The context before it is literally just him rattling off facts about the case and speculating on outcomes since no criminal investigation was being conducted. It's mostly professional and boring. The other party says something inaudible, he laughs, changes his tone and comments about checks for 11k being issued-- the implication being it's such a low amount because "no, she's a regular person" and "she's 26, she has no value," which is all clearly how he expects the city to respond.
In the city's own response, the main thing they took issue with was his discussing potential resolutions at all-- because when your officers are caught on camera offering cynical takes about how you'll handle a pedestrian death, it's not a good look for you:
> The Accountability Ordinance is clear in seeking to preserve the integrity of OPA investigations: “While any incident of public concern is under OPA, SPD or OIG review, no City employee should comment, either in their official or personal capacity, in a way that suggests that any factual, policy, or legal conclusions have been reached about the incident.”
It's gallows humor (and definitely unprofessional and insensitive) but the conclusions you're coming to based off of one line are seriously fucked. He's a Narcissist? A sadist? Seriously? An incel?
Those are some bold claims to make about a man who is very clearly jaded.