You are pointing out another unfortunate circumstance in our kangaroo court "justice" system. Whenever there is a jury trial, there is a strong bias for the prosecution and against the defendant. This bias has been demonstrated to exist and is well-known to any criminal defense attorney.
Mr Gibbous' attitude is a perfect example. i.e. since Larry was charged with a crime, he must be guilty of something. No hard working, honest DA would ever try to railroad an innocent person. (Mr Gibbous, does the name Mike Nifong sound familiar?)
ReardenMetal makes an additional point as to how this works. A common tactic of a prosecutor is to pile on felony charges so that a simultaneous conviction would essentially result in a life sentence and a conviction on even one charge would result in several years in prison. Consequently, the defendant is intimidated into accepting a plea bargain to save themselves from years of incarceration.
When you consider what Larry was facing vs what he actually ended up agreeing to, it's pretty obvious that the DA in this situation really had no case to begin with. I doubt that his superiors are happy with his performance. I'd say his attempt to promote his career backfired.
