- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: How did they justify the Steinle verdict?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:09 pm to Seldom Seen
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:09 pm to Seldom Seen
Trump was just re-elected
2
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:09 pm to WONTONGO
quote:
If you know he possessed the gun that killed her, how in the world do you at least not get him on involuntary manslaughter? It wasn't even a hung jury... Not guilty???
I could see how they could beat a murder case....but involuntary manslaughter when he fired the shot that killed her? I don't get it......they convicted him on a felon in possession of a weapon.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 9:10 pm
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:11 pm to Hetfield
I don’t know all of the facts in the case, but I think that they the defense attorney is partially correct. I don’t agree that the verdict was a vindication if immigrants, but his immigration status is a separate issue than the question of guilt on the charge of murder.
It is an outrage that the guy was out of jail and walking freely in the city of San Francisco. If he had been turned over to ICE for deportation as he should have been, Steinle would be alive.
Maybe the prosecutor was not able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the guy had intent.
It is an outrage that the guy was out of jail and walking freely in the city of San Francisco. If he had been turned over to ICE for deportation as he should have been, Steinle would be alive.
Maybe the prosecutor was not able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the guy had intent.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:11 pm to 14&Counting
Crazy world we're living in.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:15 pm to papasmurf1269
Unless you are a criminal illegal alien
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:17 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:
had intent.
Is that needed for involuntary manslaughter. I do not think vehicular manslaughter is intended, in most cases any how.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:18 pm to WONTONGO
His story of picking up the gun which was in a shirt under a bench and it went off was about the third version he came up with. I can understand not guilty on murder, but there is no way it wasn't manslaughter. California hates Trump more than they care about the lives of their own citizens. I am certain that a white male taxpayer as the defendant would have been found guilty.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:21 pm to 14&Counting
quote:
I could see how they could beat a murder case....but involuntary manslaughter when he fired the shot that killed her? I don't get it......they convicted him on a felon in possession of a weapon.
The are a lot of accidental shootings where the person that pulled the trigger is not charged much less convicted.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:22 pm to pwejr88
quote:
How did they justify the Steinle verdict?
It's a "technicality"...her losing her wonderful life at 33 years...is a technicality of legal concept. Too bad for her...good luck for the illegal criminal alien murderer. San Francisco!...WOOT!!
*Dumb pigs*
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:23 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:So you definitely got cheated on with an Asian guy in the last six months or so huh
The jury was stacked with a bunch of people named ghanesh patel and chi xi wu.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:24 pm to gthog61
Liberals everywhere are cheering this verdict. Liberals want more illegals in this country to solidify a future voting bloc.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:25 pm to pwejr88
How?? Maybe by being in the courtroom and listening to the testimony. Whadda ya think?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:29 pm to WONTONGO
quote:
If you know he possessed the gun that killed her, how in the world do you at least not get him on involuntary manslaughter? It wasn't even a hung jury... Not guilty???
Hell they didn't even find him guilty of assault with a deadly weapon...
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:30 pm to ljhog
quote:
ow?? Maybe by being in the courtroom and listening to the testimony. Whadda ya think?
Yeah...no.
"Jury instructions" can be forced loss of reason.
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:47 pm to GBPackTigers
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the era of citizens having less rights than noncitizens.
Thank your local SJW; bleeding heart liberal; anti-American; anti-Trump; self-righteous; loathing pieces of crap we are now surrounded by.
Thank the legal system that has once again failed.
What is law if it cannot be enforced?
What is justice if it cannot be served?
Thank your local SJW; bleeding heart liberal; anti-American; anti-Trump; self-righteous; loathing pieces of crap we are now surrounded by.
Thank the legal system that has once again failed.
What is law if it cannot be enforced?
What is justice if it cannot be served?
Posted on 11/30/17 at 9:54 pm to kcon70
quote:
What is justice if it cannot be served?
What about justice for the murderer??? Huh?? If the bitch wouldn't have been there in the first place, she would still be alive. It's her fault for being there!!
Racist!!!
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 9:57 pm
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:03 pm to tigress4life
Neo Liberals consider Kate Steinle's death by this criminal illegal alien as just a sacrifice "for the greater good" or "collateral damage" in the neo lib policy of "open borders".
This is in their eyes the only "politically correct" solution.
To understand the neo lib one has to be familiar with their philosophical grandfather. He is Herbert Marcuse. The most influential leftist since the 1950's-'60s in the U.S. in institutions that "shape society" academic, literature, media, the entertainment industry, and finally politically in the actions of the Democrat party.
He called himself a "cultural Marxist".
The form of "Political correctness" that has taken over free speech here is straight from Marcuse's writings. His political philosophy is the "political" in political correctness.
I would suggest reading "Intellectual Morons" by Daniel Flynn for an overview if you want to understand neo libs.
Intellectual moron link
Marcuse's influence is outlined, and how a neo lib justifies every abominable thing they do, like what happened tonight with Steinle's murderer's not guilty verdict.
The book also describes other sick, twisted, shapers of society like Alfred Kinsey who was himself a sexual masochist who in his "research" had pedophiles molest children.
The book exposes all the neo lib gods like Margaret Sanger, Earth Liberation terrorist group for instance as the evil, insane people they were.
This is in their eyes the only "politically correct" solution.
To understand the neo lib one has to be familiar with their philosophical grandfather. He is Herbert Marcuse. The most influential leftist since the 1950's-'60s in the U.S. in institutions that "shape society" academic, literature, media, the entertainment industry, and finally politically in the actions of the Democrat party.
He called himself a "cultural Marxist".
The form of "Political correctness" that has taken over free speech here is straight from Marcuse's writings. His political philosophy is the "political" in political correctness.
I would suggest reading "Intellectual Morons" by Daniel Flynn for an overview if you want to understand neo libs.
Intellectual moron link
Marcuse's influence is outlined, and how a neo lib justifies every abominable thing they do, like what happened tonight with Steinle's murderer's not guilty verdict.
The book also describes other sick, twisted, shapers of society like Alfred Kinsey who was himself a sexual masochist who in his "research" had pedophiles molest children.
The book exposes all the neo lib gods like Margaret Sanger, Earth Liberation terrorist group for instance as the evil, insane people they were.
This post was edited on 11/30/17 at 10:10 pm
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:03 pm to pwejr88
Simple. The science said that it was an accident. This should have never gone to trial. The bullet hit the ground and bounced up.
Gun accidents happen all of the time. Remember when Chaney shot that guy. He didn't have a trial because it was an accident
Gun accidents happen all of the time. Remember when Chaney shot that guy. He didn't have a trial because it was an accident
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:07 pm to pwejr88
quote:
How did they justify the Steinle verdict?
Evidence was presented in court that the bullet had ricocheted before hitting Steinle
Posted on 11/30/17 at 10:07 pm to tigress4life
Sweet tangent
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News