I haven’t read the article yet, so forgive any ignorance.
Lawyer: I’d like to call Mr. SWAT officer as my next witness. Mr. SWAT, how often do you train with your side arm, long gun, tactics, and response?
Mr. SWAT: all the time, sir (or ma’am).
Lawyer: Isn’t it true that you do this so you can be more effective at killing other people?
Mr. SWAT: why no sir. We train to preserve life.
Lawyer: I’d like to call the trainer for the local police department as my next witness. Mr. Trainer, how often do you train law enforcement officers?
Mr. Trainer: It’s my full time job. So, I would estimate 40 hours a week or more.
Mr. Lawyer: And isn’t it true that you train cops to effectively kill people so they can literally get away with murder?
Mr. Trainer: No sir! I train officers so they can be safe on the job and preserve life.
Mr. Lawyer: How many hours does a police officer need to train in order, in your expert opinion, to be proficient (or qualify) with a side arm?
Mr. Trainer: X number of hours.
Mr. Lawyer: Do you ever have officers that choose to train over and above this minimum standard?
Mr. Trainer: Yes we do.
Mr. Lawyer: and they do that so they can more effectively kill people, isn’t that correct?
Mr. Trainer: No. Our officers seek to preserve life, protect themselves, and protect the public.
Then the defendant gets on the stand and responds to similar questions in a similar fashion (or the lawyer states this in his closing arguments).
And it’s also your attorney’s job to pick a jury that isn’t so anti-cop or so stupid that they cannot or will not follow that line of thinking.