Don't forget discovery. The prosecution holds back info at their extreme peril.
"And I don't know about you, but I'd be upset if they weren't still investigating; I don't take it as a sign they don't have enough;"
Again - had they had any direct evidence, he would have been arrested long ago. They may well have had a stong circumstantial case when they arrested him (tho the threshhold for an arrest warrant is decidely lower than for a prelim), and may even have turned up new direct evidence in the meantime. We'll get to see that in July.
What is shown in the prelim is only what is needed, has absolutely nothing to do with what has been turned over to the defense. The prelim's purpose is to show cause to move forward to trial.
As to discovery, that continues throughout the trial, as evidence arises. Any good lawyer will always tell you, you investigate every waking moment, never rest on your laurels. Nothing is a sure thing.
"Again - had they had any direct evidence, he would have been arrested long ago. They may well have had a stong circumstantial case when they arrested him (tho the threshhold for an arrest warrant is decidely lower than for a prelim), and may even have turned up new direct evidence in the meantime. We'll get to see that in July. "
This could be true, but the majority of cases are tried with circumstantial evidence. But direct evidence, in the house they shared in a nebulas thing. The fact that the bodies washed up did clarify and rush the need to arrest, as it became apparent that Scott was getting antsy. Up to that point, the authorities were fine in taking their time, gathering evidence. This murder took place less than 6 months ago, and for CA this is fairly fast. What we see in July will still be only a small part of this case. Only when the actual trial comes to pass will we see the whole enchilada.