How does prosecution work when the permit is issued by the State that also pays the prosecuting staff?  

 I know this has happened before but the offender has to essentially mislead or omit a known factor of environmental impact right?  So if these wind farms posed an impact factor that included the potential and likely killing of endangered raptors, and they still got the permit, then the State would have a really hard time succeeding in prosecution, since they acknowledged the risk and approved the permit.

 My question would be what does the EI say from the wind turbine company, and what did the State agree to.  There's a decent chance they just took the deal to erect the turbines, essentially agreeing to look the other way in regard to negative species impact.