The Implicit Bargain Behind the Ferguson Effect

Paul Cassell, a former federal judge, concludes there is a correlation between the summer’s BLM protests and increased crime.

I'm inclined to believe the correlation on display here, but I'm not sure what the broader lesson is. I see segments of the pro-police wing basically argue something along the lines of "look what happens when you complain about police brutality too much". The implied bargain is structured in the form of accepting or at least tolerating police misconduct in exchange for baseline law & order.

I don't think anyone (except maybe Cincinnati police union rep Steve Loomis) actually believes that cops can do no wrong. The debate appears to be "Is police misconduct really that bad?", especially in contrast to other societal ills. There's no feasible resolution to that debate. But regardless, the undeniable fact is that police as an institution in the United States has indeed lost significant legitimacy in the eyes of a significant portion of the population.

My own stance is that this loss in legitimacy is valid, because the accountability structure in place is a joke. There is no profession in the world where you can literally steal $225,000 during the course of your job and a judge will shrug and say "Well, who are we to say that was clearly wrong?". Cops are not going to get the benefit of doubt for anything they do. A cop can say "he tried to grab my taser" but how many times is that actually true? They can say "we heard shots fired at us" but how do we know they're not just trigger-happy? They can say "Defendant began swinging his arms and punching both officers" but how do we know they're just blatantly making shit up and expecting not to get caught?

The inciting incident for BLM was Ferguson. And it doesn't matter whether Darren Wilson had used deadly force appropriately, there is no other profession where the baseline expectation is a de facto exemption from criminal prosecution, and where the prosecutor acts like your defense attorney in a grand jury proceeding. What other profession would you see whistleblowing of wrongdoing punished with psychiatric commitment?

So regardless of your own personal opinions, a significant portion of the population does not trust the police. I argue that they have good reason not to trust them. But even if they didn't, how do you begin to repair the compromised relationship? Even well-intentioned police can't do their jobs when the community either doesn't want them to or is actively hostile. Why call the cops? Why assist them? Why furnish them with any information? Why bother if you don't believe they have your best interests in mind?

I can think of ways of repairing this relationship. Getting rid of qualified immunity is a start that's realistic (my less realistic policies are banning police unions and somehow changing prosecution's entire culture so that they don't believe that cops should receive special treatment for criminal charges. No idea how to get there). What would your solution be?