This is an assertion not supported by the link to the Washington Post article. It may be true, but this it references one relatively small study stacked up against the studies of the Force Sciences Institute.

What I find curious is that defense attorneys do not seem to avail themselves of the Force Science Institute’s findings, and the resulting policies by various police departments. If a police officer who calms down and consults with counsel and doctor gives more accurate, less confused testimony about violent event they were involved in, that should apply to civilians as well, and whatever the civilian babbled about in the immediate wake of a shooting should be heavily discounted. I would think that defense counsel could point to the police’s own studies, reasoning, and policies to defend anything his client inconveniently blurted out when first arrested, especially at a crime scene.