BST audit alleges misrepresentation in DOJ-funded research

Building Shooters Technology says a six-month audit found a pattern of citation misrepresentation in work by Texas State University’s ALERRT Center that was funded in part by the Justice Department. The company says the findings raise questions about research rigor, conflict disclosures and peer review in police firearms training research.

Why it matters: - BST says the research errors could affect police firearms training, a public safety issue with direct real-world consequences. - The audit also raises broader questions about citation integrity in taxpayer-funded research and whether conflict disclosures were complete. - ALERRT has received more than $136 million in taxpayer funding, making the findings relevant to public oversight of federally supported work.

What happened: - Building Shooters Technology LLC said a six-month evidentiary audit found a multi-year pattern of misrepresentation in work published by J. Pete Blair, executive director and grant director for the ALERRT Center at Texas State University. - The reviewed work was funded in whole or in part by the U.S. Department of Justice under award 15JCOPS-24-GK-02506-PASS. - BST said the disputed claims appeared across podcasts, ALERRT-sponsored Substack posts, a criminal justice repository and an April 2026 peer-reviewed article in Taylor & Francis journal Evidence Base. - The company said it discovered the pattern while responding to questions from readers and clients about Blair’s publications and claims.

The details: - BST said it found selective citation, exclusion of contradictory results and claims that reversed both the conduct and findings of cited studies. - BST said the April 2026 Evidence Base article appears to advocate for training products that Blair has publicly said are being developed by ALERRT. - The same article explicitly disclaimed any potential conflicts of interest, BST said. - Dustin Salomon, BST’s founder, said academic credentials and taxpayer funding should increase rigor, not reduce it. - Blair told BST he would make several corrections through a corrigendum. - Blair disputed that other issues identified by BST were misleading. - Blair also disputed that a government-funded, peer-reviewed article promoting the publishing organization’s forthcoming training products created a disclosable conflict of interest. - Blair said he would verify that point with the journal editor. - BST said it also contacted the journal editor about the citation concerns, the possibility of a corrigendum, the conflict issue and the peer-review process. - The editor said the journal was in contact with Blair and would not disclose communications with authors to third parties. - The editor said the article underwent rigorous peer review by two independent, anonymous referees under the journal’s policy. - BST said no correction had appeared in the journal as of the release. - BST said the non-journal version of the article on CrimRxiv also had not been revised.

Between the lines: - The dispute is not just about one article. It touches how research tied to law enforcement training is vetted, cited and disclosed. - BST’s complaint suggests a tension between academic publication standards and product development inside the same research ecosystem. - The journal’s defense of peer review indicates the article cleared formal review, but BST is challenging whether the review caught the underlying citation problems.

What's next: - BST said its full findings and reference materials are available in its published audit. - The journal may issue a corrigendum if Blair submits one and the editor approves changes. - The CrimRxiv version could also be updated if the authors revise the article. - The dispute may continue to develop if additional response from Blair, ALERRT or the journal becomes public.

The bottom line: - BST is alleging that publicly funded research on police firearms training contains serious citation and disclosure problems, and the challenged article remains uncorrected for now.