Kate Steinle murder trial ended with acquittal of assailant.

1. 77

   jackclee lmposted 6 years ago

   Was justice served in this case?

   replyreport
2. 0

   ahorsebackposted 6 years ago

   The questions raised of this case holds the perfect answer to every single quest to enforce more gun laws on the law abiding citizen in America ,  A five  time deported illegal felon  with a blatant disregard for American law .
   
   Not Guilty .
   
   Oh no , there's not a thing wrong with our legal system in America ?
   
   Absolutely sickening justice system !

   replyreport
   1. 77

      jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      This is the reason we need to end sactuary cities. The real criminals are the city officials who support this insane policy. I would support bringing  charges against them for incompetency and criminal activity and failure to defend the citizens of San Francisco.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         I have actually been personally involved in similar injustice with the systematic BS. breakdown like this ,   I support far more actions than cutting off funds to states , churches ,homeless  shelters , and cities with similar track records  and track records they are .  I detest  activist judges like these .
         
         California  , Oregon , Washington    would be firsts on my list .

         replyreport
3. 61

   Live to Learnposted 6 years ago

   I don't now the full facts of the case but if the bullet ricocheted then it would not have been prudent to go for murder. Involuntary manslaughter sounds reasonable but I don't know what California law sets as the guidelines for this.
   
   Sounds to me as if the prosecution dropped the ball on this one.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      No they didn’t. The way the system works is the prosecution presents a slew of charges which can vary from murder to involutary manslaughter...and it is up the jury to decide on the guilt or innocence. In this case, it should have been guilty on the manslaughter charge becase the facts agree with the very definition of manslaughter. It is almost the same as a drunk driver killing another driver in a DUI case. This man was negligent in playing with a gun in a public place and accidentally discharged the gun and a person died as a result. The jury was wrong and there is no way around this or making excuses...

      replyreport
   2. 95

      wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      Agreed.  Not having sat through the trial, I cannot judge it any different than the jury did, and they apparently found the evidence of murder to be lacking.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         What about involuntary manslaughter...? It was one of the options on the table for the jury to consider...

         replyreport
         1. 0

            ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Juries , obviously representative   of our social attitudes and opines,  suffer the same moral and ethical , biases .     Until one has witness the sometimes moron factor of just one  jurist  in action , one believes that our system will always deliver justice.
            
            Not .

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               Sitting on a jury is a difficult task. Weighing evidence, void of emotional considerations, will often times result in a decision different from the one come to by those with will of the wisp conclusions that waiver with each news report.
               
               If you weren't in their shoes, with the information and instructions they were given, it is impossible to second guess.

               replyreport
               1. 77

                  jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  That is an excuse for a wrong conclusion. I served on a jury and we reached a conclusion that was just and it all depends on the judge, the lawyers involved and the people chosen to serve on the jury.
                  This case was politicized from the outset, just like the OJ case. The verdict did not fit the crime and it is almost an open and shut case.
                  The people are only humans and should have comon sense.
                  If no one is responsible for her death then what is the point of having any laws..
                  I am serious. If no consequences are imposed on this simple case, what chances are there for any other case? Against any undocumented immigrants?
                  If I am an undocumented immigrant, the message is clear. Move to San Francisco and you will be protected, no matter what. Is that the result you want?

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                     Since I do not possess all of the facts, I cannot come to a reasonable and mature conclusion. I support your right to do the opposite.

                     replyreport
         2. 95

            wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Having not sat through the trial...
            
            It always astounds me that people posting on the web will make legal calls without ever seeing or hearing even half of what was presented.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               What else could be presented in this particular case?
               Let me ask you this...
               If you were Kate’s family, can you imagine any scenario where this guy should be acquited of this crime?
               
               If not, I don’t need to sit in jury box and hear all that is being spewed by the defense.
               
               Let me rephrase that, unless it can be shown an alien from outer space drop by and affected the mind of this guy and caused what ensued...

               replyreport
            2. 0

               ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               Don't get me wrong , when I think about my life experiences and I mean this  respectfully . When I;m in a negative mood  I  sometimes find myself wishing  there were more people who have been the  witness of a violent death , as a family member or friend of the victim.   
               The opinions expressed here at times  show a  callous disregard for the victims of crime in general  and violent crime in particular .  There is a certain naive disregard , of some people in these forums for the overall state of all victims of crime.   I honestly find that morally  frustrating .

               replyreport
               1. 77

                  jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I totally agree. It seems to me, many people have lost their common sense. The sense of right and wrong. The sense to use their own brain and judgement to discern a situation and come to a reasonable conclusion. A good defense lawyer can put the doubt into anyone’s head. That is their job but a person does not have to buy into it.
                  The OJ trial was a prime example. All the evidence was there and yet, they jury aquited him.
                  
                  This case may only have meaning when someone is affected personally. Wait till the jurors or their family members become victims. Let’s see how they will rule in that case...

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                     Jack , I couldn't agree with you more ,   Let them once sit across the desk from some useless  chief of police  who won't answer any questions , provide any  details  and simley says , "I'll get back with you when I have something useful to tell you ". and then never does .

                     replyreport
                     1. 77

                        jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                        The people who supports sanctuary cities and also support gun control have a real problem here...
                        They will acquit a person who played with a stolen gun and ended up killing someone recklessly...
                        Yet they want to limit gun ownership by responsible citizens...
                        What is wrong with this picture?
                        
                        They have it ass backwards.
                        It is the person that kills using guns, the guns are not the problem. It is the person who wields the gun.

                        replyreport
                        1. 95

                           wildernessposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                           Unacceptable.  The guns MUST be the problem or the citizenry cannot be disarmed, the liberals won't be happy and the politicians won't get votes.
                           
                           Guns have to be declared the problem or the world will (figuratively) end for too many.  And if we do, and spend our resources on useless gun control laws the world really WILL end for a great many, just as it has in the past.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                              Their sad  attempt to create The Big Bad Wolf , instead of face reality head on .
                              Stop illegal immigration  and imagine all the democratic voters they won't recruit ?
                              
                              Next liberal conquest , let released felons vote again , more votes .

                              replyreport
4. 0

   ahorsebackposted 6 years ago

   "Court is dismissed" , Bring in the dancing clowns !

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

      And, see. That is why you would never be chosen for jury duty. Dancing clowns? You are expecting a show instead of a fair and honest trial.

      replyreport
      1. 77

         jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         That is not true here in NY. I was chosen to serve on a murder trial in my local county of Westchester and also on a US grand jury in downtown manhattan.

         replyreport
         1. 77

            jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            Moreover, our justice system demand that we are judged by a jury of our peers...
            In this case, there is no peers to speak of. To do so, you will need to pack the court with undocumented immigrants. If so, I think you will reach a better verdict than what we got.
            These jurors of San Francisco are creating an environment that will ultimately lead to their own destruction. It is their choice.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               I'm certain if you were given the power to be judge, jury, prosecuting and defense attorney; and were able to judge the case with superficial facts and a good dab of emotion, we'd all be happier

               replyreport
               1. 77

                  jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

                  I know how the law works and I am a defender of our Constitution. Unlike most judges and lawyers, I actually know more about the system than they do. What does that tell you about our justice system and how it has been perverted by these bureaucrats with an agenda. By the way, I include the Supreme Court in this as well. Some of our Justices cannot pass a basic test on our Constitution and yet they are ruling on the Constitutionality of our laws. What a joke.

                  replyreport
            2. 77

               jackclee lmposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               I am optimistic about this outcome.
               Perhaps it will finally get the national attention it deserves. Just perhaps, Congress will finally act and pass Kate’s Law and put an end to this sanctuary city and the revolving door of undocumented felonies returning to our coutry after being deported multiple times and committing more crimes...

               replyreport
      2. 0

         ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

         I have actually served on Two juries in violent crimes and both verdict outcomes were entirely resulting from  the , in my opinion , the  selected moral  ignorance of juror's.    ie..                         Jury Selection.
         Want a not- guilty verdict for assault , pick a panzie for a juror, 
         
         Want a not guilty verdict for a drug addicted crime , pick a recovering addict .
         
         Want a non-guilty verdict for a drunk driver crime , pick a recovering alcoholic.
         
         Not guilty for a corporate  , pick a businessman . Justice ? It is  all that simple.

         replyreport
         1. 61

            Live to Learnposted 6 years agoin reply to this

            So, you are a victim of 'selective moral ignorance'? You were, of course, one of the jurors.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               ahorsebackposted 6 years agoin reply to this

               Actually ,to that naive point ,as to a hung jury , I don't care that another guilty man walks free  there are millions of them on the street and  I wasn't a victim -the true integrity of  justice  was and is .
               
               But you know that already.

               replyreport
5. 78

   colorfuloneposted 6 years ago

   Indiana Rep. Todd Rokita’s bill “Stopping Lawless Actions of Politicians (SLAP) Act” would hold state and local lawmakers criminally responsible for refusing to comply with federal immigration enforcement efforts. The Republican’s bill would subject violators to a $1 million fine and up to five years in prison if they are convicted.
   *  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12 … rants.html
   
   Law and order...is needed!

   replyreport