Kate Steinle murderer found not guilty of murder.

[Peach]

Name: Jose Ines Garcia Zarate

Likeness:

He is known to "pick up" guns, is a felon; the public has a right to know of possible dangers, correct?

 

[Peach]

Turning her death into a political point is a sin; the jury ruled. Can you turn off thee hate long enough to even think of her?

You're disgusting....

Thinking of the victim, KATHRYN STEINLE is disgusting, WHY?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Turning her death into a political point is a sin; the jury ruled. Can you turn off thee hate long enough to even think of her?

You're disgusting....

Thinking of the victim, KATHRYN STEINLE is disgusting, WHY?

Thinking of her would mean ensuring that the same thing doesn't happen again.

The reprehensible verdict ensures that it will.

 

[Peach]

Turning her death into a political point is a sin; the jury ruled. Can you turn off thee hate long enough to even think of her?

You're disgusting....

Thinking of the victim, KATHRYN STEINLE is disgusting, WHY?

Thinking of her would mean ensuring that the same thing doesn't happen again.

The reprehensible verdict ensures that it will.

The Feds are finding charges, and he isn't going to Vacaville.

 

[toobfreak]

The jury decision was unanimous.

7 felony convictions
5 deportations
Ice had a hold placed on him and the city let him go anyway. The city is guilty of negligent homicide imo. I hope they pay DEARLY.

He deserves the death penalty.

San Francisco California is the only place I know where you can be a felon with a stolen gun, discharge it in a public area hitting and killing another person, change your story, admit to the crime, and not be convicted of felony manslaughter because not only did the judge suppress all possible damning evidence, but the City celebrated it as a victory for illegal immigrants over one of their own U.S. Citizens.

 

[Peach]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Turning her death into a political point is a sin; the jury ruled. Can you turn off thee hate long enough to even think of her?

You're disgusting....

Thinking of the victim, KATHRYN STEINLE is disgusting, WHY?

Thinking of her would mean ensuring that the same thing doesn't happen again.

The reprehensible verdict ensures that it will.

The Feds are finding charges, and he isn't going to Vacaville.

The Peoples State of California and the Criminal Enterprise of San Francisco will attempt to shield him from justice at the hands of the feds.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

 

[WillowTree]

He's being deported.

He should have been found guilty on Involuntary Manslaughter, if you read the California law on involuntary manslaughter....

Tell me dear friend. What good does deporting him do?

It does absolutely no good, unless the deal includes Mexico jailing him!

Why would Mexico jail him?

 

[Peach]

Turning her death into a political point is a sin; the jury ruled. Can you turn off thee hate long enough to even think of her?

You're disgusting....

Thinking of the victim, KATHRYN STEINLE is disgusting, WHY?

Thinking of her would mean ensuring that the same thing doesn't happen again.

The reprehensible verdict ensures that it will.

The Feds are finding charges, and he isn't going to Vacaville.

The Peoples State of California and the Criminal Enterprise of San Francisco will attempt to shield him from justice at the hands of the feds.

The Feds have jurisdiction, it was Texas that sent him to California on a 20 year old warrant.

Before the shooting, Garcia Zarate had finished a federal prison sentence for illegal re-entry into the United States and was transferred in March 2015 to San Francisco's jail to face a 20-year-old charge for selling marijuana. A Justice Department official said there’s an existing federal detainer requiring Garcia Zarate to be remanded to U.S. Marshals and sent to a federal court in Texas to answer for the probation violation.

If he had not been shoved off to California, no death.

 

[Peach]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

No, in this nation, juries or Judges KNOW. I know he should never have been near a firearm, and it appears never in California. But the Justice System costs money, so passing the buck is now in "fashion".

 

[InstantOn]

Blame the prosecution. They overcharged which was a stupid thing to do.

 

[JQPublic1]

Just more fuel to keep the Trump train rolling....

If you kill him you'll fry like pigs in a blanket. You'll be fried like bacon. If the system doesn't fry you...hell will.
The evidence showed that the homicide was unintentional . There was no criminal intent at all. Now you apologists for the cops who murder unarmed blacks know how those families felt after the killers of their loved ones walked free. As some of you told me during my verbal duels with you over the
Various killer cop events: the jury has spoken.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

No, in this nation, juries or Judges KNOW. I know he should never have been near a firearm, and it appears never in California. But the Justice System costs money, so passing the buck is now in "fashion".

Letting a clearly guilty scumbag off the hook is not passing the buck. It is criminal in an of itself.

 

[Peach]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

Actually, you may be correct, add up priors, firearm, death.......maybe life inside.

 

[Peach]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

No, in this nation, juries or Judges KNOW. I know he should never have been near a firearm, and it appears never in California. But the Justice System costs money, so passing the buck is now in "fashion".

Letting a clearly guilty scumbag off the hook is not passing the buck. It is criminal in an of itself.

See below, I added up the offenses. Still, he should never been sent to CA from Texas.

 

[Care4all]

He's being deported.

He should have been found guilty on Involuntary Manslaughter, if you read the California law on involuntary manslaughter....

Tell me dear friend. What good does deporting him do?

It does absolutely no good, unless the deal includes Mexico jailing him!

Why would Mexico jail him?

if he were being deported right now, then it would be with an agreement that he serve his jail time there in prison.... our gvt makes deals like that all the time with friendly nations...and even unfriendly nations, sometimes...

 

[Peach]

He's being deported.

He should have been found guilty on Involuntary Manslaughter, if you read the California law on involuntary manslaughter....

Tell me dear friend. What good does deporting him do?

It does absolutely no good, unless the deal includes Mexico jailing him!

Why would Mexico jail him?

if he were being deported right now, then it would be with an agreement that he serve his jail time there in prison.... our gvt makes deals like that all the time with friendly nations...and even unfriendly nations, sometimes...

Jail here puts him at greater risk, jail him here.

 

[JQPublic1]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

No...the California justice system works.
The crucial motivation of intent was absent in this case. Live with it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Or you can think it through and see where the state made errors:

Jurors were given the option of convicting Garcia Zarate of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. However, there are two types of involuntary manslaughter — a purely accidental killing, which is a misdemeanor, and one with underlying criminal intent, a felony.

“For example, getting into an accident while texting is doing something that is legal in an illegal way,” said former San Francisco prosecutor Tony Brass. Winning a conviction requires showing that the defendant was guilty of gross negligence, not that he intended to commit a crime.

It’s a similar situation when someone is handling a gun, and it goes off and shoots someone, said Public Defender Jeff Adachi, whose attorneys defended Garcia Zarate.

“The presumption is that, even though it was an accident, you should reasonably know that it could go off and someone could get hurt,” Adachi said. That’s gross negligence.

District Attorney George Gascón’s office, however, opted to give the jury the felony version of involuntary manslaughter, should it decide the Steinle killing wasn’t first- or second-degree murder.

SF prosecutors made key miscalculation in Kate Steinle case

The underlying criminal intent needed for the felony version, prosecutors said, was that Garcia Zarate “brandished” the gun. In his jury instructions, Superior Court Judge Samuel Fengsaid that meant displaying the gun in a “rude, angry or threatening manner.”

“It would be like someone waving a gun and saying, ‘Get off of my property,’ and the gun goes off,” Adachi said.

No witnesses, however, testified to seeing Garcia Zarate wave or point the gun in a threatening manner at Steinle or anyone else. “A jury would have nothing on which to base the brandishing charge,” Brass said.

District attorney’s office spokesman Alex Bastian said Garcia Zarate pulled the gun out of his pocket, which he said was enough to qualify as brandishing. The defense, however, argued that Garcia Zarate found the gun on the ground — and there were no witnesses to support either version.

“It was one more decision the jury had to make,” Bastian said.

All excuses.

EVERYONE in America Knows he killed her. The man should have gotten life.

This is two high profile murderers that Californian citizens have let go free.

Californians are pathetic.

No...the California justice system works.
The crucial motivation of intent was absent in this case. Live with it.

Manslaughter does not require intent ya dumbass.

Californians are a morally bankrupt people. Deal with it