Well, I am at my limit on appellate legalese because I can easily imagine we take different meanings from that appellate language. I would assume that for the purposes of the court, a prosecutor presenting a tainted case is guilty of misconduct regardless of where in the chain of the prosecution the misconduct took place - it's a general indictment of the case. So to me that is why the important question here remains - was the the particular ADA sanctioned - seems they should have been if the cops were prosecuted and the ADA was jointly culpable. But while this is all an interesting discussion (no. really) in the end it's clearly not Kamala, it's someone else in the office, so from the stand point of our thread, we are pretty much off topic here. If you want me to grant she made a bad hire (and we don't even know that, odds are just as good the ADA was inherited) I'll give you that for comity.