I said from the beginning that it had some kernels of truth, but is reductive and simplistic. I don't think that's particularly strong language, I have since the beginning acknowledged that you can put together the kernels to truth to claim a sort of poetic truth - it's not a total fabrication. But that's all it is: a poetic truth. Actual truth of continuity between slave patrols and municipal police forces only exists in perhaps one southern city. The overwhelming majority of police forces do not have their roots in slave patrols. Slave patrols were disbanded, and police forces formed after abolition.

That's essentially summarizing the article: slave patrols existed in much of the south, but claiming continuity with today's police is a very big stretch, to the point where it's only poetically true.

I think he makes a reasonable point. Even a source that acknowledges some connection makes it clear that saying that policing in the South "rose out" of slave patrols is a far overreach.