Kate Steinle murderer found not guilty of murder.

[busybee01]

He's being deported.

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

The fact is that this was the correct verdict. There are 3 reasons why.

1. Steinle was shot by a bullet that ricocheted off of concrete. If you are going to kill someone, you generally don't fire into the ground to hit someone unless you are very skilled with a gun.

2. The gun in question apparently has a hair trigger on it. The defense lawyers provided statistics that show how prone the gun is to a accidental firing.

3. The gun was stolen from a park ranger's car. The defendant was never linked to the theft. This is a guy with a second grade education and living on the street. The idea that he could get into a car and steal it without leaving any trace would be unbelievable.

The fact is that it is Trump and his supporters who are abusing her memory. They are using her for their cheap politics. Disgusting.

It's not about politics, it's about justice now

You wouldn't know justice if it hit you in the head. It is politics. Right wing looney tunes like you need bad guys to scare people into doing things you want. If you can't find one then you will make one.

 

[Winston]

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

If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough to actually read what has been posted you would know that FELONY Manslaughter does require "intent". The standard of proof required to return a guilty verdict was not provided. Hell, it was not even close.

 

[Flash]

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.

.

But yet when first interrogated the sonofabitch claimed he was shooting at sea lions. He only changed his story when his lawyers advised him that he better come up with another story.

The guy is not only a convicted felon and an illegal alien but he is a known liar.

The jury of San Francisco Moon Bats were not interested in justice or doing the right thing or else they are the biggest idiots on the face of the earth. Take your pick.

 

[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

If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough to actually read what has been posted you would know that FELONY Manslaughter does require "intent". The standard of proof required to return a guilty verdict was not provided. Hell, it was not even close.

Any excuse you can muster to further the decline of our society.

If it were up to me that man would be executed in the public square on live tv.

 

[busybee01]

He's being deported.

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

 

[busybee01]

The fact is that this was the correct verdict. There are 3 reasons why.

1. Steinle was shot by a bullet that ricocheted off of concrete. If you are going to kill someone, you generally don't fire into the ground to hit someone unless you are very skilled with a gun.

2. The gun in question apparently has a hair trigger on it. The defense lawyers provided statistics that show how prone the gun is to a accidental firing.

3. The gun was stolen from a park ranger's car. The defendant was never linked to the theft. This is a guy with a second grade education and living on the street. The idea that he could get into a car and steal it without leaving any trace would be unbelievable.

The fact is that it is Trump and his supporters who are abusing her memory. They are using her for their cheap politics. Disgusting.

You are stupid. Negligent homicide is when your actions result in the death of a human even if you didn't mean to kill anyone.

This fit that to a tee.

How the gun got where it was is irrelevant. This moron picked it up and fired it, hell he even admitted he fired it (at a sea lion LOL) but then changed his story after talking to an attorney.

You are a retard

Anyone who disagrees with you is a retard. Anyone who uses their reasoning skills in a unprejudiced manner is a retard? You are the REAL RETARD.

 

[toobfreak]

Californians are pathetic.

I stop short of lumping all Californians together. I know good people out there. For one thing, the jury had to go by only what was allowed to be presented. Second, as the two maps below show, Trump won a great deal of California, Hillary one in just a few key areas of high population, mainly San Fran and LA., and both of those areas are heavily controlled by Democrats, so people there hear only one side of anything ever, and the rest who do not agree are vastly outnumbered and probably afraid to disagree.

 

[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.

Manslaughter does not require intent ya dumbass.

Californians are a morally bankrupt people. Deal with it

If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough to actually read what has been posted you would know that FELONY Manslaughter does require "intent". The standard of proof required to return a guilty verdict was not provided. Hell, it was not even close.

Any excuse you can muster to further the decline of our society.

If it were up to me that man would be executed in the public square on live tv.

Don't you believe in the Constitution anymore? "Innocent until proven guilty" is the metaphorical cornerstone of our democracy.
You didn't have a problem with that paradigm when the officers who "accidently" killed Freddie Gray were acquitted.

 

[Flash]

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

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?

The whole trial was politically motivated and your defense of the illegal murderer is disgusting.

 

[Flash]

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?

The whole trial was politically motivated and your defense of the illegal murderer is disgusting.

These Liberals can't win with their screwed up commie agenda. That is why they lost 1,000 national seats, Congress and the Presidency. They need the welfare queen and illegal vote or else the Democrats would never get more than 20%.

It doesn't make any difference to them if their constituency is filthy disgusting illegal aliens. Not one bit at all. That is why they are trying to (poorly) justify the despicable verdict.

 

[JoeB131]

There are rare cases in the US where somebody gets shot and the shooter is determined not to be negligent. Most of the time those cases don't even go to trial because they are so obvious.

actually, we have 800 accidental shootings a year in this country, and most of them go unpunished.

This asshole was let off the hook in a filthy sanctuary city by a jury of Moon Bats because he was an illegal.

No, he was let off because his actions didn't meet the description of what he was being charged with.

 

[jillian]

Usually a unanimous not guilty murder verdict would mean that there were questions in the jury's mind.

I didn't sit on the jury so will wait to hear from some of them.

Hold your outrage until we get the facts Trumpkins.

The facts are pretty damn clear Moon Bat.

An Illegal Alien, protected by a filthy ass Democrat controlled sanctuary city, shot a White girl with a stolen Federal Agent's firearm and wasn't even convicted of so much as involuntary manslaughter.

Despicable verdict by a jury of assholes.

So you heard the testimony and evidence?

If you didn't, then you don't know what it was.

 

[Flash]

Usually a unanimous not guilty murder verdict would mean that there were questions in the jury's mind.

I didn't sit on the jury so will wait to hear from some of them.

Hold your outrage until we get the facts Trumpkins.

The facts are pretty damn clear Moon Bat.

An Illegal Alien, protected by a filthy ass Democrat controlled sanctuary city, shot a White girl with a stolen Federal Agent's firearm and wasn't even convicted of so much as involuntary manslaughter.

Despicable verdict by a jury of assholes.

So you heard the testimony and evidence?

If you didn't, then you don't know what it was.

As much as you have Moon Bat.

 

[Winston]

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

If you could pull your head out of your ass long enough to actually read what has been posted you would know that FELONY Manslaughter does require "intent". The standard of proof required to return a guilty verdict was not provided. Hell, it was not even close.

Any excuse you can muster to further the decline of our society.

If it were up to me that man would be executed in the public square on live tv.

Yes, I would expect nothing less from an uneducated racist homophobic idiot.

 

[jillian]

Usually a unanimous not guilty murder verdict would mean that there were questions in the jury's mind.

I didn't sit on the jury so will wait to hear from some of them.

Hold your outrage until we get the facts Trumpkins.

The facts are pretty damn clear Moon Bat.

An Illegal Alien, protected by a filthy ass Democrat controlled sanctuary city, shot a White girl with a stolen Federal Agent's firearm and wasn't even convicted of so much as involuntary manslaughter.

Despicable verdict by a jury of assholes.

So you heard the testimony and evidence?

If you didn't, then you don't know what it was.

As much as you have Moon Bat.

And yet I'm not running around ranting and raving like a demented lunatic like you are, moron. Nor am I saying the jury was wrong or right. I didn't hear the evidence, you freak of nature. I am told the defense attorney was very good. Maybe the prosecutor screwed up. Doesn't make the jury wrong, loser.

 

[DrLove]

As much as you have Moon Bat.

And yet I'm not running around ranting and raving like a demented lunatic like you are, moron. Nor am I saying the jury was wrong or right. I didn't hear the evidence, you freak of nature. I am told the defense attorney was very good. Maybe the prosecutor screwed up. Doesn't make the jury wrong, loser.

Flies his racist colors proud!

 

[MindWars]

 

[jillian]

As much as you have Moon Bat.

And yet I'm not running around ranting and raving like a demented lunatic like you are, moron. Nor am I saying the jury was wrong or right. I didn't hear the evidence, you freak of nature. I am told the defense attorney was very good. Maybe the prosecutor screwed up. Doesn't make the jury wrong, loser.

Flies his racist colors proud!

Ahhhh. The good old days when they could Ken people.

Vile, aren't they?

 

[jillian]

The shooter should be in jail. It isn't only the people who kill pretty white girls who should go to jail.

And NBC didn't edit anything, lowlife.