Leonidas
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
I think I better understand with what you're saying now. My view is slightly different, mostly on the use of the term probable cause.
What you're talking about here is what I would term "quality of case work" rather than "probable cause". Our philosophies about quality police work seem to be very similar as there are few things I despise worse than lazy police work. My goal was always to nail down every angle possible, lay it out in the report in a way that there were no questions not addressed, and then be prepared to battle it out in court. I'm a fast typist, have a decent mind, an affinity for soaking up case law, a tendency to be an over-achiever and a strong desire to always win. My goal always was to have the defense attorney read my report and turn to his client and say, "So, you're going to prison, the only question is how much time we can plea bargain this down to."
Probable cause, to me, is just one of the steps on the road to quality police work. Once I have probable cause nailed down, I know I can make an arrest and bring charges. But the challenge becomes "can I win the case?" It's a challenge because I have to defend the case in court, and I have to overcome the prosecutor's desire to protect his/her win-rate (and their laziness which too often results in an easy plea rather than go for the throat).
In addition to being a required step, PC is also a nice hammer sitting in the toolbox of an investigator. Just because you have PC doesn't mean you have to make an arrest at that moment. You can hang on to it and use it when the time is ripe to make an arrest that will lead to byproducts that will enhance the case. On the other hand, sometimes the case forces you to make the arrest as soon as you think you have PC because you don't want to lose evidence, or the bad guy.
And then there are the times when you have PC and you have to admit that this is about as good as it is going to get. You believe the crime was committed by the defendant, but there are holes, or potential holes, that you just can't get filled. Those are the times you just have to have some faith in the prosecutor, judge and jury to make good decisions.
Getting PC is like the traffic light turning from red to green. Technically, you can go, but smart people always look both ways to make sure it's really safe to go.
So, steering this thing back to the topic at hand. Discounting a politically motivated prosecution, if criminal charges are brought in the Deepwater Horizon case, the investigators and the prosecutors will almost certainly have done everything they think they need to do in order to nail everything down and close all the holes.
The major potential weaknesses to any prosecution on this is going to be that this will be a difficult case to make because there are so many people involved, the corporations involved will hire attorneys by the building full, everybody will put forth major efforts to protect their asses, a literal boat-load of physical evidence sank to the bottom of the ocean, judgment will be an issue, and the technical aspects might be hard to explain to a jury.
The two sided sword of the case will be that it is a federal prosecution. Federal laws, especially conspiracy cases, are very sweet and can be made easily. The side that cuts the other way is found in this old saying, "Federal conspiracy cases are easy to make so federal agents and prosecutors can make them." Maybe I'm a bit jaded, having been a local cop my entire career but having spent 5 years in a GS-14 job in a three-letter fed agency. But given my choices between an ADA with 5-years experience who comes to work looking to lock up some bad guys vs. an AUSA with 20-years experience who comes to work praying he doesn't screw up today; I know who I want prosecuting my case.
