Great article, Mike. I agree with what you propose completely, but I think there are two other factors, one of which is partially addressed by your proposal.

Often district attorneys seem … reluctant to bring cases to a grand jury. One likely cause is that DAs work closely with the police and don’t want to risk antagonizing them. Focusing on the DA and police chief as key elements of the Quadrant is crucial but won’t necessarily address this workplace dynamic. Not conspiring to suppress evidence is certainly a big step forward, but not doing the wrong thing could be seen as positive but passive.

Even when cases are brought before grand juries, too often they decide not to recommend a trial. To me, the most likely reason is that citizens don’t want to cross the police, fearing reprisals.

I’d like to suggest that once single-issue Quadrant voting has succeeded, these elected officials move swiftly with common cause to legally require a trial (or at the very least a grand jury hearing) as well as proper, supervised crime scene and chain-of-evidence procedure for every police shooting and assault. No exceptions.

Knowing that they will automatically face at least a grand jury hearing with evidence, witnesses, etc is likely to deter at least some of the brutal and horrific police violence we continue to witness.