For once and for all, progressive DAs do NOT want to let criminals go free more than conservative DAs, this is UNTRUE.
The difference lies in willingness to convict on LESS EVIDENCE.
Basically, is it better to convict innocent people, or to let guilty people go free?
Conservatives think that if you OVER-convict, you're more likely to catch criminals, whereas progressives think catching criminals is not worth locking up innocent people.
Just because you convict more people DOESNT make it more likely you've captured actual criminals, because if you convict the wrong person, you're letting the actual criminal go free. But conservatives say, "we solved more crimes so its better", even if they got the wrong guy, its better than not getting anyone.
However, if you're stricter about making sure you have the real bad guy, the odds are greater you'll actually let him go.
There are problems with both approaches, neither is actually " right", it just depends on whether you want to put more innocent people in jail or get more criminals off the street.
Your preference is mostly when they try to put YOU or your family member in prison for a crime you didn't commit, THEN its unfair.
But if its someone else, you're more ok with the unfairness because you think it makes you less likely to be a victim of crime.
NEITHER ONE WANTS TO LET CRIMINALS GO.