I don't think you really understand how prosecution works either. A prosecutor has an affirmative legal duty not to compel a citizen to endure a trial where the prosecutor, himself, has reason to know, in his professional judgment, that there is no reasonable likelihood of a conviction. Prosecutors cannot put a man on trial simply to satisfy a mob. You are aware that in most cases, the prosecutor will make an indictment decision without referring the matter to a grand jury, aren't you? In this case, however, it was politically impossible to take responsibility for the inevitable decision. A prosecutor with more balls would have simply declined to indict and told the public why.

But in that case "the community" would have rioted...

As for your demand for credentials, I have an B.S. degree from Nowhereville State University in Economics, followed by an M.S. in Economics from a top-ranked state research university where I was a teaching assistant, and then I went to a top law school for the J.D. I was enlisted in the Navy for four years, and held a commission in the Naval Reserve for 16 years. Top Secret security clearance. Travelled to 38 of the United States and four US territories, plus 52 countries. And, here's the kicker: I've been a prosecutor too. Three years. THAT's where I get my ignorant crap from.