Kate Steinle Murderer Acquitted

[JimmyBob]

This will be a great talking point for the D's in the '18 election: sanctuary, sanctuary, boom-a-la-ka, boom, boom, boom:

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/30/kate-steinle-shooting-jury-reaches-verdict/

 

[Headhunter]

Wouldn't this qualify for some kind of manslaughter even if it was an accident?

 

[CowboyJD]

Wouldn't this qualify for some kind of manslaughter even if it was an accident?

“The jury, which deliberated six days, considered first-degree, second-degree, or involuntary manslaughter for Garcia Zarate. He was found guilty of guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon.”

 

[Headhunter]

Wouldn't this qualify for some kind of manslaughter even if it was an accident?

“The jury, which deliberated six days, considered first-degree, second-degree, or involuntary manslaughter for Garcia Zarate. He was found guilty of guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon.”

How the hell was this not at least involuntary manslaughter? Looks like some messed up crap to me.

 

[NZ Poke]

 

[NZ Poke]

 

[GunsOfFrankEaton]

Kate's Wall. Now.

 

[MegaPoke]

“Help me Dad.”

Last words.

 

[CowboyJD]

How the hell was this not at least involuntary manslaughter? Looks like some messed up crap to me.

Well, I would imagine you haven’t heard all the evidence presented...seeing as how you didn’t even realized he was charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Juries aren’t infallible, but they get it right much, much, much more often than they got it wrong.

 

[Medic007]

To me, this case highlights the dangers of the sanctuary city bullshit. This 5 time previously deported criminal, who was wanted for a 6th deportation, would not have been sitting on a bench, "found" a stolen gun under it, and jacked with it had San Francisco simply complied with the ICE detainer request.

Politics over public safety is "responsible" for the death of that young lady. That's fvcked up. I don't expect any San Francisco city officials to have a single regret and will probably laud the jury's decision as a victory on "immigrant" rights.

I hope this kicks Congress's ass into gear on increased removal of illegals and beefing up our border security. If it's difficult to get them back out of the country because of sanctuary cities, maximal effort to keep them out is the best course of action.

 

[Headhunter]

How the hell was this not at least involuntary manslaughter? Looks like some messed up crap to me.

Well, I would imagine you haven’t heard all the evidence presented...seeing as how you didn’t even realized he was charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Juries aren’t infallible, but they get it right much, much, much more often than they got it wrong.

Read my original post you liberal judgmental prick. I didn't say I didn't know what he was charged with I asked how this killing didn't qualify for manslaughter. He admitted he fired the gun.

But since you are incapable of answering a straight forward question without being a douche please let others respond next time.

 

[CowboyJD]

Read my original post you liberal judgmental prick. I didn't say I didn't know what he was charged with I asked how this killing didn't qualify for manslaughter. He admitted he fired the gun.

But since you are incapable of answering a straight forward question without being a douche please let others respond next time.

I read your first post. Here it is.

Wouldn't this qualify for some kind of manslaughter even if it was an accident?

Which certainly indicates that you weren’t fully clear on all that he was charged with or some of the other facts you subsequently discover (if you knew he admitted to firing the gun, why even discuss or raise it being an “accident”. I pointed out something from the article that said they found him not guilty. To which you responded....

How the hell was this not at least involuntary manslaughter? Looks like some messed up crap to me.

Which indicates to me that you do not understand how the jury could find him not guilty.

To which I responded.....

Well, I would imagine you haven’t heard all the evidence presented...seeing as how you didn’t even realized he was charged with involuntary manslaughter.

Juries aren’t infallible, but they get it right much, much, much more often than they got it wrong.

Indicating that maybe you don’t understand how the jury could find him not guilty because you didn’t hear all the evidence the jury did. And also pointing out how you were asking how this wasn’t even involuntary manslaughter if it was an accident.

Then you go ape shit crazy. Btw, haven’t you claimed time and again that you never ever start with the name calling? That you only call people names in a discussion in response to them calling you a name? That clearly ISN’T true.

Finally, I’ll respond when and where and how I like until a moderator tells me not to. If that upsets you....news flash....I don’t give a damn.

 

[Headhunter]

Blah, blah, blah. I didn't need a dissertation defending your being a douche.

You don't know jack about what I was or wasn't implying. You somehow magically know whats in others people mind, that makes a judgmental prick. You're a know-it-all, smartest guy in room douche.

 

[aix_xpert]

I read your first post. Here it is.



Which certainly indicates that you weren’t fully clear on all that he was charged with or some of the other facts you subsequently discover (if you knew he admitted to firing the gun, why even discuss or raise it being an “accident”. I pointed out something from the article that said they found him not guilty. To which you responded....



Which indicates to me that you do not understand how the jury could find him not guilty.

To which I responded.....



Indicating that maybe you don’t understand how the jury could find him not guilty because you didn’t hear all the evidence the jury did. And also pointing out how you were asking how this wasn’t even involuntary manslaughter if it was an accident.

Then you go ape shit crazy. Btw, haven’t you claimed time and again that you never ever start with the name calling? That you only call people names in a discussion in response to them calling you a name? That clearly ISN’T true.

Finally, I’ll respond when and where and how I like until a moderator tells me not to. If that upsets you....news flash....I don’t give a damn.

Sorry JD, but you posted a whole lot of nada and avoided the real question here. How does someone who admits to firing a gun that clearly killed someone be found not guilty of at least manslaughter, given that manslaughter was one of the charges levied and available to the jury to convict this individual of. What evidence would refute that charge? Intent isn't relevant in manslaughter charges.

 

[Bitter Creek]

“The jury, which deliberated six days, considered first-degree, second-degree, or involuntary manslaughter for Garcia Zarate. He was found guilty of guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon.”

I am absolutely baffled by the involuntary manslaughter 'not guilty' verdict.

I'm not being a smart ass or politically biased hack when I say this. I just really don' understand how that charge doesn't stick.

 

[Bitter Creek]

“Help me Dad.”

Last words.

If I was her Dad, I would have some thoughts going through my head right now on what follow up actions would be personally justifiable.

 

[windriverrange]

This is easy....had Headhunter, myself or Medic done this would we not be found guilty of some type of murder charge? I mean seriously, the guy has been deported 5 times and was supposed to be detained for a 6th deportation, just freakin dumb!

One of the lamest arguments I hear about all this, is if they prosecute illegals who come forward as witnesses to crimes committed to other illegals, then police would see a lack of cooperation amongst the immigrant (illegal and otherwise) community. Well hell, if they illegals weren't here in the first place, they wouldn't be such easy targets with the criminal already knowing there would probably be a lack of cooperation as it involves cooperating with law enforcement.

The politicians of SF killed that lady. In my eyes them not cooperatings with the feds is the same as them being the getaway driver in a robbery or murder. Lousy SOB's!

 

[CowboyJD]

Sorry JD, but you posted a whole lot of nada and avoided the real question here. How does someone who admits to firing a gun that clearly killed someone be found not guilty of at least manslaughter, given that manslaughter was one of the charges levied and available to the jury to convict this individual of. What evidence would refute that charge? Intent isn't relevant in manslaughter charges.

Well, if you want to draw the conclusion that there is absolutely no evidence that that jury could have heard that would rationally give them reasonable doubt as to involuntary manslaughter, go right ahead.

I’m not gonna do that though.

Nor am I gonna speculate in an attempt to refute a conclusion that you have already made that there is no such evidence.....especially given a hypothetical that starts off assuming what the evidence actually established.

Likewise, I’m not assuming they absolutely got it right. I specifically disclaimed that notion.

Basically, I’m declining to attack or defend the actual decision of the jury because....wait for it....I didn’t hear the evidence. Neither did any of you.

 

[CowboyJD]

I am absolutely baffled by the involuntary manslaughter 'not guilty' verdict.

I'm not being a smart ass or politically biased hack when I say this. I just really don' understand how that charge doesn't stick.

I’ve seen a lot of juries do a lot of baffling (at least to me) things in cases I was involved in.

I’m certainly not going to try to deconstruct a jury where I heard zero percent of the evidence presented.

 

[CowboyJD]

Blah, blah, blah. I didn't need a dissertation defending your being a douche.

You don't know jack about what I was or wasn't implying. You somehow magically know whats in others people mind, that makes a judgmental prick. You're a know-it-all, smartest guy in room douche.

You seem very angry.

Name calling and whatnot. After claiming you never start the name calling. Losing your cool.

Maybe it’s because you realize you came off looking foolish.

Could be something else.

Maybe day drinking.

Maybe medication level issues.

Not that I care. I find it funny when you flip your lid like this.

Just know that.

 

[Bitter Creek]

I’ve seen a lot of juries do a lot of baffling (at least to me) things in cases I was involved in.

I’m certainly not going to try to deconstruct a jury where I heard zero percent of the evidence presented.

That is fair. I also wouldn't put you or anyone else on this board in the role of having to figure it out. I certainly can't.

I can't help but put myself in the role of her father. My life and perspective on what is right and wrong would forever be changed by this and I would consider my own version of what needs to happen next.

 

[MegaPoke]

That is fair. I also wouldn't put you or anyone else on this board in the role of having to figure it out. I certainly can't.

I can't help but put myself in the role of her father. My life and perspective on what is right and wrong would forever be changed by this and I would consider my own version of what needs to happen next.

Same.

 

[Medic007]

Even though folks claim that politics weren't involved in this case, I can't help but wonder what exactly the jury members had going on in their minds regarding their own political views. Was he a poor mistreated undocumented citizen and a conviction would leave a black eye politically despite his admission that he did have possession of the gun when it went off? Makes me say hmmm.

I don't need to hear all of the evidence to come to my own opinion that justice was not served and won't be served, likely due to leftist politics. He wouldn't have been roaming the streets to begin with except for the involvement of leftist politics.

 

[aix_xpert]

Even though folks claim that politics weren't involved in this case, I can't help but wonder what exactly the jury members had going on in their minds regarding their own political views. Was he a poor mistreated undocumented citizen and a conviction would leave a black eye politically despite his admission that he did have possession of the gun when it went off? Makes me say hmmm.

I don't need to hear all of the evidence to come to my own opinion that justice was not served and won't be served, likely due to leftist politics. He wouldn't have been roaming the streets to begin with except for the involvement of leftist politics.

I'm actually ignoring the politics. I don't care that he was an alien. I don't care that he's been deported. I know that he was illegally (as convicted) possessing a firearm when it discharged and killed another person. Unless someone wants to show me evidence that she didn't die of the gunshot wound (good luck with that), I can't fathom any scenario or evidence (without political influence) where that is not a manslaughter charge. Which leads me to believe that the only reason he was acquitted is because of his illegal alien status.

 

[Medic007]

I'm actually ignoring the politics. I don't care that he was an alien. I don't care that he's been deported. I know that he was illegally (as convicted) possessing a firearm when it discharged and killed another person. Unless someone wants to show me evidence that she didn't die of the gunshot wound (good luck with that), I can't fathom any scenario or evidence (without political influence) where that is not a manslaughter charge. Which leads me to believe that the only reason he was acquitted is because of his illegal alien status.

That's exactly what I'm thinking.

 

[JimmyBob]

Maybe day drinking.

Disgusting! Hell, even I/DBros wait 'til sundown.

 

[Headhunter]

Blah, blah, blah. I didn't need a dissertation defending your being a douche.

You don't know jack about what I was or wasn't implying. You somehow magically know whats in others people mind, that makes a judgmental prick. You're a know-it-all, smartest guy in room douche.

You seem very angry.

Name calling and whatnot. After claiming you never start the name calling. Losing your cool.

Maybe it’s because you realize you came off looking foolish.

Could be something else.

Maybe day drinking.

Maybe medication level issues.

Not that I care. I find it funny when you flip your lid like this.

Just know that.[/QUOT

Can't disagree with your all knowing awesomeness.

 

[hollywood]

This is an analysis of the case and the verdict by a writer for Red State, which is hardly what you could describe as a "liberal" website.

https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rump...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

Given the fact that the firearm in question has a tendency to basically go off on its own, that the shot was a "ricochet" and it was argued that there was uncertainty who may have fired the shot, there was perhaps some reasonable doubt as to guilt? The guy has a 2nd grade education and may not exactly have what one would describe as a "high functioning" intelligence. The police seemed to have pulled some things on questioning him which also threw some doubt about his "confession" into the mix.

So yes, the guy had been deported numerous times before and he will be deported again as he is to be turned over the US Marshal's office. But stop trying to conflate that by breaking immigration laws that somehow should be considered in relationship to the question of whether or not he was proven guilty in this case.

I don't want him in the country anymore than the rest of you do, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty. This sounds like to me the classic case of a prosecutor simply playing their cards wrong, pushing for that 1st Degree murder charge and largely ignoring a push to the jury that they could convict him on a lesser charge. That's not exactly something that is uncommon in the justice system.

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

This is an analysis of the case and the verdict by a writer for Red State, which is hardly what you could describe as a "liberal" website.

https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rump...medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

Given the fact that the firearm in question has a tendency to basically go off on its own, that the shot was a "ricochet" and it was argued that there was uncertainty who may have fired the shot, there was perhaps some reasonable doubt as to guilt? The guy has a 2nd grade education and may not exactly have what one would describe as a "high functioning" intelligence. The police seemed to have pulled some things on questioning him which also threw some doubt about his "confession" into the mix.

So yes, the guy had been deported numerous times before and he will be deported again as he is to be turned over the US Marshal's office. But stop trying to conflate that by breaking immigration laws that somehow should be considered in relationship to the question of whether or not he was proven guilty in this case.

I don't want him in the country anymore than the rest of you do, but that doesn't automatically make him guilty. This sounds like to me the classic case of a prosecutor simply playing their cards wrong, pushing for that 1st Degree murder charge and largely ignoring a push to the jury that they could convict him on a lesser charge. That's not exactly something that is uncommon in the justice system.

What gun is that and what is the frequency of them going off on their own?

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

Okay I looked it up. 40-caliber Sig Sauer P239. Anxious to see the statistics on accidental firing.

 

[Medic007]

Okay I looked it up. 40-caliber Sig Sauer P239. Anxious to see the statistics on accidental firing.

There's some cited in that opinion piece. What is conveniently left out is how accidental discharges actually happen in law enforcement.

 

[Medic007]

It's a good thing the feds have an arrest warrant for the illegal alien now. It gets him out of the reach of the idiots in San Francisco and there's nothing they can do to prevent it.

 

[Headhunter]

The dude ran from the scene and threw the gun in the bay.

But.

Nothing to see, just a hard working immigrant who got ahold of an evil gun that shoots itself. He was just there doing a job an American won't do for slave wages. He was helping the economy.

 

[Medic007]

The dude ran from the scene and threw the gun in the bay.

But.

Nothing to see, just a hard working immigrant who got ahold of an evil gun that shoots itself. He was just there doing a job an American won't do for slave wages. He was helping the economy.

He was probably looking for a police officer to give the stolen gun to when the pistol opened fire all by itself. He threw the pistol into the bay to stop the murderous rampage after it went crazy and killed the woman. He then went directly to the police because he thought he didn't have to worry about being deported for reporting the crime the pistol committed thanks to the sanctuary city policy. But then those racist bastard arrested him! Thank goodness the jury finally set things straight.

 

[Headhunter]

Sig Sauer guns are bad about firing themselves. I've got one I had to put in time out.

Funny, owned it for years, shot it hundreds of times then all the sudden it started shooting on it's own. Damn guns.

 

[windriverrange]

Given the fact that the firearm in question has a tendency to basically go off on its own, that the shot was a "ricochet" and it was argued that there was uncertainty who may have fired the shot, there was perhaps some reasonable doubt as to guilt? The guy has a 2nd grade education and may not exactly have what one would describe as a "high functioning" intelligence. The police seemed to have pulled some things on questioning him which also threw some doubt about his "confession" into the mix.

2nd grade education and "low functioning" intelligence.....but he seems to be able to keep finding his way back to the US to commit crimes, okay I really understand all this now! Complete liberal lawyer contrived bullshit! What is sad is that the person killed wasn't say Gavin Newsome's(sp) or one of the other SF leaders wife, son, daughter etc.

 

[CowboyJD]

2nd grade education and "low functioning" intelligence.....but he seems to be able to keep finding his way back to the US to commit crimes, okay I really understand all this now! Complete liberal lawyer contrived bullshit! What is sad is that the person killed wasn't say Gavin Newsome's(sp) or one of the other SF leaders wife, son, daughter etc.

Easy to say this.....when you didn’t actually hear the evidence.

Easy to pass judgment on facts....that you didn’t actually hear as the jurors did.

This is why I declined to speculate about a possible set of facts that did....whatever. The next step was gonna be exactly this.

 

[Medic007]

Easy to say this.....when you didn’t actually hear the evidence.

Easy to pass judgment on facts....that you didn’t actually hear as the jurors did.

This is why I declined to speculate about a possible set of facts that did....whatever. The next step was gonna be exactly this.

The legal part is done. The result of that is in the court of public opinion now. I'm pretty sure most of us non-lawyers that have an issue with the verdict see these two non-arguable facts...

Zarate was in federal custody and was to be deported following the completion of his sentence. San Francisco authorities asked to take custody of him for a 20 year old drug case. That case was dismissed. ICE had submitted a detainer request to regain custody of him for deportation. Instead of simply holding him until he was again in federal custody, they released him.

After his release, he acquired a stolen firearm that discharged and killed Steinle. He was convicted for possession of that firearm.

Personally, I don't care if the prosecution did a shitty job trying the case or not. I don't care if the jury did a shitty job or not. The bottom line is that a guy that should have been turned over to ICE wasn't due to leftist virtue signalling politics, and a woman was killed.

Process vs results. Nothing will change the death of Steinle or the verdict. Those are both historical events now. But those that are putting their politics over public safety could certainly change and I don't blame people for losing their minds to attempt to get that change made.

 

[RussOSU87]

I carried a P239 for years with one always in the chamber. Amazingly the Sig never went off by itself. I had no idea I was carrying a weapon that would just start firing on it’s own. So is it true that if you have one in the chamber and if you put enough pressure on the trigger it might make a loud noise?

 

[CowboyJD]

The legal part is done. The result of that is in the court of public opinion now. I'm pretty sure most of us non-lawyers that have an issue with the verdict see these two non-arguable facts...

Zarate was in federal custody and was to be deported following the completion of his sentence. San Francisco authorities asked to take custody of him for a 20 year old drug case. That case was dismissed. ICE had submitted a detainer request to regain custody of him for deportation. Instead of simply holding him until he was again in federal custody, they released him.

After his release, he acquired a stolen firearm that discharged and killed Steinle. He was convicted for possession of that firearm.

Personally, I don't care if the prosecution did a shitty job trying the case or not. I don't care if the jury did a shitty job or not. The bottom line is that a guy that should have been turned over to ICE wasn't due to leftist virtue signalling politics, and a woman was killed.

Process vs results. Nothing will change the death of Steinle or the verdict. Those are both historical events now. But those that are putting their politics over public safety could certainly change and I don't blame people for losing their minds to attempt to get that change made.

Except there are people in this very thread demanding any set of facts that might establish reasonable doubt on the manslaughter charge.

When it’s done, they purport to weigh the evidence that they didn’t see.

You don’t care about those things, but there of plenty people in this thread asserting and discussing exactly what you say you don’t care about.

Nice speech though. Even agree with some of it.