I don't know about the "the next best thing". Maybe for his career, but certainly not for the people he was representing (which is the family and the citizens of the state, officer Wilson notwithstanding), IMO.
I'm not questioning the jurors or even what they found out.
If this is the 'fair' or 'right' thing to do, why isn't this the de-facto standard? Why aren't we doing this for every case, or, at least, the vast majority of cases? When we look at "dynamics", as you say, of how indictments are granted, this case is a huge outlier. Why is it that such high standard seemingly only applies when a cop is involved. I'm sure you would agree there's just something inherently unfair about that, which is what I think undermines what's perceived as justice.