As the District Attorney, Robert McCulloch, already put on a dog and pony show of self-serving faux transparency to show what a great job he did in sabatoging the indictment of P.O. Darren Wilson for the killing of Michael Brown in Ferguson, what's left to hide?

But the complaint, drafted by Anthony Rothert of the ACLU of Missouri, was a smart bit of legal writing.  Regardless of the outcome of the action, the grand juror's message was laid bare:

19. From Plaintiff's perspective, the presentation of evidence to the grand jury investigating Wilson differed markedly and in significant ways from how evidence was presented in the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term.

20. From Plaintiff's perspective, the State's counsel to the grand jury investigating Wilson differed markedly and in significant ways from the State's counsel to the grand jury in the hundreds of matters presented to the grand jury earlier in its term.

21. From Plaintiff's perspective, the investigation of Wilson had a stronger focus on the victim than in other cases presented to the grand jury.

22. From Plaintiff's perspective, the presentation of the law to which the grand jurors were to apply the facts was made in a muddled and untimely manner compared to the presentation of the law in other cases presented to the grand jury….

32. From Plaintiff's perspective, Defendant's [i.e., the prosecutor's] statement characterizes the views of the grand jurors collectively toward the evidence, witnesses, and the law, in a manner that does not comport with Plaintiff's own opinions.