I’ve said before and I’ll say it again that this incident is not an example of purely criminal prosecutorial intention that we saw in the Duke Rape Hoax. That said, I will allow one similarity: many of us are told, or are thinking, “well the prosecutor has to have more than what we’ve seen, right?”.
In the Duke Rape Hoax, the answer was always, and increasingly shockingly, no. I can only wait to see if there is anything more to this incident than what we (and the Sanford police?) already know — but I agree with earlier posts here that if there were more to it, we should have seen it in the indictment.
As discussed in other threads, there might in fact be less, not more, from the prosecutor than we have been told. The doubts raised about the “girlfriend” at the other end of the phone need to be addressed.
Regarding the “girlfriend”, you may find this VERY interesting. It is part of a series. It is the most complete rundown of this thing I’ve ever seen: