When are we going to start taking the animals out and stacking them like cord wood?

Sad and revolting beyond belief. Prayers to her family. I can't imagine what is going through their minds right now over this travesty of justice.

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Fuck them all..."an unintentionally discharged firearm"...bullshit!...stuff like this makes me mad as hell...fuck them all

My memory is getting old, but did that asshole simply walk up and shoot her in the head?

quote:

Originally posted by grumpy1:
I can't imagine what is going through their minds right now over this travesty of justice.

I wouldn't even want to guess. One thing I'm pretty sure of though is that they won't be calling on people to "burn this bitch down." Referring to San Francisco of course.

I'm thinking it though.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by grumpy1:
I can't imagine what is going through their minds right now over this travesty of justice.

I wouldn't even want to guess. One thing I'm pretty sure of though is that they won't be calling on people to "burn this bitch down." Referring to San Francisco of course.

I'm thinking it though.

I'll instant karma you the matches.

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Fuck them all..."an unintentionally discharged firearm"...bullshit!...stuff like this makes me mad as hell...fuck them all

My memory is getting old, but did that asshole simply walk up and shoot her in the head?

No.

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

I don't know much about this particular case (may the victim RIP despite the verdict here), but the fact that the guy who shot her was in this country at all, and free to roam at all, is itself a significant problem, and one that's a perfect example of how fucked up our border security and policies regarding illegal immigration are.

You all may recall, he had previously been deported FIVE times and has SEVEN prior felony convictions. And somehow we can't keep this guy off the streets?

What the actual fuck? This is much larger of a problem than SF's sanctuary city status.

Let's hope he's promptly run over by a steam roller, or worse.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel...

I hope you don't mind, though, if I start a petition to have San Francisco renamed to something more appropriate? The name "Hole In The Wall" comes to mind, at least until I can think of something that better characterizes that haven of criminals.

Anybody with me?

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

Uh huh.

Sorry, but not this time, JALLEN. I can believe that he didn't go out that day with the intention of killing someone, but for him--a previous multiple felon--to walk out of that courtroom today with zero punishment for killing an innocent woman is the very definition of injustice for that poor family.

But at least the jurors aren't racist.

Remember who this jury pool keeps electing by overwhelming majorities...

Sickening. Matt fucking Gonzalez...can't believe this shit-head reared his far-left head, now that his public profile has been reinvigorated, his renewed political career will also.

Kate Steinle's parents response

quote:

They also expressed frustration at the sanctimony and stubbornness of San Francisco politicians. In response to the outrage over Kate’s killing, the city modified its sanctuary policy only slightly, allowing notification of federal immigration authorities only when a person convicted of certain violent crimes is about to be released.

...

The trial was an ordeal for Kate’s parents. They had to hear what seemed like interminable monologues from public defender Matt Gonzalez. “That jury — God love ’em, God love ’em,” Liz said of their endurance of Gonzalez’s arguments, including his contention that the gun went off accidentally. “Just ridiculous stuff,” she added.

“I own a handgun,” Brad interjected. “I know that guns don’t just go off. But you have a jury full of people, the vast majority of which probably haven’t shot a gun before and don’t know the intricacies of how a gun works.”

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

Uh huh.

Sorry, but not this time, JALLEN. I can believe that he didn't go out that day with the intention of killing someone, but for him--a previous multiple felon--to walk out of that courtroom today with zero punishment for killing an innocent woman is the very definition of injustice for that poor family.

The only thing he got convicted of was Felony possession of a fire Arm... 2-5 years and he has been in jail for two years already.

Let's hope the Feds charge him with something.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Fuck them all..."an unintentionally discharged firearm"...bullshit!...stuff like this makes me mad as hell...fuck them all

My memory is getting old, but did that asshole simply walk up and shoot her in the head?

No.

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which

can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

There you go again, inserting rationality.

Based on the three articles I read, I think the prosecutors over reached. Murder requires deliberate action. The articles I read said testimony showed she was hit by a ricochet.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Fuck them all..."an unintentionally discharged firearm"...bullshit!...stuff like this makes me mad as hell...fuck them all

My memory is getting old, but did that asshole simply walk up and shoot her in the head?

No.

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which

can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

There you go again, inserting rationality.

Based on the three articles I read, I think the prosecutors over reached. Murder requires deliberate action. The articles I read said testimony showed she was hit by a ricochet.

What about involuntary manslaughter? Maybe I'm confused about what that means. What should this piece of garbage been charged with then if not manslaughter? That's a serious question.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

BULLSHIT JALLEN.

FACT: Defendant was a 5 time felon requested to be held by ICE and was released by Sancutary City SF.

FACT: THAT SPECIFIC EXACT GUN Killed Kate Steinle

FACT: THAT SPECIFIC EXACT GUN Was admitted by defendant to be in his possession immediately before it Killed Kate Steinle.

He was responsible for her death, period. It's in the facts of the case. Whether it's murder 1-13, manslaughter or whatever other legal term normal people don't really care, she died because of him and that gun in his possession. That he somehow got off for mere possession of an illegal weapon is an absolute travesty and for you to suggest anything else is quite frankly disgusting.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:


Uh huh.

Sorry, but not this time, JALLEN. I can believe that he didn't go out that day with the intention of killing someone, but for him--a previous multiple felon--to walk out of that courtroom today with zero punishment for killing an innocent woman is the very definition of injustice for that poor family.

Exactly. They won with a Twinkie defense.

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Fuck them all..."an unintentionally discharged firearm"...bullshit!...stuff like this makes me mad as hell...fuck them all

My memory is getting old, but did that asshole simply walk up and shoot her in the head?

No.

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which

can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

There you go again, inserting rationality.

Based on the three articles I read, I think the prosecutors over reached. Murder requires deliberate action. The articles I read said testimony showed she was hit by a ricochet.

That's the answer right there. Whether he was here illegally or at the invitation of the president, his legality status has no bearing on the criminal nature of the shooting. Zero.

The evidence showed the bullet skipped off concrete and then hit her. There was no evidence that he was shooting at concrete to shoot people so there goes intent which is necessary for 1st or 2nd degree charges.

What's left? Voluntary or involuntary manslaughter. Pick one and it's not voluntary.

I don't think the prosecution charged him with that but I could be wrong since the murder was the big charge. He was in possession of a firearm so he's popped for that. Discharge of a firearm in the city I'm not sure about since he claimed he picked up a shirt and the gun was in it unknown to him.

He's still facing possible civil matters but that's not worth the paper it's printed on.

Unless the DA held back on some charges, he's walking having served his time with credit for time already served.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:

quote:

Originally posted by Sig2340:

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

quote:

Originally posted by Elk Hunter:

quote:

Originally posted by Bisleyblackhawk:
Fuck them all..."an unintentionally discharged firearm"...bullshit!...stuff like this makes me mad as hell...fuck them all

My memory is getting old, but did that asshole simply walk up and shoot her in the head?

No.

I commend to all of you to avoid reaching firm, especially intemperate, conclusions about verdicts unless you have had the opportunity to see the evidence, hear the testimony, listen to the presentations of counsel. I have adopted this practice in my years of dealing with trial outcomes, and find it helpful in avoiding unjustified, mostly uninformed opinions which

can prove embarrassing when the real details are known.

There you go again, inserting rationality.

Based on the three articles I read, I think the prosecutors over reached. Murder requires deliberate action. The articles I read said testimony showed she was hit by a ricochet.

What about involuntary manslaughter? Maybe I'm confused about what that means. What should this piece of garbage been charged with then if not manslaughter? That's a serious question.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/art...Steinle-12396509.php

quote:

Prosecutors gave the jury the option of convicting him of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or involuntary manslaughter. Jurors rejected all three.

First would've been overcharge, second would've been a stretch but, involuntary manslaughter should've been a slam-dunk. Somehow a ricochet and minimally educated policeman conducting an interrogation of a man with a 2nd grade education was enough for this jury to let him off the hook.