• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.

pizzaparty

Member
Oct 28, 2017
775
That is what they charged him with, but what they actually argued was first degree murder

Which, btw, was ridiculous considering he didn't even shoot at her -- it was a ricochet that killed her
That would be incompetence, not overreach.

I am also not finding any sources that claim that the prosecution argued first degree murder to the exclusion of any other charge. It is not my experience that any prosecutor does not argue in the alternative.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,117
So this guy wasn't supposed to be here after being deported previously and ends up accidentally killing someone when he illegally enters back into the country.

Seems pretty cut and dry. Yet he gets away with murder. Very unfortunate, him getting deported means nothing, because he has been deported before only to come back and to have blood on his hands.

I'm not saying he maliciously aimed and fired, but I'm just of the feeling that the moment you pull that trigger in any scenario you're agreeing to a unwritten consent that you're taking full responsibility for what happens when that bullet hits something.


In an ideal world that would apply to everyone from cops to FBI to everyday citizens. (Yes I mean immediate terminations and or jail time)

I feel awful for the family of the deceased, justice was not served.

People are killed/hurt by guns firing accidentally all the time, and someone doesn't always get jailed for it. It seems like the prosecution did not prove he intentionally pulled the trigger, creating enough doubt for the jury to acquit. It's not that far fetched. The fact that someone died doesn't always mean someone has to go a jail.
 

pizzaparty

Member
Oct 28, 2017
775
People are killed/hurt by guns firing accidentally all the time, and someone doesn't always get jailed for it. It seems like the prosecution did not prove he intentionally pulled the trigger, creating enough doubt for the jury to acquit. It's not that far fetched. The fact that someone died doesn't always mean someone has to go a jail.
The guy was also acquitted of involuntary manslaughter which doesn't have the requirement of intent like murder does.
 

TheGhost

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,137
Long Island
People are killed/hurt by guns firing accidentally all the time, and someone doesn't always get jailed for it. It seems like the prosecution did not prove he intentionally pulled the trigger, creating enough doubt for the jury to acquit. It's not that far fetched. The fact that someone died doesn't always mean someone has to go a jail.
Oh yeah of course, prosecution didn't do their job, I'm just of the feeling that someone should go to jail for pulling that trigger. I don't care what he intended to do, his actions led to someone's death, on top of that he wasn't even supposed to be here to begin with. Prosecution should have handled the case better. Now the right will talk about this for years to come.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,117
The guy was also acquitted of involuntary manslaughter which doesn't have the requirement of intent like murder does.

But it does require them to prove he was intentionally reckless. If the jury believed his story that he found a wrapped up package and in the process of unwrapping it the gun went off, the acquittal makes sense.
 

Instro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,002
The guy was also acquitted of involuntary manslaughter which doesn't have the requirement of intent like murder does.
Sure, but if the events presented are true(in that she was killed by a bullet fired when he picked up the wrapped gun), then it's not involuntary manslaughter either.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
That would be incompetence, not overreach.

I am also not finding any sources that claim that the prosecution argued first degree murder to the exclusion of any other charge. It is not my experience that any prosecutor does not argue in the alternative.

I can't say they argued it to the exclusion of the other charges as I haven't seen the transcript, but that was their reported focus (see below). If you spend all day telling me that evidence proves he went there to kill someone, and I don't find that credible, why would I accept your claims that the same evidence suggests something entirely different happened? Also, in CA apparently the charge is just "murder" and the degree/lesser offenses are chosen by the judge when giving instructions to the jury so it is entirely plausible that they did not argue the lesser offenses

Prosecutors told the jury that Garcia Zarate brought the gun to the pier that day to do harm, aimed it toward Steinle and pulled the trigger. Assistant District Attorney Diana Garcia spent much of the trial seeking to prove the pistol that killed Steinle couldn't have fired without a firm pull of the trigger, while establishing that Garcia Zarate tossed the weapon into the bay before fleeing the scene.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Jury-reaches-verdict-in-killing-of-Kate-Steinle-12396509.php?utm_campaign=twitter-premium&utm_source=CMS Sharing Button&utm_medium=social
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,117
Oh yeah of course, prosecution didn't do their job, I'm just of the feeling that someone should go to jail for pulling that trigger. I don't care what he intended to do, his actions led to someone's death, on top of that he wasn't even supposed to be here to begin with. Prosecution should have handled the case better. Now the right will talk about this for years to come.

A hair trigger and no safety means it's not out of the realm of possibility that the gun can fire without someone intending it to fire. And that he "wasn't supposed to be here to begin with" has zero additional bearing on the case or his guilt/innocence. Would this be any less tragic if he were a citizen? Would this woman be any less dead? That's only feeding into the right's Xenophobic agenda, which is exactly what they want.
 

F34R

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,989
Local law enforcement has no requirement to respect a request from federal immigration enforcement agencies. Extension of detainment by local law enforcement of a person for no reason other than to comply with a detention request has been held to be unlawful in the Ninth Circuit where all of this took place. The whole system of detention requests ICE has put into place with programs like Secure Communities and the Priority Enforcement Program is flirting with unconstitutionality under the Tenth Amendment, but there is an awful lack of state's rights activists coming out to call out the federal government for attempting to interfere with local law enforcement.

It is not t proper or lawful for local law enforcement to hold a person for ICE. ICE could have camped outside of whatever prison this guy was being released from - don't put it on local law enforcement.

it's not their job to enforce immigration laws. Trying to play border cop hurts their ability to do their actual job in their community. You make it sound as if they are actively shielding these people. They simply aren't doing anything about them, which again makes sense since it is not their job to. You could make the same complaint about anyone who comes across an undocumented person and doesn't run to ICE to report them. ICE knew he was in San Francisco (he got there from Federal Prison after all) -- there wasn't anything stopping them from going to get him if they had cause to

Also, they didn't release a felon "because ICE are being assholes". They released a felon because the (20-year old) charges against him were dropped

All they had to do was notify ICE that this person was being released on X day. That is all. They didn't have to hold him an extra day, etc. They could have simply notified ICE of his release date. There. Nothing unlawful about that. Nothing about enforcing immigration laws about that. Don't put that crap about hurting their ability to their job. It takes a simple phone call or fax to notify that someone is being released. We did it all the time for extradition notifications for charges from other states. That five minutes to send the info, I can see how that hinders them from doing.... their job. Never hurt our abilities, nor our jail system effectiveness.

"Hey, we have this guy here that is here illegally, and he'll be released from our custody on x day." Done. If ICE shows up on their time, and takes custody of this guy, then everyone has done a damn good job, while respecting the law. ICE doesn't show up, and the guy is released, legally from custody, then whatever happens after that is on ICE.
 

pizzaparty

Member
Oct 28, 2017
775
I can't say they argued it to the exclusion of the other charges as I haven't seen the transcript, but that was their reported focus (see below). If you spend all day telling me that evidence proves he went there to kill someone, and I don't find that credible, why would I accept your claims that the same evidence suggests something entirely different happened? Also, in CA apparently the charge is just "murder" and the degree/lesser offenses are chosen by the judge when giving instructions to the jury so it is entirely plausible that they did not argue the lesser offenses

First degree murder and second degree murder are different Penal Code sections in California (Penal Code Section 189 makes this distinction). There is definitely a different statutory basis for both. The judge does not get to decide whether first degree or second degree murder is being charged - the prosecutor does.
 

TheGhost

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
28,137
Long Island
A hair trigger and no safety means it's not out of the realm of possibility that the gun can fire without someone intending it to fire. And that he "wasn't supposed to be here to begin with" has zero additional bearing on the case or his guilt/innocence. Would this be any less tragic if he were a citizen? Would this woman be any less dead? That's only feeding into the right's Xenophobic agenda, which is exactly what they want.
Would it be less tragic? No
But you can't sit there and tell me that family is not sitting there thinking that could have been avoided if he didn't re enter the country illegally.
Him being deported isn't a victory for the family either, because obviously deportation means nothing when it comes to that particular individual.

But the case was not about that so I won't speak another word on it.
 

Commedieu

Banned
Nov 11, 2017
15,025
The propaganda over this case is literally having the effect it was designed for.

You course correct for a problem. Illegals stealing jobs and murdering people isn't some epidemic. The guy went through a justice system, and they found him not guilty. It's surprising. As this just really illustrates how badly of a job the prosecutors did.

I heard all the shit about him robbing them at gunpoint then shooting sideways to kill her. Turns out some jackass left their special forces pistol out for any child or person to grab. And a extra sensitive gun, went off.

Just like everyone gets off for accidentally shooting someone. This person did too. That's our laws in our country. Expecting anything else is very bizzare. His past has nothing to do with the current charges. Unless he had a history of shooting people to death.

Maybe there would be harsher punishments for accidental deaths if Americans were consistent with their whims. Instead of cherry picking who can and can't accidentally kill someone. If it's zero tolerance it should be zero tolerance. But we can all seem to excuse a mom that let's her kids get a gun, or any of the daily accidental shootings in our country. Which weren't even an issue until trump played all of us to discuss this as if it has to do with illegal immigration. And coming from the GOP that supports no form of gun control massacre after massacre, it's extra bullshit.

This is just scare white people with Mexican boogiemen news.

Nope if he wasn't here he literally couldn't have accidentally shot her. But an American citizen could have. The law enforcement failed to secure a weapon that was designed to be extra sensitive. This is the major problem, not the person who lifts a gun from a car.
 
Oct 29, 2017
3,166
This ruling is a mockery to the victim and the victim's family. San Francisco should sink into the fucking ocean.
 

Heath V

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,634
My goodness how many times is this guy going to get deported? This is absolutely ridiculous! RIP to the victim.
 

4859

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
7,046
In the weak and the wounded
This is one of the least believable defenses on the level of "Affluenza", anyone who has ever handled a gun in their life know they don't just go off.


..... I wish this was true. At least there is something here I can understand.

Maybe if you have only experienced double action only, or even double/single action if you arent familiar with cocking the hammer yourself, making for a long and heavy first draw.... So this would seem bizarre, as you really have to apply pressure to double action as it raises the hammer when the trigger is pulled. takes about 10+ lbs of force (The sidearm I am most familiar with, requires 13 lbs of force for double action, it also has so many safety features they are touted as 'redundant' and still, nd's can happen if you aint on it) to get the trigger to move and it has to be depressed from its at rest position all the way to its firing position, with that consistent amount of force the whole way.

However weapons with single action, or both modes, have a trigger pull weight of 2-5 lbs, which is very very light, hair trigger is a good description, as in if a hair falls on it, it will fire. Not only is it much easier to pull, but the trigger position is already right up to the point where if it moves at all, its firing. Since you have to manually raise the hammer, the intended use is you are going to use deadly force. Not a show of force, not a deterrent, you have positively identified a target as one you are going to kill, as in they are already an active shooter (a real active shooter actively shooting), or have directly pointed the weapon at you, or other people. The light trigger mitigates accuracy impediments like trigger pull, firing anticipation, and pull/firing lag, the errors associated with these can be magnified exponentially with an adrenaline rush. Even during scoring ranges, my finger was never in that trigger well, and the weapon was never on fire, until the exercise started. cocking and flipping the safety was just too easy and can be done with the trigger hands thumb while aquiring a rising target, so there is zero reason to have a weapon on fire, or a hammer cocked unless you have decided you are going to kill a threat (a REAL threat). There is a reason safety-less weapons are frowned upon, they have little to no time saving value, and a whole laundry list of deadly cons.

So if this weapon was wrapped up, loaded with a round chambered, and that hammer was cocked, or somehow got inadvertently cocked while packaged which could easily happen during handling, just about any bump or tap that could push any packaging into that trigger well, would set this weapon off.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
All they had to do was notify ICE that this person was being released on X day. That is all. They didn't have to hold him an extra day, etc. They could have simply notified ICE of his release date. There. Nothing unlawful about that. Nothing about enforcing immigration laws about that. Don't put that crap about hurting their ability to their job. It takes a simple phone call or fax to notify that someone is being released. We did it all the time for extradition notifications for charges from other states. That five minutes to send the info, I can see how that hinders them from doing.... their job. Never hurt our abilities, nor our jail system effectiveness.

"Hey, we have this guy here that is here illegally, and he'll be released from our custody on x day." Done. If ICE shows up on their time, and takes custody of this guy, then everyone has done a damn good job, while respecting the law. ICE doesn't show up, and the guy is released, legally from custody, then whatever happens after that is on ICE.

It doesn't hurt their ability to their job because it is a lot of work, it hurts their ability to do their job because the community sees them as an extension of the immigration authorities. It sows distrust and reduces cooperation. That said, I do agree that they should have told ICE they would not honor the detainer rather than simply ignoring it. ICE also should have known they wouldn't honor it though, as detainers had been ruled unconstitutional. If they got a warrant, as they have now, he would have been held.
 

Book One

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,813
That this dude was illegal has no bearing on a gun going off and a ricochet killing someone. But you can tell by the vitriol and pure seething hatred oozing off some people that the fact that that seems to be the most critical factor. This thing ultimately has more in common with other accidental shootings of someone mishandling a gun than it does illegal immigration concerns. As usual, fear of the other is the most important aspect of right wing talking points.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
First degree murder and second degree murder are different Penal Code sections in California (Penal Code Section 189 makes this distinction). There is definitely a different statutory basis for both. The judge does not get to decide whether first degree or second degree murder is being charged - the prosecutor does.

Not according to this analysis by a LA County Deputy DA:
I see some people complaining about prosecutors "charging first-degree murder" in the Zarate case. In California, prosecutors don't "charge" first-degree or second-degree murder. The charging document reads simply "murder." The judge will instruct on first-degree and/or second-degree murder and/or lesser included offenses of manslaughter, based on the evidence presented in the case, and how that evidence fits the law. None of these lesser included offenses have to be charged for the jury to consider them.

https://www.redstate.com/patterico/...micide-statutes-relevant-steinle-murder-case/
 

WaffleTaco

Community Resettler
Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
2,908
I would really love to read the opinion on this case. I'm curious to see how the jury got there.
 
Oct 25, 2017
21,439
Sweden
You think an illegal immigrant legally obtained a firearm?
if gun ownership was heavily regulated, as in the rest of the world, much fewer guns would be in circulation and the probability of this individual having access to a firearm would have been much lower (much more expensive due to lower supply or lower chance to find it randomly if you believe the account of the defence)
 

Xenon

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,266
A hair trigger and no safety means it's not out of the realm of possibility that the gun can fire without someone intending it to fire. And that he "wasn't supposed to be here to begin with" has zero additional bearing on the case or his guilt/innocence. Would this be any less tragic if he were a citizen? Would this woman be any less dead? That's only feeding into the right's Xenophobic agenda, which is exactly what they want.


You worry about it being politicized on the right, but yet are only defending the verdict based on your political POV. Switch the racial make up of the shooter and victim and I bet your thoughts on this would be quite different.

Part of the problem with events like this is people like hold them up and decry "See that's how they are!" This is done on all sides of the political spectrum. You're not wrong in call that out but understand you are only doing it because of your own bias.

That said... who the fuck handles and puts his finger on the trigger on a gun they just found in a crowded area. Fucking tragic.
 

F34R

Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,989
It doesn't hurt their ability to their job because it is a lot of work, it hurts their ability to do their job because the community sees them as an extension of the immigration authorities. It sows distrust and reduces cooperation. That said, I do agree that they should have told ICE they would not honor the detainer rather than simply ignoring it. ICE also should have known they wouldn't honor it though, as detainers had been ruled unconstitutional. If they got a warrant, as they have now, he would have been held.
Like I said, a simple notification saying he's getting out, and like you mentioned, "we won't honor that detainer", would be a lot better than simply letting criminals back on the street when there are ways to prevent it. Hopefully this will get them to fix whatever problem kept this guy from being dealt with appropriately.
 

see5harp

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
4,435
Him being a immigrant shouldn't even be a part of the story. The story is this idiot fired a weapon and accidentally killed someone.
 
Oct 29, 2017
3,166
if a "responsible gun owner"™ kills their daughter by accidental discharge of their weapon, is it a mockery to this daughter and the rest of that family if the accidental shooter is acquitted?

I fail to see how the right wing turning this into an immigration issue is more disgusting than your attempt to turn this into a gun control issue especially when it was stolen from a LEO.

This is a gross failure of the system on all fronts but mostly its a failure of the San Francisco justice system to even get a manslaughter conviction out of this. Fucking HOW!?
 

thediamondage

Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,236
Him being a immigrant shouldn't even be a part of the story. The story is this idiot fired a weapon and accidentally killed someone.

It ties into the issue of San Francisco being a sanctuary city which means the times he was jailed, he was released by the city back into the state and not into ICE custody for deportation because a sanctuary city does not want to be seen as cooperating with ICE/INS. I totally agree there are issues such as ICE/INS overstepping its mandate and trolling jails for people to deport, taking too long with paperwork so people can be stuck in jail for months unjustly, an undocumented immigrant who jaywalks is not the same as someone who assaults or murders someone and should not be deported, etc but on the flip side it leads to the "worst case" scenarios like this where a person who should not be in the US is left in place because of loopholes and ends up killing someone.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
It ties into the issue of San Francisco being a sanctuary city which means the numerous times he was jailed, he was released by the city back into the state

He wasn't arrested in SF multiple times. He has spent barely any time outside of federal prison since the 90s. He never made it far past the border since then. He was jailed in SF because the federal BOP transferred him there to face a 20-year old drug charge which was dropped the next day. Then they held him for 3 weeks while they confirmed w/ the DOJ he was eligible for release (some paperwork issue) and had no active warrants. AFAIK that is the only time he has spent in jail in SF

The BOP has since changed their policy that allowed them to transfer him to SF without consulting ICE in the first place
 
Last edited:

see5harp

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
4,435
It ties into the issue of San Francisco being a sanctuary city which means the times he was jailed, he was released by the city back into the state and not into ICE custody for deportation because a sanctuary city does not want to be seen as cooperating with ICE/INS. I totally agree there are issues such as ICE/INS overstepping its mandate and trolling jails for people to deport, taking too long with paperwork so people can be stuck in jail for months unjustly, an undocumented immigrant who jaywalks is not the same as someone who assaults or murders someone and should not be deported, etc but on the flip side it leads to the "worst case" scenarios like this where a person who should not be in the US is left in place because of loopholes and ends up killing someone.

Oh I do not deny that it was easily roped into the story because of the Trump candidacy. It's just not part of the actual story. When a parent kills a child accidentally with a gun I'd expect that fucking idiot to go to prison too. The biggest idiot in this case is the officer who left a loaded firearm in a car.
 

Cels

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,772
well yeah he should get deported, he's one of the "bad hombres" if you prefer a presidential description

the guy who sells flowers by the freeway onramp or those fruit cart guys, they're just hustling. they can stay. fellow Californians know who I'm talking about.
 

trembli0s

Member
Oct 28, 2017
228
A hair trigger and no safety means it's not out of the realm of possibility that the gun can fire without someone intending it to fire. And that he "wasn't supposed to be here to begin with" has zero additional bearing on the case or his guilt/innocence. Would this be any less tragic if he were a citizen? Would this woman be any less dead? That's only feeding into the right's Xenophobic agenda, which is exactly what they want.

Does the result matter either way? I'd argue there will be more outrage and xenophobia as a result of the acquittal than if he had actually been convicted of manslaughter.

This is exactly the type of case that Trump and the AltRight want. Sympathetic, pretty, young white woman; repeated felon and illegal immigrant with multiple deportations and illegal entries.

This guy going free is going to cause a massive backlash. Heaven forbid he ever ends up in the US again, which to be frank he likely will end up here again, because the shit storm will be epic.
 

NinjaScooter

Member
Oct 25, 2017
54,117
Does the result matter either way? I'd argue there will be more outrage and xenophobia as a result of the acquittal than if he had actually been convicted of manslaughter.

This is exactly the type of case that Trump and the AltRight want. Sympathetic, pretty, young white woman; repeated felon and illegal immigrant with multiple deportations and illegal entries.

This guy going free is going to cause a massive backlash. Heaven forbid he ever ends up in the US again, which to be frank he likely will end up here again, because the shit storm will be epic.

You are probably right, it's foing to create a fervor in either direction because it's already been politicized, I'm saying that has no factor in his guilt or innocence though. He was likely acquitted because the jury felt there was a reasonable enough chance that his story was true, in which case their verdict was 100% correct.
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
Trump is desperate to get this back in the news because it was overshadowed by Flynn's indictment etc
 

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,183
Is there some caveat with those numbers? "7 time convicted felon, deported 5 times"? What is supposed to be the normal course of action for someone who keeps entering the country and keeps getting convicted of crimes?
 

sangreal

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,890
Is there some caveat with those numbers? "7 time convicted felon, deported 5 times"? What is supposed to be the normal course of action for someone who keeps entering the country and keeps getting convicted of crimes?

Yes, there is a caveat with those numbers. He wasn't entering the country and committing crimes (since the 90s). He was repeatedly convicted and deported for the crime of entering the country illegally. The only reason he ever made it to SF is because the bureau of prisons dropped him off there after his latest jail sentence. All of his attempts resulted in him being picked up by CBP and sent to jail
 

signal

Member
Oct 28, 2017
40,183
Yes, there is a caveat with those numbers. He wasn't entering the country and committing crimes (since the 90s). He was repeatedly convicted and deported for the crime of trying to enter the country illegally. The only reason he ever made it to SF is because the bureau of prisons dropped him off there after his latest jail sentence


Ah I see.
 

Gaius Cassius

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,859
Oregon
The gun is the thing that still doesn't make sense to me. How the hell does a stolen LEO weapon just appear under a bench next a major city pier?

The other thing that I doubt is the weapon 'Just going off' on its own. We're talking about a modern Sig Sauer semi auto pistol used by the local PD. They're well made weapons. The chance of this stolen LEO gun just happened to be found under the bench also having such a defect is a bit much.
 

excelsiorlef

Bad Praxis
Member
Oct 25, 2017
73,316
The gun is the thing that still doesn't make sense to me. How the hell does a stolen LEO weapon just appear under a bench next a major city pier?

The other thing that I doubt is the weapon 'Just going off' on its own. We're talking about a modern Sig Sauer semi auto pistol used by the local PD. They're well made weapons. The chance of this stolen LEO gun just happened to be found under the bench also having such a defect is a bit much.

Thieves robbed an LEO's car IIRC... and wrapped up ditched the gun or tried to hide it to pick it up later.

It's a gun literally designed to go off easy.
 
Last edited: