> But if he did click that button and now is trying to say that the defense might have caused the video to be converted to a lower quality then ignorance is no longer plausible.

I don't understand. Are you saying that my idle speculation somehow grants positive evidence to the claim that there's been prosecutorial misconduct in the case?

The fact that you or I can identify a likely source of error doesn't mean that (1) that is, in fact, the source of error, or (2) that the prosecutor is aware of it. The rest of your post is overly wrought given the information we actually have.