Let me remind you that the point I raised you on was as follows:
I haven't really offered any opinion on anything else in this conversation, BLM or American prosecution system, so stop attributing arguments to me I haven't stated purely so you can knock them down.
I'll repeat my assertion, and the ruling of the ECHR, he didn't fail to 'address state killing of an innocent man' he approved a decision by a prosecuting solicitor that there was statutorily insufficient new evidence to pursue a prosecution against individual police officers following the initial CPS decision to not to prosecute in 2016 and the 'cannot be unlawful killing' ruling from the coroner.
Perhaps a better example could be the decision to prosecute in the case of Ian Tomlinson, where the CPS decided to prosecute and the officer was acquitted by the Jury.
It's not common that police officers are convicted in front of juries, up until Tomlinson case no police officer had been convicted for manslaughter for a crime committed while on duty since 1986. So as the DPP you might be asking yourself 'what's the point?'