General Discussion

...or for the victim to sue later.

It is an interesting statute that really tends to favor the prosecution as it basically requires that the case run its course and result favorably for the defendant.

To succeed, a plaintiff must establish that a state actor initiated a criminal proceeding without probable cause, acted with malice, and the proceeding ended in the plaintiff's favor.

Getting a grand jury to return a true bill on a case gives the prosecutor the cover of probable cause. After that they are basically immune to any repercussions.

Federal prosecutors generally possess absolute immunity from malicious prosecution claims for actions taken within the scope of their prosecutorial duties--even if they act in bad faith, knowingly prosecute innocent people, or withhold evidence.

But, as in all things law: it is complicated at both the state and federal level.

So, what do these federal prosecutors really have to lose? They get to take the trial all the way to the end and maybe convince a jury that the defendant is guilty, and the worst case for them is that the case is resolved in favor of the defendant.

You can do a lot of damage to a person's reputation and bank account along the way to that end.