-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Jury reaches verdict in killing of Kate Steinle on Pier 14 in San Francisco
- Thread starter Reptile
- Start date
I saw that also, on what basis is it not relevant to know about this guys rap sheet??
A San Francisco jury sending a message. Call it "Jury Nullification - Left Coast Style".
JayMcB
NES Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2011
- Messages
- 22,362
- Likes
- 109,094
FIFY.
In the event it was my daughter I cannot even say.
It was relevant for the pre-determined outcome.
I wouldn't be surprised if they gave his gun back pending further charges!
I had a contractor stop by, to find out he was an undocumented illegal. His favorite saying was "Stupid Americans"
I called ICE and the local PD to let them know he was straying out of his sanctuary city.
I had a contractor stop by, to find out he was an undocumented illegal. His favorite saying was "Stupid Americans"
I called ICE and the local PD to let them know he was straying out of his sanctuary city.
If a Licensed Gun Owner did this he would be in jail for life. This was a statement by an anti-trump constituency that said eff your illegal immigration laws and anti-sanctuary city views.
"A California jury acquitted Zarate of the more serious charges in the case, including murder, involuntary manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon -- only convicting him of being a felon in possession of a firearm."
I thought if someone was killed in the commission of a crime it is murder....well, he was committing a crime and someone died. So WTF????
"A California jury acquitted Zarate of the more serious charges in the case, including murder, involuntary manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon -- only convicting him of being a felon in possession of a firearm."
I thought if someone was killed in the commission of a crime it is murder....well, he was committing a crime and someone died. So WTF????
lowbuckbob
NES Member
The verdict was a referendum on Trump
tuna
NES Member
But the crime he was committed of, is canceled out by being a criminal and thus, we use English language rules to decide that a double negative is a positive, and that is the only thing the English language is good for, since it is the language of the oppressors and colonial exploitation.
Duh.
It's prejudicial.
The gun was never 'his' - the shooter's claim was that he found it in a public place, and never claimed that he bought it anywhere. There was no evidence brought to trial that ever linked the gun to the shooter, so this part of his story held-up.
The shooter also did not know the victim at-all, and there was no evidence brought to trial indicating that the shooter was attempting to commit a crime at the time the firearm discharged. Prosecutors couldn't determine WHY the firearm was discharged...only that this illegal was the one who discharged it.
The shooter claimed the discharge was an accident. Judging by where the shooter was, and where the victim was struck, it would have been difficult to determine that this bozo deliberately aimed the firearm with the intent of hitting her - he would have had to have been a pretty-good shot, with a great deal of experience and range-time, to pull-off such a shot, and there was NO WAY to prove that this guy was even remotely capable, since the gun involved wasn't even his.
This is the story of what happens when clueless morons stumble-upon loaded firearms, and don't have the common sense to leave them alone. The rest of the details are just noise to get your blood-pressure going - had this shooter been a tourist here on vacation, the results probably would have been the same.
SteelShooter
NES Member
The gun was stolen from a federal agent 4 days earlier (BLM).
I would disagree with your second statement, I can almost guarantee if it was some tourist they would at least get involuntary manslaughter.
- Joined
- May 4, 2014
- Messages
- 2,065
- Likes
- 367
The shooter actually claimed he didn’t even know it was a gun when he picked it up and that it just went off when he picked it up. Shitty work by the prosecutor to not put more holes in that story.
The way many stories still call him an “undocumented immigrant” really grinds my gears. He’s been deported five times!!! He’s not undocumented, he’s illegal!
SteelShooter
NES Member
He had multiple stories - he said he pulled the trigger, then he said he stepped on it, then he threw it in the ocean to keep it from firing
Horrible
NES Member
Guns don't just "go off". Trigger must be pulled. My guess is that the moonbat jury never fired a gun before and don't know anything except where the bullets come out. Perp also kicked the firearm into the water after the shot was fired. Isn't that obstruction of justice?
Law abiding, legal gun owner would have been thrown in jail for the rest of their life.
Sparky123
NES Member
Justice San Francisco style.
Well, to start, you had a jury that was composed of 12 people who were too stupid to get out of jury dity.
Add to that gross overreach (the DA went hard for premeditated murder in a case where the victim was hit by a ricochet at a fair distance from the shooter) which likely meant that the prosecution only stressed the premeditation point in the summation, and the jury may never have even considered what comprised involuntary manslaughter. There was also much fog about the "4.4 lb hair trigger" on the gun, which could also skew the thought processes of a jury unfamiliar with firearms.
Add to that gross overreach (the DA went hard for premeditated murder in a case where the victim was hit by a ricochet at a fair distance from the shooter) which likely meant that the prosecution only stressed the premeditation point in the summation, and the jury may never have even considered what comprised involuntary manslaughter. There was also much fog about the "4.4 lb hair trigger" on the gun, which could also skew the thought processes of a jury unfamiliar with firearms.
Last edited:
nstassel
NES Member
At least the ranger whose gun was stolen made out ok
https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/10/2...s-gun-was-stolen-and-used-in-steinle-killing/
https://ww2.kqed.org/news/2017/10/2...s-gun-was-stolen-and-used-in-steinle-killing/
Anyone care to venture a guess this guys fate in the NY courts ?
A New York man has been charged with second-degree manslaughter after he shot and killed a woman he says he mistook for a deer.
Thomas Jadlowski, 34, pleaded not guilty to the manslaughter charge and hunting after hours on Thursday. His bail was set at $50,000 cash or $100,000 property. The charges carry a maximum prison sentence of 15 years.
Rosemary Billquist, 43, was walking her dogs in a field in the town of Sherman on Nov. 22 when she was shot by Jadlowski, who was about 200 yards away, according to the Chautauqua County Sheriff's Office.
A New York man has been charged with second-degree manslaughter after he shot and killed a woman he says he mistook for a deer.
Thomas Jadlowski, 34, pleaded not guilty to the manslaughter charge and hunting after hours on Thursday. His bail was set at $50,000 cash or $100,000 property. The charges carry a maximum prison sentence of 15 years.
Rosemary Billquist, 43, was walking her dogs in a field in the town of Sherman on Nov. 22 when she was shot by Jadlowski, who was about 200 yards away, according to the Chautauqua County Sheriff's Office.
I'm not so sure - the case didn't seem to delve-into how the defendant actually found the weapon, or if he truly understood how it worked or could deduce if it was even loaded. The defendant's total ignorance of these things probably played a role in his acquittal.
If I'm "Dumb-Tourist Johann" from the Old Country, and I don't know jack-squat about guns either, I could make the same case. "I found something under a park bench, I picked it up, and it went "BANG!" and then there was people screaming and.....it was an accident." Considering that the shot discharged only reached the victim after a ricochet, the only issue on the table was whether the shooter actually knew he had a firearm in his possession (and therefore was negligent in handling it), or just completely clueless about what he found. My guess is, the latter was easier to prove than the former.
amm5061
NES Member
KBCraig
NES Member
https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rumpf/2017/11/30/lied-kate-steinle-case/
These two facts are undisputed by the prosecution and defense:
These two facts are undisputed by the prosecution and defense:
- On July 1, 2015, Kate Steinle was fatally struck in the back by a single bullet as she walked on Pier 14 with her father to view the San Francisco Bay.
- Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, a Mexican citizen illegally in the United States, fired the gun that killed Steinle.
Listening to the radio today, it seemed as the judge wouldn't allow any of this guy's history to be brought up at trial .
So when the defense spun their yard about how this poor immigrant who was just here for a better life had a horrible "accident" there wasn't much the prosecutor could counter with.
The judge pretty much put in the fix on this one.
I would be very curious of the reaction of the jurors when the trial was over and they found out exactly what it was they kicked loose.
If I said what I would really do if my beautiful daughter died in my arms and her last words were "Help me Daddy." I figure there would be a knock on my door pretty quick.
So when the defense spun their yard about how this poor immigrant who was just here for a better life had a horrible "accident" there wasn't much the prosecutor could counter with.
The judge pretty much put in the fix on this one.
I would be very curious of the reaction of the jurors when the trial was over and they found out exactly what it was they kicked loose.
If I said what I would really do if my beautiful daughter died in my arms and her last words were "Help me Daddy." I figure there would be a knock on my door pretty quick.
San Fransisco must now deal with the law of unintended consequences...
This jury verdict can help solidify Trumps reelection and need for The Wall.
Although Kate's killer will not face justice - many lives can perhaps be saved in the long run as people revolt against sanctuary cities.
I can only hope.
This jury verdict can help solidify Trumps reelection and need for The Wall.
Although Kate's killer will not face justice - many lives can perhaps be saved in the long run as people revolt against sanctuary cities.
I can only hope.
Similar threads
