Whether the grand jury system is inherently flawed by allowing the government to damage citizens without consequences for constitutional violations

QUESTION PRESENTED A check on the government’s power to prosecute its own citizens minus no check does not equal zero. . A check on the government’s power to prosecute its own citizens minus viable means to hold the government accountable equals zero. Petitioner Webb, a 44-year-old noncriminal, made formal accusations of mul: tiple violations after Webb was indicted on a felony. It was then dropped but lasted 84 days and Webb suffered significant damage as this occurred in Arizona and Webb's home state was Kentucky. This Court has stated that a Grand Jury is “a primary security to the innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive persecution; it serves the invaluable function in our society of standing between the accuser and the accused...to determine whether a charge is founded upon reason or was dictated by an intimidating power : or by malice or ill will.” Wood v. Georgia, 370 U.S. 375, 390 (1962) ; This is contradictory. The grand jury system is very important to the criminal justice process to protect the innocent from being damaged but then again it is not important enough for consequences if it fails. Is this approach inherently flawed as it allows the government to damage citizens at will while subsequently denying citizens their fundamental right to seek legal justice if there is probable cause of Constitutional violations? i