Every police department wants to be careful about who it lets in. The question Eliel Teixeira and Edwin Wu put to the guests of episode 46 of Palavrão Tático — Paulo Brandão and Felipe Teixeira, officers from Brazil's Federal District — is how much of that screening is still possible. The short answer from both: at the front door of the agency, "it's getting harder and harder." At the front door of an operational unit, it's a different story.

At the hiring stage: the candidate's past

In Brazil, you get into the police through a public civil-service exam, and the main character filter is the background investigation ("investigação social" or "vida pregressa") — one of the phases of the exam process, which looks into the candidate's record, pending cases, associations and conduct. The guests confirm it gets done. The problem, they say, is what happens next: the courts "leave room" for a lot of it to be challenged, and a good share of the disqualifications get reversed by a judge.

And if something slipped through, the picture gets even tougher. They use a hypothetical: a candidate facing a domestic violence case (under Brazil's Maria da Penha Law). If it shows up in the background investigation, he's going to have a problem in the hiring process. But if it went unnoticed and he was appointed, sworn in and started working, in their view there's practically no way left to remove him over something that wasn't caught back then.

On paper, Brazilian public servants go through a three-year probationary period before gaining tenure (Article 41 of the Federal Constitution), during which they can be evaluated and let go for being unfit. What the guests describe suggests that, in practice, that tool carries little weight when the problem predates the swearing-in.

In California: background, psych eval and the new decertification

On the American side, the requirements are in Government Code section 1031, which mandates a thorough background investigation and a psychological evaluation before any peace officer is hired. The background tends to be extensive: interviews with former employers, neighbors and ex-partners, financial history, drug use, social media, and a polygraph at many departments. After the academy, the officer serves a probationary period — usually 12 to 18 months, depending on the department — during which he can be cut loose fairly easily.

There's also a newer tool. With state law SB 2, from 2021, California began allowing POST to revoke the certification of officers for serious misconduct — excessive force, dishonesty, abuse of authority, among others — with the first reviews starting in 2023. Until then, California was one of the few states without that mechanism: an officer fired for misconduct could be hired by another department.

In the operational unit: "the mask comes off"

Selection for a tactical unit works differently, and the guests explain why: at that point, the agency already knows the officer. In their unit, there's a prior vetting with the people who have worked alongside the candidate. The logic is that an officer can fool the people "above" him — the boss, the supervisor — but not the people next to him. "In the middle of a gunfight, you know who's who." And if the vetting doesn't catch it, the course itself will.

They describe a specific type the process tries to screen out: the student who is "special operations only for the course." During the course, he gives it everything. Once he's on the job, the excuses show up: he can't skip lunch, he can't take that shift. The opposite exists too: the officer who never took a special operations course but has all the fundamentals and principles of an operator. He's the one who comes to mind when you ask yourself who you'd call right now in an emergency.

The cost of not screening

When a unit doesn't pay attention to this, the guests say, the result shows up in one of two ways: a team that can't operate, or a team "boiling over all the time," with internal conflict and no cohesion. The hosts remark that it's a good thing the units there have that latitude to pick the best.

What the two of them make of it

In the episode, Eliel Teixeira and Edwin Wu ask their questions from the perspective of guys who spent years training new officers in Los Angeles — and they're clearly surprised by the limits the courts put on the Brazilian filter. The full conversation is worth a listen to catch the guests' examples.

Sources and verification

California Government Code, section 1031 (mandatory background investigation and psychological evaluation). California Senate Bill 2 (2021), the Kenneth Ross Jr. Police Decertification Act, and public information from POST on the decertification process. Brazilian Federal Constitution, Article 41 (three-year probationary period). Law 11.340/2006 (Maria da Penha Law), cited in the hypothetical example. How often court reversals happen and the selection method used by the guests' unit are accounts from the episode's participants, not independently verified.

Who's talking here: Eliel Teixeira and Edwin Wu are working police officers in the Los Angeles area, California — born in Brazil, American citizens, with long careers in law enforcement. In this episode, they host Paulo Brandão, an officer in Brazil's Federal District for 27 years, and Felipe Teixeira, an officer in the Federal District for 16 years, who came to Los Angeles for SWAT School.

Heads up: everything described here follows the rules of California — and, on several points, the specific department each of them works for. In other American states the rules change; in Brazil, each police force has its own organic law and hiring notice.