I think this article primarily aims for
understanding, and to the extent that one sees a bias it says more about which side they don't empathize with.
> Usually they [police] confront situations of conflict they did not cause, but which they are required to enter as third parties
This is a good description of responding to a domestic disturbance or stopping violent crime. But I think a good part of police running amok is precisely due to situations that don't fit this bill. Traffic tickets, drug possession, "jay" walking, home raids. No conflict exists until the police create it, at which point they aren't in the situation as a mediator but as biased second party that still operates with impunity.