Good find Bob.
Officers are public employees working for "government" when performing their job they voluntarily surrender some rights. I find it utter rubbish that they can do criminal acts and then not have to testify about it because they may loose their job. Rule of law means we are not ruled by men who decide law it means our politicians and public employees are ruled by law, yet we can see how even the courts and the politicians use "law" to protect themselves over the public whom they supposedly serve. Our constitution federal and state protect our liberty not government employees liberty.
officers are in the unique position of immediately after using their guns of being asked questions by COPS wherein if they don't answer, they can be held liable for violating dept. rules.
anybody else is free to say "i choose to remain silent".
that's why garrity, etc. was invented, because it recognizes that we are in a unique situation that others are NOT placed in
we thus have specific rules.
every time we get in a shooting we will still be asked basic questions we have to answer 'are there any suspects outstanding' and stuff like that to ensure the scene is safe, and VERY general questions, about what happened.
but since we can be administratively compelled to provide statements (nonLEOs don't have this happen) , we need special protections as to how those statements can and can't be used.
nobody BUT a LEO can be compelled to provide a statement about a shooting, so yes.. we need our rights protected.