- 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: I Saw the Kate Steinle Murder Trial Up Close. The Jury Didn’t Botch It.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:19 pm to sicboy
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:19 pm to sicboy
quote:
Holy crap everyone here knows absolutely NOTHING about this. We are so adamant we know more about this case than the people who were in the courtroom.
Nontrue. Why so mad?
0
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:24 pm to Aristo
I can get fleeing, but he got rid of the weapon. So was his concern prints or the fact that it was stolen?
If prints, why didn’t he consider that when he saw it but had the good sense to consider it after the shock and confusion of killing someone. Did he toss it because he knew he shouldn’t have had it?
I can buy him not meaning to shoot her, but I think he stole it, was intent on robbing someone maybe even Steinle (follow them)
Killing someone in connection with a felony is murder in CA
But oh hey I found the gun and said “what’s this?” Which would also explain why his story changed once a lawyer was involved in which case he was coached by his attorney to lie
If prints, why didn’t he consider that when he saw it but had the good sense to consider it after the shock and confusion of killing someone. Did he toss it because he knew he shouldn’t have had it?
I can buy him not meaning to shoot her, but I think he stole it, was intent on robbing someone maybe even Steinle (follow them)
Killing someone in connection with a felony is murder in CA
But oh hey I found the gun and said “what’s this?” Which would also explain why his story changed once a lawyer was involved in which case he was coached by his attorney to lie
This post was edited on 12/6/17 at 5:29 pm
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:25 pm to DelU249
quote:
Here’s a motive...he was waiting on the pier (he’s homeless) to rob someone using the gun he stole to buy drugs
Hard to make that case when you can’t mention his 7 felony convictions for drug related crimes that most definitely included theft
Possibly on the robbery motive, but his actions would have had to clear a threshold on the attempted robbery. He would have had to have approached them and attempted the act of stealing from them and with a weapon that would be armed robbery.
If the DA really wanted this guy in jail, he would have charged him with criminal negligence...he did not and criminal negligence would have been a slam dunk. Criminal negligence would have at least probably led to an involuntary manslaughter conviction, but the jury was not allowed to consider criminal negligence as a charge .
Zarate's actions absolutely constituted criminal negligence at a minimum
I would check to see if Jerry Brown's office or Kamala Harris' office had been calling the DA in regards to this case or someone spoke to the CA AG Xavier Becerra...a former Congressman
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:27 pm to Aubie Spr96
quote:
I think the natural inclination of most people would be to pick up a weapon they saw laying on the ground of a crowded public venue. Hate for some kid to get it.
ORRR call the police and make sure nobody touches it until they arrive. If I go to the park and see a gun sitting on the bench, I'm sure as hell not grabbing it and putting my finger on the trigger.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:33 pm to FT
Attempting to convict him for first degree murder was stupid. They should have pressed hard for manslaughter. It was clearly an accidental shooting from the fact that the bullet hit the ground and ricocheted. I feel he should have gotten something, but not for murder one.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:36 pm to DelU249
Exactly, how the frick do they believe his word that he just found it laying on the bench then fired it accidentally?
I don't believe that for one second. Even if he did he was a dumbass that did what dumbasses do and should be charged for negligent homicide. It looks like the prosecution was inept or corrupt.
I don't believe that for one second. Even if he did he was a dumbass that did what dumbasses do and should be charged for negligent homicide. It looks like the prosecution was inept or corrupt.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:48 pm to TigersFan64
My issue is not even the “not guilty” verdict. My issue is the circumstances under which that verdict was obtained. No angle was looked at, no element was investigated and the prosecutor took a dive
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:52 pm to DelU249
However Silver lining is that a person of color with not a penny to his name here illegally with seven felony convictions Can’t beat a murder rap for which I sure as shite would have been convicted
He walked free so I don’t ever want to hear about racial injustice being pervasive in our justice system
He walked free so I don’t ever want to hear about racial injustice being pervasive in our justice system
Posted on 12/6/17 at 5:55 pm to KiwiHead
He stole the gun that’s a felony
And worse makes this a federal case potentially
And worse makes this a federal case potentially
This post was edited on 12/6/17 at 5:56 pm
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:02 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
It
does
not
change
the
fact
that
he
shouldn't
have
been
in
the
country
!
!
!
sorry you dont understand
n
o
b
e
a
r
i
n
g
o
n
t
h
e
c
a
s
e
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:07 pm to Cruiserhog
None at all. Except that pesky little issue if him not being there and Steinle being alive today if sanctuary city policy is not in place.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:10 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
Also, involuntary manslaughter wasn't there? Did they get that right too?
Didn't read the entire article, did you?
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:12 pm to FelicianaTigerfan
quote:
Based on that I can go out in public, shoot a gun, have the bullet hit someone unintentionally, they die, and im innocent?
Not after you made this post.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:13 pm to motionmagic
quote:
Even if he did he was a dumbass that did what dumbasses do and should be charged for negligent homicide. It looks like the prosecution was inept or corrupt.
Exactly. Go back and read the part about the prosecution choosing the accompanying crime. No witness saw him brandish a weapon. Should have gone with felony possession. Prosecution fricked up.
This post was edited on 12/6/17 at 6:14 pm
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:15 pm to motionmagic
quote:
Exactly, how the frick do they believe his word that he just found it laying on the bench then fired it accidentally?
The jury did not have to believe it, the prosecution is required to prove that it was not true, and they did not, that small hurdle of innocent until proven guilty.
This post was edited on 12/6/17 at 6:17 pm
Posted on 12/6/17 at 6:20 pm to sicboy
quote:
There are all kinds of felonies.
Murder
Aggravated assault and/or battery
Manslaughter (unintentional killing of another)
Animal cruelty
Vehicular homicide
Larceny
Arson
Burglary
Tax evasion
Various forms of fraud
The manufacture, sale, distribution, or possession with intent to distribute of certain types and/or quantities of illegal drugs
In some states, the simple possession (possession without intent to distribute, e.g., for personal use) of certain types of illegal drugs, usually in more than a certain quantity but regardless of quantity for some drugs in some jurisdictions (such as Virginia for cocaine and heroin)
Grand larceny or grand theft, i.e., larceny or theft above a certain statutorily established value or quantity of goods
Vandalism on federal property.
Treason
Rape/sexual assault
Kidnapping
Obstruction of justice
Perjury
Cheque fraud
Copyright infringement
Child pornography
Mail and wire fraud
Violating parole, probation, or recognizance bond
Threatening an official (police officer, judge)
Okay Pick me 7 of them on that list that aren't that bad
Pick the non violent ones if you like... here let me help.. Child Porn! Hey now I get why democrats let him go, so the can frick kids together.. nice list Sic, all those offensives look pretty bad, he had 7 of them
Posted on 12/6/17 at 7:06 pm to jbgleason
quote:
No Safety - That is true. It is a Double Action / Single Action design with a decocking lever. It doesn't need a safety and was never designed to have one just like millions upon millions of other firearms. Means nothing but sounds sexy to a jury. Oooohhh!!! NO SAFETY!!!
Yep
quote:Yep
Light Trigger Mode - Another bending of the truth to impress a jury. The weapon has a single action trigger that is lighter than the double action pull but is in no way "light" compared to other firearms. To say the weapon has a "light trigger mode" is to imply that it can go off at the mere touch and that just isn't true.
quote:Yep
Backup emergency weapon used by law enforcement - This pistol is issued as a Primary, Backup and Off Duty weapon depending on the agency. They just added "emergency" because it sounds sexy.
quote:
At the end of the day, they used "experts" to hoodwink a jury pulled from San Francisco all of whom have most likely never touched a firearm. The fact that the jury asked to see the pistol and was denied by the Judge is significant. It is very common for juries to be allowed to examine evidence and, given that they wanted to see the gun, it is apparent they had questions about the trigger pull I am shocked the Judge denied the request.
Yeah that's fricked up.
The spec SA trigger pull weight on that gun is 4.5 lbs. Definitely lighter than the DA weight but nowhere near light enough to have it break by barely touching it. It was a total sham.
This post was edited on 12/6/17 at 8:19 pm
Posted on 12/6/17 at 8:17 pm to DelU249
Still, the prosecution going for a first degree murder conviction was utterly stupid. That was a manslaughter case.
Posted on 12/6/17 at 8:41 pm to TigersFan64
And intentional
And if the gun was stolen, it’s a murder conviction. The prosecutor and the investigators had no interest in that crucial detail
So, Juan Jose, start from where you found the stolen gun
And if the gun was stolen, it’s a murder conviction. The prosecutor and the investigators had no interest in that crucial detail
So, Juan Jose, start from where you found the stolen gun
Posted on 12/6/17 at 8:43 pm to upgrayedd
And the prosecution didn’t seek out even one firearm expert to refute the defense who did have expert testimony
Prosecutor took a dive
Prosecutor took a dive
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News