• “Like many Americans, we are deeply disappointed by the Grand Jury’s decision. ” Stosh Cotler, CEO of Bend the Arc, self described as “a national organization inspired by Jewish values and the steadfast belief that Jewish Americans, regardless of religious or institutional affiliations, are compelled to create justice and opportunity for Americans.”

• “The Ferguson grand jury’s decision not to indict Officer Darren Wilson in the death of Michael Brown is a miscarriage of justice.” Congressional Black Caucus chair Marcia Fudge, D-Ohio.

Things are supposed to look clearer through a magnifying lens. But sometimes they appear even murkier.

Examined from the birds-eye view of society as a whole, the grand jury decision looks very much like a modern-day parable about the ills of racism. White policeman, young black victim. Overwhelmingly white police force in an integrated town that is two-thirds black. The absurd disrespect given Brown and his family as his body lay on the ground for hours after the shooting.

But delve into the facts in detail and without reference to societal ills, and the looking glass presents a quite different picture.

Twelve community members of all demographic backgrounds, given a thankless task, were ostensibly trying to do their best to arrive at a decision supported by the facts and the law. They were given mountains of evidence, both physical and testimonial. They devoted almost a month of their lives to meeting, well after their service was supposed to be complete.

The grand jury members concluded that no probable cause existed for any of the indictments put before them. No matter your feelings about the prosecuting attorney’s office—or about whether the process was better or worse than the norm—this determination by the jury meant that there weren’t nine of them who believed it was more likely than not that Wilson committed a crime. To get from there to a trial and conviction beyond a reasonable doubt would have been a stretch indeed.

Notwithstanding the principles of jurisprudence involved, the comments above by Cotler and Fudge attempt to conflate the many problems of racism in America – including myriad examples of police mistreatment, particularly of young black males – and the grand jury process.

This blending of different things is not only wrong, but extremely dangerous. And ironically, it’s most dangerous to those who are trampled upon the most by the system and society.

We don’t know their intent for sure, but if Cotler, Fudge and others are “disappointed” or consider the case a “miscarriage” because only one result – an indictment – would be satisfactory in their eyes, then they are essentially calling for a judicial system that makes decisions based not upon facts before the grand jury but instead upon societal opinions or unrest outside the courtroom.

That view reflects neither an American nor a Jewish sense of justice. It essentially undermines what our system protects, namely, the rights of those charged with a crime.

The vast number of criminal cases are not against police officers. They are against civilians. And many, many charges are against those who are poor, underprivileged, disadvantaged and generally don’t have access to the resources needed to sustain an effective defense.

If we depart from the essential need to protect the rights of defendants, then we risk something transformative, and not in a good way. If juries simply become mini-legislatures that get to decide on the basis not of the facts presented but rather what a majority or interest group on the streets of America think, then we will have eroded the protections we’ve worked so hard to sustain.

We can’t say we are disappointed by the decision because we weren’t part of a grand jury that, absent some error in the process or instructions, applied a ream of evidence to the law. Unless we can with a straight face contend we know for sure we would have ruled differently based on the facts before us, that is an almost impossible burden to overcome.

We can say, however, we are disappointed in so many things about our society:

• That blacks in this nation are killed, not only by police but largely by other civilians, at a massively disproportionate rate to others.

• That there are a terrible number of obstacles to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness placed upon wide swaths of our society.

• That the community conditions that led up to and contributed to the death of Michael Brown are deplorable.

• That despite the well-meaning peaceful speech by most, the violence exercised in the aftermath of the grand jury decision will set back community relations as much if not more than the case itself.

Expecting the outcome of this case to serve as a microcosm of how we see a more just world is both unrealistic and distracting. Unrealistic because it’s not what court cases are intended to accomplish. Distracting because the heavy lifting we must do as a society is about changing systems, institutions and our outlook on societal justice.

It is not in any way inconsistent to state that the loss of Michael Brown’s life is tragic and that our justice system gave our peers the opportunity to make a determination based on facts and law. Both are critical components of our humanity and our society. They should both be recognized and respected.