Even in states with more restrictive use-of-force laws, a cop’s proclamation of fear can be enough to avoid prison, no matter the circumstances. The law generally “tells jurors to look through the eyes of the officers,” said Craig Futterman, a criminologist at the University of Chicago. “It doesn’t ask: Did the officer have other alternatives? Did the officer really put the sanctity of human life first?”

In the wake of the failed convictions of the past four years, elected officials and advocates for police accountability have set their sights on changing deadly force laws. State legislators in Washington have proposed eliminating a provision that absolves officers who kill unless there's proof they acted with “malice”; lawmakers in California introduced a bill to raise the standard for a justified police killing from “reasonable” to “necessary” and to require jurors to consider the role an officer played in escalating an encounter. If it passes, California would have the nation’s toughest law governing police use of deadly force.

“We give police officers an extraordinary amount of power,” said Futterman. “There’s a reticence by most of society, jurors included, to find officers guilty of violating people’s rights because it would be a very scary world to most folks if people believe that the people we entrust to protect us are out there abusing us, which is sadly the reality for many black and brown communities.”

Read more at BuzzFeed