Grand juries were designed to be a check on prosecutors and law enforcement. Instead, they’ve become a corrupt shield to protect those with power and another sword to strike down those without. And it’s now all too obviously past time the system was overhauled to fix that.

Before Wednesday’s shameful decision by a New York grand jury to refuse to indict the police officer who choked to death an unarmed and unresisting Eric Garner, one statistic made clear just how much our justice system has failed:

Grand juries not resulting in indictments: Police Officers: 80 of 81 Civilians: 11 of 162,000 #Ferguson http://t.co/rmHtPlNlun — Charles Clymer (@cmclymer) November 25, 2014

If you are an ordinary citizen being investigated for a crime by an American grand jury, there is a 99.993% chance you’ll be indicted. Yet if you’re a police officer, that chance falls to effectively nil.

While the Michael Brown tragedy in Ferguson elevated the harsh reality of grand juries to the global stage, no case has driven it home more than Garner’s. A victim who was unarmed and did not resist. A forbidden chokehold according to NYPD rules. Ruled a homicide by the medical examiner who performed the autopsy. And it was all caught on crystal-clear video.

If Eric Garner’s killer can’t be indicted, what cop possibly could?

The man is unarmed. The chokehold is banned. The coroner ruled it a homicide. It is on video. None of this matters. I can't breathe. — jay smooth (@jsmooth995) December 3, 2014

Grand juries require prosecutors to prove there was probable cause – that is, more probable than not – that a crime has been committed, before a case moves to trial. Yet they’ve turned into a two-tiered justice system wherein prosecutors are able to manipulate grand juries into pretty much whatever decision they please, and absolve themselves of any accountability when they rig the system for their allies.

In cases where the prosecutor wants an indictment, he or she can show the jury a narrow slice of favorable evidence (sometimes evidence that wouldn’t even be allowed at trial), then pressure the jury over which charges to bring, and get an indictment within hours. “There is no question that a grand jury will do precisely what the prosecutor wants, virtually 100% of the time,” law professor James Cohen told Gothamist on Monday, echoing the comments of countless other lawyers over the past few weeks.

But in cases where prosecutors don’t want a trial, they can bury the jury in evidence and drag on the process for weeks, then undermine the case by cross-examining their own witnesses, and confuse the jury by not recommending which charges to bring at all. The result is what we’ve seen from Ferguson to Staten Island and back again: miscarriage of justice, under the auspices of thoroughness.

In local cases involving local cops, it’s clear that local prosecutors won’t cut it. Federal prosecutions and some states require grand juries to reach indictments, but that doesn’t mean states can’t bring in special prosecutors without connections to cases of the local police. As criminal law professor Ronald Wright told the New Republic, local ballot initiatives can quickly make this practice mandatory:

You could revise state law so that you could describe the category of cases where the appointment of a special prosecutor is mandatory. The governor shall appoint a special prosecutor in the possible criminal wrongdoing by police officer in jurisdiction with the same boundary as the district attorney. You could have an automatic trigger.

NYC Public Advocate @TishJames calls on governor to create a special prosecutor to prosecute police, citing conflict of interest #EricGarner — Lauren Raab (@raablauren) December 3, 2014

Many made the immediate point on Wednesday evening that if even Garner’s killer, captured on video, could not be indicted, then clearly body-cams won’t lead to more indictments. But the idea that body-cams were even going to be a partial solution for stopping senseless killings by police officers was absurd and insulting before the Garner decision was announced. The only people who actually think body-cams are a viable solution are the people defending the killings to begin with.

But that does not mean there is no value in the fact that the killing of Eric Garner was caught on camera. The video of Garner’s death means that the world’s public knows the truth, even if a misled group of grand jurors in New York refused to face it. It also means the Justice Department has ample evidence to open a federal civil rights investigation into the incident, which Eric Holder said on Wednesday night that it will. If the killing wasn’t on film, politicians wouldn’t be feeling increased pressure from incensed protesters of all backgrounds to finally face the issue of two-tiered justice head-on.

Right now, though, we don’t even have an accurate count of how many people police kill each year, let alone a fair system for bringing some justice to those unjustified killings – to the families of Mike Brown, Eric Garner and the many victims who are not household names. The Wall Street Journal reported just before the Garner grand jury decision was announced that literally hundreds of killings by police officers went unreported over the last several years. The road to accountability is long, but as the public gets more and more outraged, we can only hope it bends towards justice.