There's a difference between substance and form. On form, no, on substance, yes. I prefer prosecutors who take the “more in sorrow than in vengeance” approach. Make the statement, announce the decision, and wrap it up. When you get into “justice for Trayvon”, you're really exceeding your roll. That stuff also has a chance to show up in an appeal where the argument that the prosecution polluted the jury pool is sometimes made. It's just poor form to me.
As far as substance went, I thought she adequately described the process.
What was your take?