This really should never have been a question. The jury is the trier of facts in the case given to them by the court. But for DAs playing fast and loose, this would never have come up. They forget who they work for, and that the public trust demands they seek justice, not just notches on their headboards.
Exactly, Jezebelle. Nifong and his ilk have not only ignored the commands of the U.S. Supreme Court, but also the comment to ABA ethical rules such as Rule 4-3.8, which provides: "A prosecutor has the responsibility of a minister of justice and not simply that of an advocate. This responsibility carries with it specific obligations to see that the defendant is accorded procedural justice and that guilt is decided on the basis of sufficient evidence."
It's a damning indictment of both his competence and his integrity, and Nifong richly deserves disbarment. If Nifong's comments here are representative of the type of "defense" he tends to offer at trial on the disciplinary charges, he is (or should be) dead in the water.