Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic

The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge.

Call me inhumane but I will go with my boilerplate he should not have been in the country. Someone must be liable and eventually will pay.

Hank Scorpio wrote:

Right. He admitted he did it! This has to be some fuck up by the police/prosecutors like rr mentioned. I'm pretty sure the jury wasnt like "well trump sucks, if we let this guy walk that'll really show him!"

Hank Scorpio wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

Hank Scorpio wrote:

It is California. I will go with Trump sucks.

Yea I just dont see how this happened. I know they weren't allowed to bring up the guys status in court, but even then this should've open and shut.

America wrote:

Yea I just dont see how this happened. I know they weren't allowed to bring up the guys status in court, but even then this should've open and shut.

If you really know they weren't allowed to bring up his immigration status, why bring it up, its completely irrelevant

FavreFan wrote:

Hank Scorpio wrote:

You think it's impossible for a sampling of jury-duty-answering people from San Francisco to think that way?

Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:

FavreFan wrote:

Hank Scorpio wrote:

You think it's impossible for a sampling of jury-duty-answering people from San Francisco to think that way?

Virtually impossible, yes. It's a ridiculous theory.

What am i missing?

This homeless shitbag found a gun, it discharged on accident and ricochet 80 feet off the ground and killing somebody. The jury thought it was an accidental shooting.

Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter:

1) Someone was killed as a result of the defendant's actions.
2) The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life.
3) The defendant knew or should have known his or her conduct was a threat to the lives of others.

What am i missing?

This homeless shitbag found a gun, it discharged on accident and ricochet 80 feet off the ground and killing somebody. The jury thought it was an accidental shooting.

How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling?

Everything happens for a reason.

How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling?

Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:

How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling?

Depends on the gun but it's extremely unlikely outside of being dropped.

He probably feared for his life.

How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling?

Author:	FavreFan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:44 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Hank Scorpio wrote: The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge. Right. He admitted he did it! This has to be some fuck up by the police/prosecutors like rr mentioned. I'm pretty sure the jury wasnt like "well trump sucks, if we let this guy walk that'll really show him!"

Author:	America [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Yea I just dont see how this happened. I know they weren't allowed to bring up the guys status in court, but even then this should've open and shut.

Author:	Regular Reader [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
pittmike wrote: Call me inhumane but I will go with my boilerplate he should not have been in the country. Someone must be liable and eventually will pay. Mike wants to punish law enforcement and/or first responders if they're found to have screwed this up!?! Bravo Mike, I guess

Author:	conns7901 [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
FavreFan wrote: Hank Scorpio wrote: The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge. Right. He admitted he did it! This has to be some fuck up by the police/prosecutors like rr mentioned. I'm pretty sure the jury wasnt like "well trump sucks, if we let this guy walk that'll really show him!" It is California. I will go with Trump sucks.

Author:	Juice's Lecture Notes [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:48 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
FavreFan wrote: Hank Scorpio wrote: The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge. Right. He admitted he did it! This has to be some fuck up by the police/prosecutors like rr mentioned. I'm pretty sure the jury wasnt like "well trump sucks, if we let this guy walk that'll really show him!" You think it's impossible for a sampling of jury-duty-answering people from San Francisco to think that way?

Chicago Fanatics Message Board http://chicagofanatics.com/

Kate Steinle verdict http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=109778	Page 2 of 5

Author:	FavreFan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:49 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
conns7901 wrote: FavreFan wrote: Hank Scorpio wrote: The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge. Right. He admitted he did it! This has to be some fuck up by the police/prosecutors like rr mentioned. I'm pretty sure the jury wasnt like "well trump sucks, if we let this guy walk that'll really show him!" It is California. I will go with Trump sucks.

Author:	America [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Regular Reader wrote: America wrote: Yea I just dont see how this happened. I know they weren't allowed to bring up the guys status in court, but even then this should've open and shut. If you really know they weren't allowed to bring up his immigration status, why bring it up, its completely irrelevant

Author:	FavreFan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote: FavreFan wrote: Hank Scorpio wrote: The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge. Right. He admitted he did it! This has to be some fuck up by the police/prosecutors like rr mentioned. I'm pretty sure the jury wasnt like "well trump sucks, if we let this guy walk that'll really show him!" You think it's impossible for a sampling of jury-duty-answering people from San Francisco to think that way? Virtually impossible, yes. It's a ridiculous theory.

Author:	SpiralStairs [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Hank Scorpio wrote: The defense that I heard was that he found the gun and picked it up and it went off in his hand (hey buddy). I'm unsure how that isn't involuntary manslaughter. I thought the plan all along was to get that as the charge. Right. So what was the evidence that was presented?

Author:	312player [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
What am i missing? This homeless shitbag found a gun, it discharged on accident and ricochet 80 feet off the ground and killing somebody. The jury thought it was an accidental shooting.

Author:	Regular Reader [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
312player wrote: What am i missing? This homeless shitbag found a gun, it discharged on accident and ricochet 80 feet off the ground and killing somebody. The jury thought it was an accidental shooting. It was a lead story a couple of times a week on FoxNews for 18 months, so someone must die and a Democrat must pay

Author:	Furious Styles [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:05 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Everything happens for a reason.

Author:	Zippy-The-Pinhead [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:09 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter: 1) Someone was killed as a result of the defendant's actions. 2) The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life. 3) The defendant knew or should have known his or her conduct was a threat to the lives of others.

Author:	FavreFan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Zippy-The-Pinhead wrote: Three elements must be satisfied in order for someone to be found guilty of involuntary manslaughter: 1) Someone was killed as a result of the defendant's actions. 2) The act either was inherently dangerous to others or done with reckless disregard for human life. 3) The defendant knew or should have known his or her conduct was a threat to the lives of others. Yeah, I mean I think discharging a gun and killing someone satisfies those three.

Author:	rogers park bryan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:36 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
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. Defense attorney Matt Gonzalez said Garcia Zarate found the gun at the pier. He said it was wrapped in cloth, and when Garcia Zarate unwrapped it, the gun accidentally discharged. But in a police interrogation, Garcia Zarate admitted to firing the gun, saying he was aiming at a seal. Juors began deliberating Tuesday in the murder trial of Jose Ines Garcia Zarate. Juors began deliberating Tuesday in the murder trial of Jose Ines Garcia Zarate. He told police that he stepped on the gun, causing it to fire. Prosecutors said Garcia Zarate immediately tried to cover his tracks by throwing the gun into the San Francisco Bay, then fleeing the scene. Garcia Zarate was formerly known as Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, one of several aliases he is known to have used. CNN and other media outlets previously identified him as Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez. http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/us/kate-s ... index.html

Author:	SpiralStairs [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:36 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
California statue for involuntary manslaughter : Manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice. It is of three kinds: (a) Voluntary—upon a sudden quarrel or heat of passion. (b) Involuntary—in the commission of an unlawful act, not amounting to a felony; or in the commission of a lawful act which might produce death, in an unlawful manner, or without due caution and circumspection. Looks like everything boiled down to whether or not the guy intended to fire the gun.

Author:	rogers park bryan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:40 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Why would he say he shot at a seal if it was accidental? Assuming police are telling the truth about that, hard to believe it was any kind of accidental firing. Well maybe there's something we don't know.

Page 2 of 5	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Peoria Matt [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:12 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
312player wrote: What am i missing? This homeless shitbag found a gun, it discharged on accident and ricochet 80 feet off the ground and killing somebody. The jury thought it was an accidental shooting. That's what I read also. Well, not the "homeless shitbag" part.

Author:	America [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote: How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling? You'd have to drop it or shake it pretty violently. And it'd have to be a real piece of shit.

Author:	Don Tiny [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Furious Styles wrote: Everything happens for a reason.

Author:	FavreFan [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote: How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling? Depends on the gun but it's extremely unlikely outside of being dropped.

Author:	312player [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
FavreFan wrote: Juice's Lecture Notes wrote: How easy is it for a gun to go off accidentally during handling? Depends on the gun but it's extremely unlikely outside of being dropped. I dunno if it was an accident or not..it's not unbelievable that a homeless drunk found a gun and it discharged on accident. I bet a couple hundred people die every year in this country by accidental shootings and 99% aren't homeless bustouts.

Author:	McDude [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
Felon with a gun, shouldn't possess gun in first place. Accident makes it murder. This makes no sense.

Author:	312player [ Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:39 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Kate Steinle verdict
You'd have to see the confession to know if this guy confessed or was being fed scenario after scenario by a detective and agreed to a few.. He's obviously of low intelligence,nutrition and common sense. Maybe the jury saw the " confession" and didn't buy it.