Interesting stuff about Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78 (1935) and the Walker/Berger race

"...courts have cited this decision so often that it has attained a near-iconic status for its description of the prosecutor’s duty to serve justice, play by the rules, and not hit below the belt.

Did the Phil Bergers play "by the rules"

to get his taxpayer funded charter school approved

at a taxpayer provided property in Rockingham County?

[A prosecutor, as Phil Berger Jr. is,] is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.

Do the Phil Berger's seem like they want to represent all those governed,

or thier campaign financiers with business before North Carolina's government?

As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor—indeed he should do so.

But while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones.

Has not Phil Berger been pretty damn foul 

with the help of his father via funding Bob Harris 

and Keep Conservatives United?

It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one.

...Berger’s exhortation is routinely cited by courts when they reverse a conviction resulting from a prosecutor’s misconduct; by lawyers in appellate briefs as a ritualistic incantation of the law’s commitment to fair criminal process and the prevention of wrongful convictions; and by academics as a reminder of the appropriate ethical standard for a prosecutor.

Is bugging court rooms an "appropriate ethical standard for a prosecutor"?

In fact, the prosecutor described embodies an even more heroic persona—a gladiator who is required to play by special rules that may require him to eschew winning for the nobler goal of serving the cause of justice. What is more heroic than sacrificing self-interest for some higher principle?

Isn't Berger running with money from the self-interest's of his father's constituents 

with business before his fathers senate?

The prosecutor, wants very badly to win.

They are armed with more and better weaponry than the adversary; they exercise an inordinate influence over the referee and score-keeper; and they can cheat without getting caught or suffering any penalty.

If nepotism and cronyism and blatant lying count as cheating, 

I believe the Phil Bergers have cheated their way through the election.

And the prosecutor’s cheating costs more than losing a game or a title; it may cost a person his liberty or his life.

http://www.luc.edu/media/lucedu/law/students/publications/llj/pdfs/gershman_hard_strikes.pdf