The article is inconsistent with standard practices, by only selectively putting quote marks around certain parts of officers claims. Apparently pointing this out bothers you.
Yeah, you're just pulling shit out of your ass. If you're claiming "an authoritative source" backs your argument, it's on you to support your claim instead of tossing out "do your own research" accusations.
Uh huh. Or you're just making up bullshit to obscure the very simple fact that the article features some officer claims in quote marks and other officer claims in no quote marks, which is not actually standard practice or taught in any high school.