There are actually that many words as subtitles in the video, I didn't leave out the hearing impaired.
And a few hundred words are not necessary when six words at the top of the screen pretty much make it clear to most people. Maybe <h1> is not big enough, will consider making it bigger.
The title makes clear the allegation. Not the evidence. Even allegation specifics, e.g. who forged whose signature on which form, is elusive.
Most "causes" on youtube are to be quite frank absolute garbage and take 15-30 minutes to cover issues that could profitably have been read in 2 minutes of actual content in between ads and words from your sponsor. You had about 10 seconds to convince people that they wouldn't be wasting their time watching the video and you entirely failed.
Based on reading others analysis it could have been summarized as convicted conman who is almost certainly guilty alleges unproven proprietorial misconduct to distract from own guilt and invites rubes to get in on the con on the ground floor.
I believe that misconduct happens even happens frequently and have an interest in stopping it but I don't believe the most effective vehicle for that change would be donating money to a conman. I would prefer causes like the ACLU and the innocence project while leaving this party to handle his own affairs. I trust that his extreme vested interest in dealing with this matter will inspire him to pursue it to its end without outside investment.
It could be that you're making a really great point, but it could also be that you're a crank or a bullshit artist. If you want me to invest time caring about your issue, invest a little of your own in explaining it.
Is this an attack on bad prosecutors in general? Is the website author the victim of prosecutorial harassment? I can't easily tell, and after 5 minutes lost interest in trying to figure it out.