Editor’s note: On Thursday, Anderson Aldrich’s 2021 bomb threat case was unsealed by an El Paso County judge and Fourth Judicial District Attorney Michael Allen commented on the 2021 case. Allen said two guns were recovered by law enforcement at the 2021 incident, including a handgun described as a “ghost gun” and a MM-15 5.56 mm rifle. Allen said both weapons were taken by the El Paso County Sheriff’s Office and never returned to Aldrich. Allen declined to comment when asked if there was any evidence Aldrich purchased the guns used during the Club Q shooting while the 2021 case was active.

What we learned about the Club Q mass shooting this week only leads to myriad new questions. The deliberately slow and incomplete release of information in a system whose procedures are not obvious can lead to misunderstanding. A comparison to other high-profile mass shooting cases in our recent past provides some insights to the strategies of the prosecutors in charge and answers many recent media questions.

Is it normal for the elected district attorney to handle such an enormous case? Yes. District Attorney Michael Allen has placed himself in the position of greatest accountability for this case of such importance to his community. That is consistent with his predecessor, Dan May, who took charge of several high-profile cases, including the stalled prosecution of the Planned Parenthood mass killer. As then-18th Judicial district attorney, I did the same for the Aurora Theater and STEM School cases, and 20th Judicial District Attorney Michael Dougherty has done the same for the Boulder supermarket mass killer. It is expected that the DA – the lead law enforcement officer in the jurisdiction – be more than a mere badge-toting administrator. They must be capable and willing to lead in the courtroom, and not just in the corner office.

Are 305 charges excessive? No. Here, the current charges – which DA Allen can change for some time to come – can be separated into several groups. There are three victim groups: the deceased, injured and uninjured. There are two theories of murder, attempted murder and assault – intentional after deliberation, and extreme indifference. Bias-motivated crimes are charged for every victim; they are the charges with the least consequences. At first blush, the assault charges are the only ones that seem unnecessary to me – but we do not have all the facts yet. Finally, there are numerous “crime of violence” counts which only serve to enhance the sentencing range of non-murder charges.

Noticeably absent thus far are any allegations that the weapons used by the killer were illegally possessed. That remains a significant unknown given the criticism leveled at law enforcement for the presumed failure to seek a red flag order. Weapons obtained illegally cannot be stopped by a court order. DA Allen has plenty of time to add such charges if they become appropriate.

By comparison, the 2012 Aurora Theater Mass Murderer faced 166 separate counts covering 12 murdered victims and 70 attempted murder victims. Of 1,158 identified victims, we chose to limit our charges – alleging with intent and extreme indifference – to those who were murdered and injured. There were 24 counts of first-degree murder; 140 counts of attempted murder in the first degree, one count related to the bombs he made to booby trap his apartment and one crime of violence sentence-enhancing count. We chose not to charge any assault charges and only a single crime of violence count.

In 2019, we charged the adult mass shooter at STEM School with 46 separate counts, including first degree murder for Kendrick Castillo and attempted murder charges for nearly every other person in classroom 107, as well as charges for arson, burglary and others.

The Boulder DA has charged the Boulder supermarket mass killer with 54 counts, including 10 counts of first-degree murder, 33 counts of attempted murder, one count of first-degree assault and 10 counts of using a large-capacity magazine.

Every case is unique. So, too, must be the approach to prosecution.

The newly released affidavit is thin, but not uncharacteristically so. The sufficiency of an affidavit is not measured by its length. By comparison, the affidavit page lengths for the major cases above are not dissimilar: Aurora Theater (18), STEM (11), Boulder (5). The singular objective of the affidavit is to establish the low standard of probable cause to arrest. It is not intended to be what the public wants: a comprehensive story of what happened.

The affidavit’s contents more than satisfy its purpose, even though it reveals little additional information, other than the promise of video of the horrific event. That will only be seen in a court room. We will know more – but not everything – at the preliminary hearing in February. At that hearing the court will determine if there is probable cause to continue to trial, and will also rule whether the evidence is sufficient to hold the killer without bond for the duration of the case.

The case, thus far, appears to be handled in the fashion indicative of a professional and experienced prosecutor’s office.

George Brauchler is the former district attorney for the 18th Judicial District. He also is president of the Advance Colorado Academy, which identifies, trains and connects conservative leaders in Colorado. He hosts The George Brauchler Show on 710KNUS Monday through Friday from 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. Follow him on Twitter: @GeorgeBrauchler.