Posted on 12/03/2017 11:46:03 AM PST by Lurking Libertarian
So, we have a defendant with zero connection to Steinle. He had a history of drug crimes but no known violent crimes. The bullet that killed Steinle hit the ground and then ricocheted upwards. There was a video possibly showing another group of people disposing of the gun where Garcia Zarate said he found it.
Reviewing the SIG Sauer website shows these handguns cost $1,000 or more. You can see how defense counsel could easily argue that a homeless illegal immigrant would be unfamiliar with one.
All of this adds up to the defense presenting a plausible explanation for how Garcia Zarate could have fired the gun and killed Steinle by accident. That’s reasonable doubt.
The prosecutors were under tremendous political pressure. People wanted Kate Steinle’s killer’s head on a platter, even before Donald Trump ever tweeted her name.
So it’s not that surprising that “San Francisco prosecutors told the jury that Garcia Zarate intentionally brought the gun to the pier that day with the intent of doing harm, aimed the gun toward Steinle and pulled the trigger,” as the Chronicle reported, adding that the Assistant District Attorney also “spent much of the trial seeking to prove the gun that killed Steinle couldn’t have fired without a firm pull of the trigger.”
This seems to be a classic example of prosecutorial overreach.They pushed hard for a first degree murder verdict, which requires not only proving that the defendant killed the victim, but that he did it intentionally, and that it was premeditated (planned or thought out beforehand).
(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...
We have been lied to about everything since the dawn of time. Why would this be different?
Unless overcharging was done with the intent to instill sympathy for the perp.
I suggest the DA’s office wanted to lose this case. And did everything in its power to make that happen.
I know this much: if the jerk had been in his own damn hellhole and NOT here in my country she would be alive today.
A court of law does NOT have that standard because they don’t deal with THE LARGER PICTURE.
Send ALL illegals home. OUR system of law does NOT allow the innocent children of bank robbers to ‘keep the loot’ ... Send the dreamers home...
There was no first degree murder. This was a case of manslaughter. Still convicted of a felony weapon’s offence he should once again be deported. What about the victim’s estate suing Calif., SF on the original deportation issue though?
That's how they "lost" this case. My question: was it intentional?
This Redstate writer is an idiot. This is pure pro illegal alien propaganda from the open borders dirtbags at red state, a gop establishment paid for site previously run by the vile and loathsome never trumper erick erickson. This writers observations are idiotic as well as irrelevant. It is a ploy to deflect from the upcoming open borders mnesty push, nothing more.
The case done got throwed alright.
Donald Trump should be angrier at the city than at the “verdict.”
I do think that most people, even this guy, know at least that a gun is dangerous and shouldn’t be pointed at someone. Even most 5 year olds know that. On top of that, if he’s smart enough to keep crossing the border illegally and getting through the interior checkpoints, he’s not an idiot.
Manslaughter, at a minimum.
Truth is truth even if it helps the devil.
Sarah Rumpf should be named as a candidate for the Pulitzer Neo-Nazi Propaganda award. She sounds so convincing.
Seriously, search the internet for Nazi propaganda, alive and well today. They are so good at it they will have many believing Hitler was deserving of sympathy. Seriously.
If the “right” has been sloppy it should blame only itself for the logical consequences.
Did he point the gun at someone? Pointing a loaded weapon at someone involves some intent. An alien invader who has a criminal history surely knows how to use a gun.
On the other hand, this defense opens a lot of doors when legally carrying citizens shoot someone.
Consciously incompetent or grossly unconscious incompetence
“Garcia Zarate could have fired the gun and killed Steinle by accident”
Negligent homicide. Accidentally killed someone while doing something an ordinary person would know was dangerous - LIKE PULLING THE TRIGGER ON A GUN ON A CROWDED CITY STREET!
First of all the prosecution never claimed it was wilful, deliberate and premeditated which is the definition of first degree murder. They claimed it was second degree murder because the act of firing a gun on a crowded pier is an act inherently dangerous to life evincing an “abandoned and malignant heart”, ie second degree malice for murder.
Their murder theory was exactly right. They also allowed a manslaughter charge which is a lesser charge than murder. Both theories were correct. There is no evidence of a desire to let this defendant off. The defense argued that the gun went off accidentally not on purpose. That is the fact that jury bought.
“a homeless guy owned a $1,000 handgun”
NO ONE claimed the homeless guy owned the gun. He either stole it or found it. Either way, doesn’t matter if it is a $150 El Cheapo gun or a $3500 target pistol. Ordinary people know it is dangerous to pull the trigger.
Why wasn’t negligent homicide offered as a possibility then, covering the “accident” scenario?
This article is all the proof I need to tell me I made the right decision when I decided Red State was a garbage news site. Normally I will not read anything at Red State but since I wanted justice for Kate I foolishly “went there”. Puke.
The jury was never told about his priors - any of it ... to them, he was just another innocent man being railroaded ...
Manslaughter doesn’t require intent th defendant was charged with both...
Jury let this guy “walk”. He was charged with murder and manslaughter to be acquitted of both is inexcusable... may karma visit the jurors and their families often...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.