The Sheriff apparently overlooks the big picture in this deal. He has THAT in common with the cop-crowd here.
Granted, we all are due the presumption of innocence.
But what happens when a citizen kills someone? Where is the burden of proof?
He IS "guilty" of homicide by virtue of killing a human.
To avoid being found guilty of manslaughter or murder, he must prove it was "justified". In part, at least, his "proof" is his statements to investigators.
If one considers how an ordinary citizen is treated after shooting someone, and contrasts it with how these deputies are being treated, it's easy to conclude that, in practice, the burden of proof shifts according to one's employment.
The Authorities in this instance give credibility to that conclusion. Especially the Sheriff.
