Posted on 12/06/2017 10:35:57 PM PST by KJC1
An alternate juror in the Kate Steinle case said the jury made the right decision in acquitting the defendant of murder, manslaughter and assault charges after San Francisco prosecutors failed to prove he had intended to shoot anyone.
Phil Van Stockum, a 33-year-old San Francisco resident who is co-founder of a technology company in San Mateo, did not take part in deliberations as the jury weighed charges against Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, a homeless undocumented immigrant whose attorneys argued an accident was behind the killing on Pier 14 on July 1, 2015.
(snip) Van Stockum said prosecutors presented no motive for a murder by a man with no record of violence. He noted that the fatal shot had bounced off the concrete ground, and that the gun, which had been stolen four days earlier from the nearby parked car of a federal ranger, could have been in a mode requiring a lighter pull of the trigger.
“The jury members asked to feel the trigger pull of the gun during deliberation, but the judge wouldn’t allow it, for reasons that aren’t clear to us,” Van Stockum said in his Politico article.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
How many people do you have to kill before you’re a murderer?
We know it’s more that two from the trial of OJ.
You can’t yell fire in a crowded theater but it’s ok if you “find” a gun and fire it in a crowded tourist area.
He threw the gun into the bay after he shot Kate, but even that wouldn’t matter as the gun was issued to a BLM ranger so a substitute of same model would work.
To me, it sure looks like the DA’s office AND the judge threw this case away for the sake of politics.
This case will be forgotten soon if people let it be forgotten.
Well, you have to be a protected felonious illegal too. At least in this case.
Has anyone raised the possibility that the prosecution
was part of the trial charade? Could they have
purposely overcharged the accused knowing that there
was no way a murder conviction could be obtained based on
the circumstance and evidence? Sure there was a crime
more than a mere case of a felon in possession of a
firearm. I would think they should have covered all
bases. Maybe the DA has an election coming up.
No motive for murder unless he decided at the time that he wanted to discharge the gun.
I do not know how well the bullet deflection was proven, It seems like they would have to find the mark on the concrete to make that scenario make sense. (I don’t know what they did, all we heard is that the bullet was not completely round.)
The reason for second degree murder would be to cover the case where the shooting was an accident, which the defense seems to claim. The fact that this did not make sense to the jury is a problem with the prosecutor. To my thinking the jury would have had to find him guilty of the lowest charge if they found there was no intent.
My guess is that this was SF and the jury agrees with the whole sanctuary city BS and therefore decided to not find him guilty of anything. I understand that they want to go back and find him not guilty of having a gun either, since he did not realize that it was a gun, just something wrapped up in a shirt.
And finally, who stole the gun and left it under the bench? A nice gun like that should have been worth several days of panhandling.
Isn't that the crazy truth.
Manslaughter does not hold that the killing was intended. So why wasn’t he convicted of manslaughter?
Manslaughter should have been clear.
One commentator said that the decision by the prosecution to add a first degree murder charge after the trial was underway, tainted the motives of the prosecution for the Jury.
Could have? Did I miss something, did the gun used in the crime suddenly disappear?
Maybe he was worried about tainting evidence for a future trial?
Sig Sauer P239 in .40 S&W. It’s double action for the first round, single action after with a decocking lever. The hammer is bobbed, but it could be “cocked” for the first shot by someone who knew how it operated. In court the police expert who tested the piece said it had a single action trigger pull of about five pounds and double action pull of about ten pounds. Normal for a pistol of this type. It was in good working order.
It’s possible but unlikely that the pistol was cocked with a round in the chamber when the felon took possession of it. More likely he had to overcome the longer, harder double action trigger pull.
Either way, you have to pull the trigger to make it go boom. I’d wager the felon pulled the trigger to see if the thing would fire, because he’s that addled and/or stupid.
If this guy walked because the trigger was too light, every single criminal shooting could be blamed on the correct functioning of the firearm. If he walked because he didn’t know guns fire when you pull the trigger, same thing, anybody could plead stupid and walk.
The POS defense attorney was pushing the “hair trigger” thing with the jury. I hope he rots in Hell after being “accidentally” shot by an illegal alien.
The prosecution never has to prove “motive.” It is not an element of the crime.
The jury was told they had to believe he brandished the gun before it went off, despite the prosecution never bringing up testimony or evidence to that effect before they were told it was a critical element to find him guilty.
It sounds like the prosecution didn’t try too hard to build a coherent case, no surprise.
It’s becoming very obvious that this case wasn’t whether Zarate was guilty of murder or manslaughter, it was about sending a message to Trump and conservatives everywhere that the liberal agenda is alive and well. At least in San Francisco.
They don’t care about innocent lives lost, they only care about furthering their agenda. This is turning into war and now would be a good time to cut off funding to ‘sanctuary cities’ and send a bigger message back.
Could it be that the prosecution threw the case?
The guy was a drugalded drug dealer. You don’t need a motive with someone who’s fried their brain. They do stuff on impulse. And in this case, he decided to shoot a gun into a crowd to see what would happen.
BTW, he almost certainly stole the gun. Homeless people break into cars all the time in Frisco. Not too long ago just having a stolen weapon was more than enough to be convicted of stealing. Notice how they’re suddenly making it much harder to convict people of obvious crimes again?
And don’t feel sorry for the Jury. They knew exactly what they were doing. This is all about politics.
OH, I got it!
Kate Steinle sucked the bullet out the barrel of the gun with her super powers, but forgot to stop sucking before it reached her position and she only had enough time to turn around and get hit in the back!
Hey anti-American SF pin heads, the ((multiple felon)) shooter had 3 DIFFERENT accounts, of which one had the gun just firing on its own! Another had him admitting he was shooing at seals! TOTALLY ILLEGAL! His third rendition had him playing roulette. HE HANDLED THE GUN!
Do not the different accounts dictate the illegal drug addict felon was lying? Two of his own accounts had him actually handling AND or firing the gum!
With 3 different accounts (from the multi-felon), why choose the impossible story to believe, where the Sig (with the approx. 10 pound trigger tension) just fired itself!
As well, the trajectory of the bullet proves the barrel of the gun was pointed in the general direction of people, or no one would have been killed!
JURY, even though wrongfully directed for political purposes, this makes YOU guilty of denying justice in a crime resulting in the death of a beautiful young woman!
Kate Steinle only loved and helped people with he life!
This stuff is so absolute libtard airhead STUPID...!
Good grief!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.