She picked bunches of people in the first couple line-ups in numbers that didn't comport with her final version of the story of 3 guys gang-raping her, or she picked people who could not have possibly been there which means she had never seen them before, and before that she gave descriptions that didn't fit any of the players she eventually did pick. That points to a person who didn't want to make a viable identification in my book. If you finally settle on saying 3 guys did it, and you pick 20, then next time you pick 12, then 15, or then 4, to me it looks like you're being pressured to pick someone, but you can't, so you just pick a bunch to meet the pressure but in such a way that the choices are not useful.
The photo line-ups did not meet the state criminal justice system's protocols in any way, shape or form, and probably did not meet USSC case law precedent which requires that the photos and the presentation not be unduly suggestive or biased, which these clearly were.
They don't fit? Really? Three people have been indicted based on those line ups that don't fit. How much do you want to bet the judge is not going to throw the IDs out?
If she didn't want to go forward, all she had to say she can't recognize anyone. But she kept picking and picking.