In article ,
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote:

Per Kurt Ullman:
In addition I heard a lot of cynicism about the prosecutor's conduct:
apparently, in the light of history, very un-prosecutor-like. Instead
of being aggressive, he just did a data dump to the jury of everything
connected with the case and sat back.
Actually this is probably how the GJ system should work. I will admit
seldom does.

Now that you have said it, I have to agree....

But his conduct did seem to differ with historical conduct... the post
about his being an elected official and knowing people were going to
want his scalp either way sounded reasonable to me.

My more cynical side suggests that in those jurisdictions where it isn't
required, 90% of cases go to the GJ do so more for political concerns
than legal. But then, I am pretty terminally cynical. (grin)
--
"Statistics are like bikinis. What they reveal is suggestive,
but what they conceal is vital."
-- Aaron Levenstein