- 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: Kate Steinle's, killed by an illegal immigrant in SF, murderer found not guilty
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:04 am to bamafan1001
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:04 am to bamafan1001
quote:
If im Kate Steinles father, that man would be buried somewhere where no one would ever find him
Like Mexico?
1
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:06 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
WTF is wrong with people in California?
They live in an artificial world
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:07 am to East Coast Band
HAd he killed a seal his arse would be sitting in cell block C right now. Let that sink in
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:08 am to Tiguar
quote:
The Jury was able to consider murder 1, murder 2, and involuntary manslaughter. The jury said not guilty to all 3.
What is your rationale for your argument?
The prosecutor's argument was:
quote:
Prosecutors said Garcia Zarate was playing his own "secret version of Russian roulette" and deliberately fired into an unsuspecting crowd on the pier, killing Steinle
Sounds like they went all out for murder, not involuntary manslaughter.
This post was edited on 12/1/17 at 9:08 am
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:08 am to LSU Tigershark
quote:
Take that Trump! God, California is backwards
Those people dont deserve that gorgeous State they live in.
I wish the Sierra Nevadas were in South Louisiana.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:09 am to Azkiger
quote:
it was over you acting like that a suggestion of a purpose fumble of this case was so outlandish it's not even worthy of a discussion.
Sorry your fee fees got hurt over a dumb statement.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:09 am to Tiguar
quote:
The Jury was able to consider murder 1, murder 2, and involuntary manslaughter. The jury said not guilty to all 3.
What is your rationale for your argument?
This is being reported and believed by many of you to have gone down like this:
Illegal alien finds gun, decides to unload it into a crowd, shoots woman point blank in the back, California jury reviews this and decides to let him off because they're psychotic liberals who just enjoy illegal immigrants and are sending a message to Trump.
But that's not what happened.
According to the state laws of California, someone with no intent to kill who accidentally fires a gun, and the bullet ricochets off an object and then kills a person does not fit any of those 3 charges.
It's certainly not murder one or two.
And unfortunately, in California, negligent homicide doesnt exist and the law states that Homicide during the commission of a felony often results in a murder charge rather than a manslaughter charge. Murder 1 requires intent and malice.
When a killing occurred during the commission of a crime that is not a felony, the prosecutor must prove that the defendant had a criminal intent to commit the underlying unlawful act. If the defendant did not intend to engage in the crime that resulted in homicide, the state may be unable to prove involuntary manslaughter. The defendant may be able to establish a lack of intent by showing a reasonable mistake or lack of knowledge.
The guy is a 7 time convicted felon who was deported 5 times, he had no right to be in this country and he should never have been on that pier. He should be dropped out of an airplane without a parachute somewhere, but can we atleast stick to the facts instead of being ignorant morons?
This post was edited on 12/1/17 at 9:13 am
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:10 am to TH03
But the jury could have convicted on involuntary manslaughter. It wasn't an "overcharge"- the charge was available.
And by the defenses own admission...he committed that.
And by the defenses own admission...he committed that.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:12 am to TH03
quote:
Sorry your fee fees got hurt over a dumb statement.
No hurt feelings, that was just a factual response to your question.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:12 am to Tiguar
quote:
But the jury could have convicted on involuntary manslaughter. It wasn't an "overcharge"- the charge was available.
They didn't try to prove it though. The jury can't say "well it wasn't murder, but it's manslaughter" unless the case is proven.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:14 am to Azkiger
You had a dumb statement implying it could be a conspiracy, I called it dumb, you got all hot and bothered and actually think you posted any facts in a conversation of hypotheticals.
Just move along man.
Just move along man.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:15 am to TH03
So your argument is an over pursuit rather than an overcharge.
I will simply say I disagree. The pistol the accused allegedly dropped is one of the most reliable in the world. I don't blame the prosecution for calling bullshite on hurr hurr I dropped it and it went off
I will simply say I disagree. The pistol the accused allegedly dropped is one of the most reliable in the world. I don't blame the prosecution for calling bullshite on hurr hurr I dropped it and it went off
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:15 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
In almost every common law jurisdiction in America, murder is defined as the unlawful killing of another with malice aforethought. In order to prove malice, the prosecution need only prove the Defendant acted with a depraved heart. Case after case has held that firing a gun in a crowded area, even where there is no specific intent to kill or hurt someone, is still malice and therefore murder. This is jury nullification based on political belief, period. San Francisco should be ashamed of itself.
Exactly. Because otherwise every mass murder ever would just claim they were shooting at seals.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:15 am to Tiguar
quote:
And by the defenses own admission...he committed that.
Again. NO he did not.
He might have admitted to what you believe the definition of involuntary manslaughter is, but he did not commit involuntary manslaughter according to its definition in the California Legal System.
You should be mad at the state government of California and the insane fricking retards who support sanctuary cities and open borders. The guy in this case should be cased in cement and thrown in the bottom of a lake.
But looking at the facts and definitions of this particular case, it's not insane to see why the jury found him not guilty
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:18 am to Tiguar
quote:
The pistol the accused allegedly dropped is one of the most reliable in the world.
ON this point, from the reports i've read the defense brought in a weapons expert to show that the trigger is an easily fired hair trigger and the defendant had no previous knowledge of how the pistol worked.
People in California don't know shite about guns and the prosecutor failed to properly educate them
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:19 am to TH03
The only dumb suggestion made during our back and forth was the ignorance claim... You don't know more about legal systems then a DA.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:19 am to nola000
quote:
otherwise every mass murder ever would just claim they were shooting at seals.
Let's not be hyperbolic here.
surely you can see the difference between dedicated and repeated weapons fire into a crowd of people and a single accidental discharged ricocheted bullet striking someone.
Right?
And if he had been just standing there with a gun firing in the crowd all over the place and hit her you know he would be in jail, right?
This post was edited on 12/1/17 at 9:29 am
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:21 am to saint tiger225
quote:
since they can easily sneak people over our weak borders and have people in our country while planning another big terrorist attack and no one would even know bc we're so weak on borders.
Take your tinfoil hat off.
People like you are an embarrassment to
quote:
It's just the truth about our system and it's a shame that it's like that.
Those arent facts. Thats your opinion and you obviously have an agenda.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:23 am to Azkiger
quote:
You don't know more about legal systems then a DA.
If you can link me to where I said this, I'll give you a cookie.
Posted on 12/1/17 at 9:23 am to nola000
don't be that guy
Page 10 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News