The Officer Who Killed Amir Locke Now Leads Minneapolis’ Use-of-Force Training: A Deep Betrayal of Public Trust
“Anybody that stands behind Mark Hanneman becoming a trainer for other officers, they are going to continue to have the bloodshed of my baby boy, Amir Locke, on their watch.”
— Karen Wells, mother of Amir Locke
A Tragedy That Was Never Supposed to Happen
In the early hours of February 2, 2022, 22-year-old Amir Locke was asleep on his cousin’s couch when Minneapolis police broke through the apartment door with a no-knock warrant. Less than ten seconds later, Sgt. Mark Hanneman shot Locke three times. Locke, a legal gun owner who was not the target of the warrant and had no criminal record, died on the couch where he slept.
On Site Public Media is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, become a subscriber.
His killing reignited a city still reeling from the police murder of George Floyd less than two years prior. The similarities were too glaring to ignore: another young Black man, another use of deadly force, and yet another department statement that twisted facts in the police’s favor.
But what’s happening now may be just as shocking: Sgt. Mark Hanneman is leading the Minneapolis Police Department’s new use-of-force training program—despite having fatally shot Locke during a raid that even the mayor now admits was made possible by misleading policy.
For Locke’s family, civil rights advocates, and many Minneapolis residents, this appointment isn’t a step toward reform. It’s a brutal reminder that the culture inside MPD remains unchanged.
The Broken Promise of a No-Knock “Ban”
After George Floyd’s murder, Mayor Jacob Frey publicly committed to ending no-knock raids in Minneapolis. During his re-election campaign in 2021, Frey touted the policy shift as a “ban.” But that was misleading.
In truth, the new rules allowed officers to enter without announcing themselves—just as long as they stated their presence after crossing the threshold. Legal scholars, including Professor Rachel Moran of the University of St. Thomas, quickly corrected the narrative: “This was not a ban,” Moran told the city council in 2022. “It, in fact, did not affect the knock requirement at all.”
Following Locke’s death, Frey backtracked. “Language became more casual, including my own,” he admitted. “And I own that.”
A temporary moratorium on no-knock warrants followed, but even that included exceptions for “imminent threats,” which meant officers could still conduct similar raids with internal approval.
Later, the city changed its policy again, now requiring a 20-second wait before entry during daytime and 30 seconds at night. At the state level, Minnesota legislators tightened similar restrictions. But despite these efforts, the public trust damaged by the initial deception remains largely unhealed.
On Site Public Media is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support our work, become a subscriber.
A Deadly Pattern — and a DOJ Investigation
Locke’s killing was part of a national pattern. Between 2010 and 2016, at least 94 people were killed during no-knock or quick-knock raids across the U.S., including 13 police officers. And contrary to law enforcement claims, there is little evidence that such raids improve public safety or solve more crimes.
St. Paul, just across the river, hasn’t executed a no-knock warrant since 2016—and yet their homicide clearance rate sits far higher than Minneapolis’. As law student Sarah Murtada testified, “We’re not seeing any difference in officer safety, and we’re not seeing that no-knock warrants create a higher clearance rate or solve more crimes.”
Following Amir Locke’s killing, the Department of Justice launched a two-year investigation into MPD. Their report found that the department engaged in a pattern of unlawful and discriminatory policing, especially targeting Black and Indigenous residents. It described a department suffering from “deficient accountability systems” and “flawed training.”
The Minnesota Department of Human Rights (MDHR) reached similar conclusions, and both agencies imposed consent decrees—legally binding reform mandates intended to force the department into compliance with constitutional policing.
Then Came the Walk-Back
In June 2025, the U.S. Attorney’s Office abruptly asked a federal judge to dismiss the DOJ consent decree, citing delays and unspecified concerns under the Trump administration. The judge approved, but not without objection. Critics—including city council members—called the decision premature and politically motivated.
Mayor Frey quickly responded by issuing an executive order directing city staff to fully implement the DOJ’s now-defunct reforms anyway. The order instructed the City Attorney’s Office to work with the independent monitor, Effective Law Enforcement for All (ELEFA), to ensure the federal reforms would still be enforced alongside the existing state agreement.
“We are committed to police reform, even if the Trump administration is not,” Frey said. “Our residents demanded meaningful change, and we’re delivering on that promise with this executive order, ensuring the work outlasts politics and any one administration.”
But Frey’s own department was simultaneously allowing Sgt. Mark Hanneman—the very officer who killed Amir Locke—to lead training on these same reforms.
The Officer Leading the “New” Culture
Sgt. Mark Hanneman, who has been with MPD for nearly a decade, was never charged in Locke’s death. Attorney General Keith Ellison and former Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman said the state’s laws gave Hanneman wide legal cover to use deadly force if he perceived a threat.
But community outrage never faded. Protests erupted in 2022, and civil rights groups called for his firing. Locke’s parents filed a federal lawsuit alleging their son’s constitutional rights were violated and that MPD has a history of excessive force against people of color.
Despite this, Hanneman was not just retained—he was promoted.
Chief Brian O’Hara has defended the decision repeatedly, stating that Hanneman is one of the department’s best trainers and has been instrumental in developing new use-of-force curriculum aligned with the consent decree reforms. He has taught de-escalation techniques like ICAT (Integrating Communications, Assessment, and Tactics), and has reportedly received praise from within MPD and from the independent monitor.
“It’s not lost on the MPD that this incident was a tragedy,” O’Hara said. “That’s why it’s important we do everything we possibly can so that we do not create a situation like this ever again.”
But to many, the department has already created that situation—by giving an officer involved in a fatal, preventable shooting the power to shape the department’s future.
A Dangerous Contradiction
To Locke’s family, the move is indefensible.
“They show they don’t care,” said his mother, Karen Wells. “They show that this is our culture.”
City council members were caught off guard when reporters revealed Hanneman’s role. Council President Elliott Payne called the appointment “poor judgment” and said it “undermines the work we thought they were doing around rebuilding trust.” Council Member Robin Wonsley was more direct:
“Officers who harm residents shouldn’t be promoted. Elevating Hanneman to lead use-of-force training sends a clear message: killing Black residents doesn’t hinder advancement in MPD.”
Even ELEFA expressed concern. Its monitoring team reportedly met with O’Hara earlier this year and believed Hanneman would be reassigned. But when training sessions began this summer, Hanneman was still at the front of the room. He will remain there through August.
Words vs. Actions
Mayor Frey’s public statements about reform ring hollow when placed next to Hanneman’s appointment. The executive order may promise a culture shift, but the department’s internal choices tell a different story.
“We are committed to police reform,” Frey said. “Our residents demanded meaningful change.”
And yet, MPD’s decision to elevate the officer who killed Amir Locke undermines every word of that promise.
True reform requires not only policy change but also a fundamental shift in values, accountability, and trust. You can’t build a new culture by reinforcing the old one.
Minneapolis says it’s trying to change. But if Mark Hanneman is the face of that change, it’s not reform — it’s erasure.
Take Action
If you believe Officer Mark Hanneman should not lead use-of-force training for the Minneapolis Police Department, you can make your voice heard by contacting city leadership:
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey
Let the Mayor know your concerns about MPD training and accountability.
Phone: (612) 673‑2100
Mailing Address:
Office of the Mayor
City Hall
350 S. 5th St., Room 330
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Online Contact Form: minneapolismn.gov/government/mayor
Police Chief Brian O’Hara
Raise your concerns about Officer Hanneman’s role directly with the MPD.
Phone (MPD Main Line): (612) 673‑3000
Mailing Address:
Minneapolis Police Department
350 S. 5th St., Room 130
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Email (general inbox): police@minneapolismn.gov
Public pressure matters. Use your voice to demand transparent and accountable police leadership.
Thanks for reading! This post is public so feel free to share it.