Evening, I think Hunter's need for a case that would have a chance of successful prosecution was his agenda. The BPD was split on WHICH Ramsey was responsible, so the Grand Jury was a test to see which Ramsey they would have the best case against. Lou Smit would have REALLY muddied the waters by adding evidence of another possibility.

I know what you mean by feeling he was an advocate, but I really think, all along, Hunter was appearing to be the advocate because of the inability of his office to prosecute a case against ONE of them. I think he also recognized the severe damage done by the alienation between the Ramseys and the BPD and was trying to be the "good guy" in the RST's eyes so that communication lines would stay open. Someone needed to undo Eller's idiotic tactics! I also believe that - at least initially - Lou Smit was doing the same.