If they've got the evidence, legitimately charge him then? If it's sufficient, let a jury of his peers convict him then. How is this any more complicated than

If they've got the evidence, legitimately charge him then? If it's sufficient, let a jury of his peers convict him then. How is this any more complicated than that, no matter how you frame it? We have laws as a check and balance system for a reason, apparently the US courts are slowly forgetting it or something...