I do not follow. What dors time have to do with evidence presented to the GJ?
Nothing. Because prosecutors did not use the GJ for a lot of time to preserve witness testimony, as they could have for a different type of case.
The person posting that is apparently not aware of how quickly the GJ turned this around. And it still wasn't fast enough for the political prosecutors, because they tried going to TWO judges before the GJ could meet.
This is not a situation where there is any evidence that the GJ took a minute longer than necessary to approve the arrests.
There are cases where prosecution has to tread carefully. Victims who were children when they were harmed are very vulnerable. A grand jury is secret, so abusers might not find out who testified or what was said ever, unless it comes out in trial. And, if abusers convince victims to not to testify at trial, victims already did testify and prosecutors have their sworn statements. If the case never goes to trial, the victims at least didn't have to testify in public.
Sometimes, a grand jury is used for many, many hours to build a case. Sometimes, it's in and out to get the go ahead to prosecute it.
A long investigation is not how grand juries "work" all the time. It is how they "work" sometimes. There is not a scintilla of evidence that this case was handled with an investigative grand jury. This particular grand jury likely took even less time than the judges who rejected the case, because the judges probably asked more questions.
MOO