Illegal immigrant acquitted of murder in San Francisco, Trump slams verdict

[webfact]

Illegal immigrant acquitted of murder in San Francisco, Trump slams verdict

By Alex Dobuzinskis

 

FILE PHOTO: Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, arrested in connection with the July 1, 2015, shooting of Kate Steinle on a pier in San Francisco is led into the Hall of Justice for his arraignment in San Francisco, California, U.S. on July 7, 2015. REUTERS/Michael Macor/Pool/File Photo

 

(Reuters) - An illegal immigrant from Mexico was acquitted of murder and manslaughter by a San Francisco jury on Thursday in the fatal shooting of a woman that Donald Trump used as a rallying cry against "sanctuary cities" during his presidential campaign.

 

Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, 45, who had been deported to Mexico five times since first entering the United States as a juvenile, was charged in the July 1, 2015, killing of Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier.

 

Defense attorneys said Garcia Zarate found the gun and it accidentally discharged, the bullet ricocheting off the ground at the pier frequented by tourists before striking the woman.

 

Prosecutors had argued Garcia Zarate intentionally fired the gun when he struck Steinle with a bullet.

 

The jury, while acquitting Garcia Zarate of murder, manslaughter and assault charges, found him guilty of the lesser charge of being a felon in possession of a firearm, said Max Szabo, a spokesman for the San Francisco District Attorney's Office.

 

The sentence for that crime in California can range between 16 months and three years in prison.

 

The case became a lightning rod for Trump and others in the push to halt illegal immigration and penalize so-called sanctuary cities, such as San Francisco, which limit their assistance to federal immigration authorities.

 

"A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case!" Trump wrote on Twitter. "No wonder the people of our country are so angry with illegal immigration."

 

Before the shooting, Garcia Zarate, who previously was known as Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez, was released from a San Francisco jail despite a request by immigration authorities that he be detained for deportation.

 

Sanctuary supporters say enlisting police in deportation actions undermines community trust in law enforcement, particularly among Latinos.

 

Jim Steinle, the father of Kate, told the San Francisco Chronicle the family was "saddened and shocked" by the verdict.

"Justice was rendered, but it was not served," he told the newspaper.

 

In June, the U.S. House of Representatives passed "Kate's Law," named for the 32-year-old Steinle, that would increase penalties for illegal immigrants who return to the United States. The bill has not passed the U.S. Senate.

 

Since taking office as president in January, Trump and his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, have sought to cut federal funding for sanctuary cities but have suffered setbacks in court.

 

In a statement after the verdict, Sessions said San Francisco officials' "decision to protect criminal aliens led to the preventable and heartbreaking death of Kate Steinle."

 

He added, "I urge the leaders of the nation's communities to reflect on the outcome of this case and consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to cooperate with federal law enforcement officers."

 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will deport Garcia Zarate at the conclusion of the criminal case, ICE deputy director Tom Homan said in a statement that also criticized his 2015 release from jail.

 

A representative for the San Francisco sheriff's department, which runs the city's jails, could not be reached for comment late on Thursday.

 

"There was a tremendous amount of misinformation that was spread about this case from day one," San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi told reporters outside the courtroom. "You had then-candidate Trump espousing that this was an intentional shooting."

 

(Reporting by Alex Dobuzinskis in Los Angeles; Additional reporting by Dan Whitcomb in Los Angeles; Editing by Peter Cooney and Clarence Fernandez)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-12-01

[Bluespunk]

1 hour ago, webfact said:

 

"A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case!" Trump wrote on Twitter. "No wonder the people of our country are so angry with illegal immigration."

Yes, how dare the court adhere to the rules of law and actually base a verdict on the evidence. 

 

Was it not aware this person is a filthy foreigner who has no rights. 

 

Surely the court realises the thoughts and prejudices of the grand poobah of trumptopia are of more importance than judicial process. 

 

(Sarcasm alert)

Edited December 1, 2017 by Bluespunk

[darksidedog]

I will accept the verdict of a jury, however unpalatable, that has sat and listened to the detailed evidence, over someone who has not, as should all reasonable and educated people. Especially if persons commenting on it are doing so for political mileage.

Every person in every case, should be judged based on evidence, not where they originate from.

[FreddieRoyle]

I can not accept this situation, it should never have had the chance to happen. The guy had been deported what 5 times already? The person that let him out on the street, which I believe was technically an illegal act is just as responsible as the murderer.  The ironic thing is, that travesties of justice like this, will push more and more people into a strongly anti-immigrant attitude. 

 Condolences again to the Steinle family, this must be totally unbearable, plus being thrust into the limelight again thanks to this violent illegal and apparently broken judicial system in California.

[Blue Muton]

28 minutes ago, FreddieRoyle said:

I can not accept this situation, it should never have had the chance to happen. The guy had been deported what 5 times already? The person that let him out on the street, which I believe was technically an illegal act is just as responsible as the murderer.  The ironic thing is, that travesties of justice like this, will push more and more people into a strongly anti-immigrant attitude. 

 Condolences again to the Steinle family, this must be totally unbearable, plus being thrust into the limelight again thanks to this violent illegal and apparently broken judicial system in California.

There was no murder, so why spread lies about it? Or do you not understand the verdict (I realise that you don't like the verdict but your dislike for it doesn't negate it)?

[metisdead]

An off topic post has been removed. 

[ballpoint]

Are there no contempt of court laws in the US?  At the very least, Trump has once again jeopardised any chance of a fair appeal.

[LostinSEA]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Yes, how dare the court adhere to the rules of law and actually base a verdict on the evidence. 

 

Was it not aware this person is a filthy foreigner who has no rights. 

 

Surely the court realises the thoughts and prejudices of the grand poobah of trumptopia are of more importance than judicial process. 

 

(Sarcasm alert)

I'm from the UK so don't know the laws in the US but thought that if you killed somebody (even by accident) whilst committing a crime it was considered murder.

 

Quick Google brings back "Death during the Commission of a Felony"... https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html  so surely either the guy is completely innocent of all charges or guilty of murder...

 

 

[KMartinHandyman]

Possibly the prosecutions charges didn’t include involuntary manslaughter or accidental homicide that would allow the jury to reach a guilty verdict.
It appears to be a case of jury nullification.

[Bluespunk]

20 minutes ago, LostinSEA said:

I'm from the UK so don't know the laws in the US but thought that if you killed somebody (even by accident) whilst committing a crime it was considered murder.

 

Quick Google brings back "Death during the Commission of a Felony"... https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html  so surely either the guy is completely innocent of all charges or guilty of murder...

 

 

The courts, going on evidence and the rules of law, judged him accordingly. 

 

If the prosecution has a problem with the verdict then they can appeal. 

 

It is not the role of trump to rant on twitter because the verdict does follow his agenda. 

 

Mind, it’s not his role to post the fabricated videos of facist groups on twitter, but he does that as well...

 

[ilostmypassword]

8 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The courts, going on evidence and the rules of law, judged him accordingly. 

 

If the prosecution has a problem with the verdict then they can appeal. 

 

It is not the role of trump to rant on twitter because the verdict does follow his agenda. 

 

Mind, it’s not his role to post the fabricated videos of facist groups on twitter, but he does that as well...

 

Actually, the government can't appeal a not guilty verdict.

[the guest]

When it goes to the Supreme court, Trump will cut funding to San-Fransisco liberalites, will teach them a hard lesson in protecting criminals that enter USA illegally.  

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, the guest said:

When it goes to the Supreme court, Trump will cut funding to San-Fransisco liberalites, will teach them a hard lesson in protecting criminals that enter USA illegally.  

I'm assuming you're referring to sanctuary cities. I've got bad news for you. It was conservative judges who ruled that the Federal Government has  no right to compel State workers to do the Fed'd work. Something about Federalism. You should look it up.

[lannarebirth]

31 minutes ago, LostinSEA said:

I'm from the UK so don't know the laws in the US but thought that if you killed somebody (even by accident) whilst committing a crime it was considered murder.

 

Quick Google brings back "Death during the Commission of a Felony"... https://www.lawyers.com/legal-info/criminal/criminal-law-basics/murder-during-the-commission-of-a-felony.html  so surely either the guy is completely innocent of all charges or guilty of murder...

 

 

 

Normally with murder charges there are degrees of intent to commit murder. First degree (pre-meditated), Second degree (intentional but not premeditated), Manslaughter (voluntary but not pre-meditated), and involuntary manslaughter. Many times charges will include instructions to the jury that if they cannot find the defendent guilty of the charge in question they may consider and return a verdict on the lesser charge. I can only imagine that that instruction was not given in this case. Even the defense's theory of the case should have led to an involuntary manslaughter conviction IMO.

[Bluespunk]

12 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Actually, the government can't appeal a not guilty verdict.

Can’t they? Didnt realise that. 

 

Doesn’t make trump’s twitter rant any more correct though. 

 

The courts decided the verdict based on evidence, he needs to deal with it. 

Edited December 1, 2017 by Bluespunk

[LostinSEA]

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

The courts, going on evidence and the rules of law, judged him accordingly. 

 

If the prosecution has a problem with the verdict then they can appeal. 

 

It is not the role of trump to rant on twitter because the verdict does follow his agenda. 

 

Mind, it’s not his role to post the fabricated videos of facist groups on twitter, but he does that as well...

 

I agree with your comments about it's not Trumps place to get involved and at best he's doing the prosecution no favours, but like I said there seems to be a fair case for a Murder verdict (1st or 2nd Degree) by the fact that he was committing a crime by picking up the gun when the (Let's not forget) innocent young lady was killed (murdered).

 

Hey, I've lived in Singapore for the past 9 years, the guy would have been dead already here just for the fact the gun went off (Whether it hit somebody or not).

 

 

 

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, LostinSEA said:

I agree with your comments about it's not Trumps place to get involved and at best he's doing the prosecution no favours, but like I said there seems to be a fair case for a Murder verdict (1st or 2nd Degree) by the fact that he was committing a crime by picking up the gun when the (Let's not forget) innocent young lady was killed (murdered).

 

Hey, I've lived in Singapore for the past 9 years, the guy would have been dead already here just for the fact the gun went off (Whether it hit somebody or not).

 

 

 

I’ll take California law anytime. 

 

Intent matters in my view. 

 

However I’m not a lawyer or judge.

 

The court’s decided, I’m assuming that the verdict reached was in accordance with the law. 

[LostinSEA]

2 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Normally with murder charges there are degrees of intent to commit murder. First degree (pre-meditated), Second degree (intentional but not premeditated), Manslaughter (voluntary but not pre-meditated), and involuntary manslaughter. Many times charges will include instructions to the jury that if they cannot find the defendent guilty of the charge in question they may consider and return a verdict on the lesser charge. I can only imagine that that instruction was not given in this case. Even the defense's theory of the case should have led to an involuntary manslaughter conviction IMO.

Sorry, I disagree... the law seems very clear that if somebody dies as a result of you committing a (any) crime it's murder (1st or 2nd degree).

 

Obviously I'm wrong, as this case has shown, but suspect politics & not the Law swung the verdict (hey, I'm a Brit, living in Singapore for the past decade so have no dog in this game & far too much politics to deal with around Brexit,  so will bow out now....)

 

 

Edited December 1, 2017 by LostinSEA

[ilostmypassword]

7 minutes ago, LostinSEA said:

I agree with your comments about it's not Trumps place to get involved and at best he's doing the prosecution no favours, but like I said there seems to be a fair case for a Murder verdict (1st or 2nd Degree) by the fact that he was committing a crime by picking up the gun when the (Let's not forget) innocent young lady was killed (murdered).

 

Hey, I've lived in Singapore for the past 9 years, the guy would have been dead already here just for the fact the gun went off (Whether it hit somebody or not).

 

 

 

Really? First degree murder? So you think the murder was premeditated?

Second degree murder requires "malice aforethought". Any evidence for that?

Manslaughter would be the appropriate charge but it looks like politics got in the way.

[ilostmypassword]

1 minute ago, LostinSEA said:

Sorry, I disagree... the law seems very clear that if somebody dies as a result of you committing a (any) crime it's murder (1st or 2nd degree).

 

Obviously I'm wrong, as this case has shown, but suspect politics & not the Law swung the verdict (hey, I'm a Brit, living in Singapore for the past decade so have no dog in this game & far too much politics to deal with about Brexit so will bow out now....)

 

 

No, you're wrong. If there was no intent, whether long or short term, it would be a lesser charge like manslaughter.

[LostinSEA]

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

I’ll take California law anytime. 

 

Intent matters in my view. 

 

However I’m not a lawyer or judge.

 

The court’s decided, I’m assuming that the verdict reached was in accordance with the law. 

Unless it's divorce!!!

 

Joke :)

 

[boomerangutang]

2 hours ago, ballpoint said:

Are there no contempt of court laws in the US?  At the very least, Trump has once again jeopardised any chance of a fair appeal.

Correct.  Similarly, the killer who drove the truck in NYC, about than a month ago, will probably get a lighter sentence - because Trump can't keep his pie-hole shut.

 

4 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Really? First degree murder? So you think the murder was premeditated?

Second degree murder requires "malice aforethought". Any evidence for that?

Manslaughter would be the appropriate charge but it looks like politics got in the way.

Perhaps the prosecutors did consider manslaughter, but then Trump, with his big mouth, muddied the waters, and compelled prosecutors to go for a stiffer charge.

[LostinSEA]

1 minute ago, ilostmypassword said:

No, you're wrong. If there was no intent, whether long or short term, it would be a lesser charge like manslaughter.

As my 1st post (hopefully) clearly said, I thought there was a US law that said if somebody dies as a result of you committing a crime you would be guilty of 1st or 2nd degree murder (obviously judged on the Intent).

 

So if you rob a store, fire you're weapon to 1 side and hit an innocent person... Murder (1st or 2nd).

Pick up a gun & discharge it & somebody dies (ricochet or not) - Murder... (1st or 2nd).

 

As I said, where I live picking the gun up will get you life in prison, discharging it (even straight up in the air) will get you the death penalty... Funny how you never hear of gun (or knife) crime here... 

 

 

 

 

[LostinSEA]

25 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Really? First degree murder? So you think the murder was premeditated?

Second degree murder requires "malice aforethought". Any evidence for that?

Manslaughter would be the appropriate charge but it looks like politics got in the way.

To be fair, I made no comment on the judgement or the guys guilt/sentence but simply a  comment / question on... 

        A= "If somebody dies as a result of your criminal activity it's 1st or 2nd degree murder"

        B= "Somebody died as a result of your criminal activity"

 

If the guy has been convicted (B) on a criminal charge, how come A) didn't come into play...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2017 by LostinSEA

[ilostmypassword]

16 minutes ago, LostinSEA said:

As my 1st post (hopefully) clearly said, I thought there was a US law that said if somebody dies as a result of you committing a crime you would be guilty of 1st or 2nd degree murder (obviously judged on the Intent).

 

So if you rob a store, fire you're weapon to 1 side and hit an innocent person... Murder (1st or 2nd).

Pick up a gun & discharge it & somebody dies (ricochet or not) - Murder... (1st or 2nd).

 

As I said, where I live picking the gun up will get you life in prison, discharging it (even straight up in the air) will get you the death penalty... Funny how you never hear of gun (or knife) crime here... 

 

 

 

 

But there isn't such a law. Moreover, the defendant was tried under California State Law, not Federal Law. In most cases homicides don't fall under Federal Purview in the USA.

[LostinSEA]

Just now, ilostmypassword said:

But there isn't such a law. Moreover, the defendant was tried under California State Law, not Federal Law. In most cases homicides don't fall under Federal Purview in the USA.

Obviously there is such a law, but maybe it doesn't apply in California (again, I'm from the UK (England) where the whole country would be swallowed up by most, if not all, of your states so we have no concept of the Law being any different in any part of the Country) 

 

[USPatriot]

Liberal California no surprise

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, LostinSEA said:

Obviously there is such a law, but maybe it doesn't apply in California (again, I'm from the UK (England) where the whole country would be swallowed up by most, if not all, of your states so we have no concept of the Law being any different in any part of the Country) 

 

Why is that obvious? Try googling first degree murder and second degree murder. You'll be disappointed.

[LostinSEA]

1 minute ago, USPatriot said:

Liberal California no surprise

Again, unless it comes to divorce

 

[LostinSEA]

7 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

Why is that obvious? Try googling first degree murder and second degree murder. You'll be disappointed.

Try Googling "Death during the Commission of a Felony", it might open your eyes... 

 

I'll quote from the Top google result...  http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=741

 

felony murder doctrine n. a rule of criminal statutes that any death which occurs during the commission of a felony is first degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the holdup men or women is killed, his/her fellow robbers can be charged with murder.

 

Edited December 1, 2017 by LostinSEA