Tasked with making life-and-death decisions in fast-moving circumstances, police officers risk their lives in the interest of maintaining public safety. Armed with a badge and a firearm, they also wield power that can leave others with fatal wounds.

Community confidence in this protect-and-serve profession hinges on public transparency and accountability. Silence about shortcomings — from questionable judgement calls to cases of outright misconduct — is a disservice that erodes trust.

In a welcome move that holds promise to further build Honolulu Police Department credibility, Interim Chief Rade Vanic this week said the department will hold news conferences within 24 hours of every shooting incident involving an officer, thereby stepping up consistency in regard to briefings that inform the community and address public safety concerns.

Also, in response to local and nationwide demand for rethinking longstanding use-of-force practices, HPD is rightly heralding and moving forward with recently proposed changes in its training that emphasize de-escalation tactics and cultural sensitivity.

This public course-correcting comes in the aftermath of two unrelated incidents, occurring days apart, in which officers shot and killed a 16-year-old boy, Iremamber Sykap, and then a 29-year-old man, Lindani Myeni. Both were unarmed. And in both cases, video footage shot at the scene and subsequent police reports raise serious questions about whether officer actions added up to an appropriate response to perceived public safety threat.

In the case of Sykap, asserting the shooting to be unjustified, city Prosecuting Attorney Steve Alm on Tuesday announced murder and attempted murder charges against three officers in connection with the April 5 incident, in which police chased the teen and others from East Honolulu to town before confronting their stolen car on Kalakaua Avenue and firing into it.

The complaints, filed in District Court, mark the first time an officer has been charged with a crime in connection with a police shooting in at least 45 years — and came just days after a grand jury declined to indict. Given the history of apparent community reluctance to second-guess this type of heated-moment police action, Alm now confronts a high bar for convictions.

At the same time, a trial holds potential to serve as a means for thorough public vetting and depoliticizing of the case. It also could expose gaps in police training. While police are responsible for effectively upholding set standards, missteps and mistakes are inevitable — officers must own up to them, and HPD must continually strive for improvement.

In Myeni’s case, police had responded to a 911 call accusing him of walking into and then out of a Nuuanu home where the caller was staying. Home surveillance camera footage seems to support an assertion that Myeni mistakenly entered and then apologetically left the residence. It also appeared to indicate that police failed to identify themselves before the shooting — and that tragic escalation, not de-escalation, occurred. Investigations into the incident are ongoing.

In both cases, resolution that provides clarity of facts is needed, as lingering secrecy can sew poisonous doubt and suspicions about cover-up.

For now, HPD deserves applause for recent steps toward trust-building, in the wake of Sykap’s death. Among them: improving community partnerships, such as meeting with Micronesian leaders and groups with aims to foster better cultural understanding in training as well as to recruit potential new officers.

Also encouraging is Vanic’s stated commitment to making certain that rookies and veteran officers alike are aligned with the latest policy changes. These include bans, in most cases, on the use of the vascular neck restraint and on shooting into a vehicle; and a mandate that officers must intervene when they see a uniformed colleague breaking the law or HPD policy.