Different forms of protecting systems from consequences with bad outcomes for all involved

Speaking of systems without accountability in the just posted A centralized system ungrounded in science or epistemology and without consequences is guaranteed to deliver bad answers, here is another system with the same issue - the system of justice with significant swathes subject to qualified immunity.  

There is an obvious and real challenge.  Law enforcement and the judicial system, if they are doing their jobs well, are effectively punishing people who have committed crimes.  The entirety of the public who interact have a stake in undermining and gumming up the works with frivolous accusations and punishing lawsuits against public servants (hopefully) just doing their jobs.  We don't want that.

Instead we have generally gone to the opposite extreme granting qualified immunity to those public servants and effectively shielding them all, the good and the bad, from frivolous and malevolent lawsuits.  We have given up on accountability of individuals and the process.  

As soon as I posted the above regarding the scientific method, the next article I scan is Absolute Immunity, Total Fuckery by Yassine Meskhout.  The subheading is It's SO not fair to hold government officials accountable.

Given...certain recent events, there might be a renewed interest in discussing what redress (if any) we might have when a prosecutor misbehaves. Billy Binion of Reason Magazine tackled one of my favorite hobby horses in a highly recommended feature article: Absolute Immunity Puts Prosecutors Above the Law

I've written about the problem of having government officials with no accountability, from the standpoint of Seattle officials deleting evidence and within the context of the doomed over-prosecution of Kyle Rittenhouse. Nobody voluntarily seeks accountability when they don't have to, and so there's nothing surprising about the state, with its purported monopoly on violence, choosing to shield one of their viceroys. If you have any interest in fixing this oversight, one of the problems you'll encounter (as I wrote in the APAB post) is how selective the outrage is. Except for the principled civil libertarians screaming into the void, no one else cares about a leopard's diet until the moment the first layer of facial epidermis is being torn off.

It is a useful reminder with a litany of examples of a well-known and longstanding flaw in the system which needs to be fixed and yet which never does get the attention it deserves from legislators.