency, if it is responsible, will thoroughly investigate that incident and get back to you with at least an explanation for what the officer said he did and why they did it. it might not satisfy you. but they do that. if they are very good, they will also explain to you, here are the circumstances. here is why we do what we do. hope you understand. some agencies will not do that. i was at a conference in texas with an agency. their use of force policy for guns was never take me out in anger, never put me away in shame. this was less than 20 years ago. how do you make a complaint in that agency?

come on in and make one if you think you can. so there is an entire spectrum of thought and responses to citizens. i would say one is horribly wrong and not progressive. the other is what we should expect from our agencies and demand from police agencies. there are no two ways about it. we have to demand accountability and oversight not to demean officers or agencies or demonize them. but we should be able to say whether or not we are doing a good job or whether or not we are doing a bad job. we should be able to get verification. if we cannot, something is not going well. >> we have about 15 minutes. unless somebody tells me otherwise. i want to make sure we can get to as many questions as possible. what i would like to do, if we can get three questions immediately, we will get the panel to answer them.

and then we will try to get to the last three. which means, if you are not in line please don't get in line. yes, sir? >> talk about how police officers are recruited and whether it needs to be approached as more of a community service or national service type arrangement? where it is a short-term commitment as opposed to a long-term career? on the flipside, whether or not it makes sense to create a pipeline where you are recruiting returning veterans or other military personnel to serve the community as police officers? >> thank you. yes sir? , >> i don't know if training will solve this. according to fbi statistics, there is a higher percentage of white law enforcement shootings on minorities then minority law enforcement officers on white citizens. what you suggest, and what can we do? >> thank you.

>> mostly for the reverend, but anyone can answer. you talked a lot about mistrust in the police, especially in the .frican american community what would you need to see from law enforcement on a day-to-day basis to read of that trust in law enforcement among members of the community? >> thank you. three questions. each of you, please take one. reverend, you mentioned some of those things. talk about what you would like to see from law enforcement. then the other two questions dovetailed in some cases. obviously we are talking about the percentage of african-american officers shooting non-african-americans. some of that just speaks to the percentage -- we have fewer african american officers. that goes to the first question . if you can deal with pipelines, i would love to hear about programs to target the development of officers from communities of color.

-- or attino, asian least officers representing a smaller percentage of various forces. are there programs or pipelines you are seeing working? reverend, and then mr. alexander. >> i think i heard him say rebuild trust. we have to first build. we cannot rebuild what has not been built. anyway as jeff said, i have kind , of responded to some of that. i just think the consciousness across the community has to be elevated from leadership. not just governmental, political, law enforcement leadership. leadership across the board. for instance in my community, , some of my plan. not me personally, but some of the colleagues i work with -- is to bring the white business

community closer to the black business community. white churches closer to black churches. you know in the sense that the , collaborative efforts to begin productive dialogue across the board. with tiers of leaders. young people have to begin to see leaders coming together, not just ceremoniously. not just to say we had a great conversation and joined hands. but to really have serious, short-term and long-term goals about transforming the village. bob franklin former president of , morehouse college wrote, the book "crises in the village." ferguson represents a unique situation in terms of trust or mistrust of the criminal justice system.

i would say that is not unique to ferguson. you look at mass incarceration across america and the like, mistrust of police is nationwide. ferguson happens to be the metaphor right now. to answer your question, it is not an easy take. it will take some serious planning, dialoguing. but implementing initiatives that canshort term turn this around at every level. there must be leadership at the top, leadership at the bottom coming together. holding hands together. and ensuring that we not only dialogue, but that we come up with creative long and short term plans to turn this around. >> mr. alexander if you could , take on part of that question, should philosophically we start looking at how we recruit police

officer differently? where it is not necessarily a career decision but a service decision? in some cases, the way we are looking at teachers. is that a thought process in certain communities? what does that look like? >> there are less and less career police officers joining the force. what we have learned is the millennial population in particular, i see it every day, a lot of the young people coming in at 21 or 22 years, they are moving on. they are not doing the 25-30 years as their parents or others have done. they stayed for a short time and then move on to something else. i see that every day in and around the atlanta community. so that is happening on its own. recruitment,ere,

yes, we have to recruit better. everymember, about thousand young people or persons, they are not necessarily 21 because there is no age limit, but for every thousand people that might apply to be police officers we may end , up with 30 or 40 or 60. out of that group. we train them. andwe train them. -- and we train them. but i think the training modules are going to have to change in terms of how we train police officers. because there is much to be done in the area around communication, cultural competence, and around confronting and facing biases and knowing what they are because we all have them. regardless of whether the officers are black or white, what we want at the end of the day, we want a good public servant who is going to protect the community at large.

we has community members have to support them as well. >> let me have you come in. i'm going to have you give some closing thoughts. the other question asked was about african-american officers. part of the reasoning i hear is about fewer african-americans applying to be police officers, fewer making it through the process. in many cases there are young , people that make themselves ineligible to go through the academy as a result of things that have happened to them in their lives. are departments beginning to do a better job of creating pipelines, talking to young people about being in law enforcement at early ages? looking at some of the schools focusing on law enforcement, whether to be a lawyer or law enforcement officer? what are ways you are finding,

effective ways to build the pipelines so we can see increased numbers of latino, asian african-american officers, , especially in some communities? >> some agencies are. one of the disconnects and -- in policing is the decision-making comes with your tenure. if you have several years on, you are considered a veteran officer. you get to make decisions about how the agency runs. if you have not been there, shut up kid and sit over there. we will fly you how it is done here. so unfortunately, there is a disconnect, a generational disconnect, and policing. -- in policing. there are people like myself, if you start to talk about technology, i think it is a wonderful thing, but i am scared to death of it. i have five grandchildren, three -- who grab my iphone and they can operate it. three of whom are three years old, who can do things with my ipad i didn't know it could do.

so there is a clear right there. part of how we are functioning as an agency. we see agencies starting to use things like facebook. twitter. things that appeal to the masses. how do we project police departments? would you like to be a police officer? what is a police officer? do we tell people that there are literally dozens, if not hundreds of different jobs you can do inside a police department? you want to be a forensic detective? do you want to become someone who becomes a -- let me think of this term -- i can't even think of it, a person who can take different images and recordings and put them together and present to you a picture of what occurred based on recordings, audio and visual? i forget the name of that position for writ there are different expect can be done including just being a police officer. but here's the real reason. historically, in every single

police agency across this country, your best recruiting tool is your employees themselves. your employees will say, i know a kid who lives down the street. he is neighbors with my mother. let's try to recruit this kid. i think he would be a good cop. or i have a nephew, a son, a daughter, and uncle -- most of that comes from within the agency. historically, police agencies have been almost completely white. in 1971. most recruit classes were 50 white guys and two black guys. one of them would pass, one of them would fail. if you're recruiting is coming from inside the agency, you are hiring 50 white guys and one black guy what is your , recruiting going to be? progress and become more open now -- our agency is about 38% african-american.

about 25% female. and the rest are white guys. it is going to change the way we recruit. that internal recruiting mechanism we use is going to reach out to a more diverse community. that is, their own community. that is the very best method for us moving forward. >> thank you. if you could quickly ask her -- your questions, and we will allow our panelists to close. >> this question is for mr. alexander or the chief. is there anything in place that routinely or annually tests them psychologically or within stress factors to determine if they are having anything going on at home? bringing their problems to work? or if they have been at military and they might have relapses,

repressed things they want to dealing with that particular victim, suspect, or citizen, if you will? is there anything in place that is testing them for the stress? >> thank you so much. yes, sir? >> excuse me. since an incident that happened like this, the entire nation gets involved. and i am wondering if it would be feasible, since police officers across the country have such extreme authority and power, would it be feasible to have dialogue about federal regulations that govern all police departments? so we would have uniform code? >> thank you. >> i spent the last 10 years working in education, and i'm curious.

can you point to specific examples of community engagement or school engagement opportunities that police departments have taken? as they progress? so initiatives reaching out to black males or entire schools? >> check out the ok program. >> specifically about things that have worked? >> we only have three questions and 90 seconds each. i'm trying to help get your question answered. there is a program called the ok program. it is 15 years old. officers come out of a traditional law enforcement role and serve as ombudsmen. between groups of young people in certain communities, inside and outside of the school. it is run -- it is all former and current law enforcement. the young people who have gone through the program for the last 15 years, all them have graduated from high school. 80% have gone on to college.

and none have been murdered. so it is one example of a program. at least 13 or 14 cities over 15 itrs, you can take a look at as a model of a program doing an incredible job of connecting law enforcement and young people. where they are still police officers but their role is different than it would normally be. creating broader relationships. called the ok program. yes, sir? >> let me clear up something real quickly. not a word has been mentioned about the civil rights division of doj. i spent 39 years in the fbi. i ran the fbi civil rights program. the criminal section of the civil rights division will look at every single case that comes up that meets certain basic requirements such as in ferguson. or the rodney king case.

people are rioting based on the presumption that justice has not been served. it is not over yet. people have to understand that. my question to the leaders of these communities, have there been coalitions of leadership, whether it is ferguson, cincinnati, or wherever, to dispel the misperceptions on the part of people that has caused the riots? it has happened in ferguson. they have done a very poor job of maintaining the truth and letting people know what the heck is going on. >> all right. great last question. that could start another two-hour conversation. [laughter] i have never moderated a panel with three more prolific people. which is why you can answer these in 90 seconds each.

[laughter] if you would keep your closing remarks to two minutes. and i will be timing you. fournswer any one of the questions, or anything you think needs to be said that has not been set. normally i would make the reverend go last, but you are not the most long-winded. so i will start with the chief. >> don't stop. we have started something here that is a very dynamic conversation. who would have ever thought that the foundation that filthy martin luther king memorial and thehe foundation that built martin luther king memorial and the national law enforcement officer memorial would come together on an issue as dicey and challenging as race in america? especially where race affects policing in communities? this is something that has long needed to be done.

i speak from a tremendous amount of experience, having been one of the last major cities to host race riots in america. if that is what you won your legacy to be. that is not a good legacy to have. this last gentleman who spoke here from the fbi was right. what he talked about here. is there a coalition of people? this is what we talked about earlier. how good are your relationships between your local agency, and your communities themselves? are they superficial, or are they true relationships where i can pick up the phone and make a call and say, something occurred , here's what i can tie you, i will meet with you in 30 minutes now. i need your help getting information into the community. nobody can do that sitting inside of a pickle jar or isolating themselves until something happens. by the way, now i need your help. it does not work that way.

these relationships have to be existing. they have to be powerful relationships, and they have to be trusting relationships, and they cannot be temporary. they have to be there and have to be worked on constantly, each and every day. at the when you become fat, point happy, and lazy, it is time to put somebody in there who is truly invested in the community and wants to see the community get better. >> thank you. almost two minutes exactly. mr. alexander? >> when i think about this whole thing. i'm going to be very short here. i am optimistic that we as a nation are going to find solutions to much of what we talked about tonight. i truly believe that. i believe, with the help of the president and attorney general, who have made a commitment -- i was in a room with attorney general holder last night in atlanta. he has a commitment and has been

tasked by the president to do some things to help change this narrative. here is the bigger threat, from a more global perspective. that is, all of us in this room, not just police and criminal justice, but all of us, on the private side, industry, government, education, we are all american citizens. we are all at risk. from a global perspective, we are not going to be continuing to be a strong nation as long as we are divided. because we have elements out there, i.e. isil, who are infiltrating this country. looking for our weaknesses. in those weaknesses, they recruit, and in recruitment we all become at risk. so as a nation, from a global perspective, we are going to have to fix our own social

problems. we know they will not be fixed overnight. but what we do know, if we are working and fixing them together, it will push back those who may threaten the integrity of this nation. and that for me is the bigger issue out of all of this. because we have been wrestling with race from the beginning of this country. we are still wrestling with it. on all of this that we are talking about tonight is race. we are not going to fix it in ime, butrt period of t if we work on this is a country together, regardless of what i'll use it on -- aisle you sit on, we have to fix this because if we do not we will weaken ourselves as a nation, and that

is something we will not be able to do to be a strong united states of america. >> thank you so much. reverend? >> he said he was not going to be long. [laughter] quick that was two minutes and 30 seconds. [laughter] whenlways have to worry someone starts, i will be short. to take a text. in theseake one closing remarks. this, vision, the without a people perish. that is scripture. proverbs 29:18. unless we have visionary leadership, not only in the moment but in this movement, without visionary leadership, we will continue to see our

villages in crises. i represent one of the anchor institutions in every community, the local church. the watch memorial teaching ministries, a nondenominational church in the heart of new orleans. at the end of the day, the faith community, the business community, the governmental community, everyday people, there has to be the connectedness that cedric talked about. the coalition building that somebody else mentioned. in this movement, there must be take aways. we cannot just dialogue and walk away and say, we had a great evening in washington, d.c. i would hope that notes are taken and we can begin to talk about how we build on the takeaways.

even from this very purposeful and intentional discussion. otherwise we are just going through the motions, going through the processes of coming together. although this is an aggregate of people, it can become more than an aggregate if we put it in writing and declare that in new orleans, in cincinnati, in atlanta, in st. louis, all across this country, we would have more discussions like this that are purposeful. we walk away with solutions. i keep going back to short-term and long-term. this will not happen overnight. there are some things that can be immediately done in every community with great leadership, visionary leadership, inquiring of the lord, how i would put it in my vernacular, as to what we need to do. -- it doesn't take everybody doing it, but if we

can in trust not only the elected leaders, but as i said earlier in the conversation, there are people on the ground. people every day who have voices that are never heard. so if we can begin to process ways by which we hear the voices of more of our young people, who are not just protesting, but an equal number of them who are sitting at home with ideas. how do we coalesce all of that? to begin to say in every community and every neighborhood, we have come up with solutions. action-oriented solutions. where we have conceptualized actionable solutions for every neighborhood to begin to turn itself around. just on this one issue of building trust. building trust between police and every day citizens. in new orleans, that trust is already there in some parts of the city.

in other parts of our city, it has never been there. that's why oftentimes we are called the tale of two cities. oneness canat a come about. we don't like resources in america. we lack togetherness. my time is up. thank you for yours. [applause] >> a good preacher knows what two amens mean. [laughter] think -- i know there might be some final remarks. but i'm appreciative, being this moderator, that there was no way to cover all the things that needed to be covered. but i think the conversation was a good one. i know one of the things mentioned was young people. the next time there is a panel like this, i hope we have a young person on the panel. if there is an answer to the it is that ails us,

coming from the minds and hearts of young people. so often they are the brunt of what is being dealt with, but we seldom ask them to be involved in the solution process. one of my mentors is in the house. dr. ben. he was part of the wilmington 10. who was part of the 10. he understood that no matter what, they had to move and act in a way he thought was necessary. and i've seen he and others work with young people all over this country, ha even when they're angry, give us insight on some of the direction that we need to take. and so as we're talking about community policing, as many of those young people are the ones being policed, i hope that as we talk about solutions, one of those solutions is ensuring that we don't ever have a conversation of any kind without young people being at the table in the room, andt