They'd behave more like doctors who order hugely expensive tests, procedures, and medicine they know patients don't need for the purpose of indemnity. They'd never admit to mistakes which could be used against them in the court of law. Frivolous lawsuits would abound, and doubly so when successful suits impugn the integrity of officers' statements in criminal court (even after the fact). The policy holders would settle to save money because court is more expensive on average. In other words, we'd expect them to stop policing in general.
> They'd behave more like doctors who order hugely expensive tests, procedures, and medicine they know patients don't need for the purpose of indemnity.
Good. It's gone far too much in the opposite direction.
> They'd never admit to mistakes which could be used against them in the court of law.
Already the case.
> when successful suits impugn the integrity of officers' statements in criminal court (even after the fact)
As it should.
> The policy holders would settle to save money because court is more expensive on average.