The system IS determining if Mr Wallace committed a crime. The investigators gather the facts, the DA determines if those facts should constitute arrest and a trial (this is where prosecutorial discression happens). If a trial, then the jury gets to determine if Mr Wallace committed a crime. Seriously, did you read the affidavit for Mr Wallace's arrest? That was pretty cut-and-dry stuff.
I'm pretty sure if you were under investigation for a crime and aspects of that crime were not coming out, you would like the investigators to not rush the end product. 5 months is nothing for an investigation. As stated much earlier in this thread, there may have been organized crime in play with the illegals. I've been involved in a few investigations with conspiracies and lots of stolen items. Multiple subjects, multiple victims, trying to recover as much of the stolen posessions as possible, affidavits, technical surveillances... 5 months is nothing. Conversely, Mr Wallace's situation was singular and fairly simple to resolve investigatively.
So far, I haven't seen any LE corruption in this. I haven't seen any DA impropriety or corruption either. All I've seen is a sworn affidavit for Mr Wallace's arrest for facts that even Mr Wallace concurred with in his interview with the Denver Post yesterday.
Jim, you are simply ranting. Nothing I type or say will change that.
Damn... I tried so hard to not get sucked into another long drawn out thread about cop hating and stupidity. Last post on this one for me. I've already deleted too much.
