Jury finds undocumented immigrant not guilty of murder of Kate Steinle
- Thread starter squerly
- Start date
when our ancestors settled this country there were few lawyers and fewer laws. In this case the killer would never have seen a jail cell. Following history it seems the scum outnumbered law abiding citizens. Written history does not reflect when the 1st group of vigilantes were formed, however you can bet that something similar to this occurred to make honest citizens say "enough is enough"
I'm just as appalled, astonished. I was sure that he would be convicted of negligent homicide or something, similar to a DUI death.
The woman was 80 ft away and was hit by a ricochet off the pavement. The drugged up crazy guy said he fired three times while the forensics guy testified the gun was fired once.
First degree murder would require that the idiot intended to kill her. The prosecutor made a grave error in choosing a more harsh charge than was supported by the testimony the jurors heard. They apparently were persuaded the crazy guy acted without intent to kill her and ruled accordingly as a rebuke to an overzealous prosecutor. I don't agree with that but I can see how it could happen.
I was on a jury in a similar but less serious case. Idiot lady laid down her bicycle in the middle of the street on a curve in the dark, while she talked to a motorist who stopped on the curve. Defendant had a reason to be angry at her, she had just left visiting his ex wife or something. Defendant roared up and ran over the bicycle at high speed. Attempted manslaughter? The jury discussion concluded that this wasn't proven by the testimony we heard. We would have supported a charge of intimidation or something but she wasn't hit and an intent to maim her wasn't proven. One other juror and I saw how this was going and refused to allow an acquittal, as a strategy to make a hung jury so that he could be tried again on the same charges.
Judge called us in and asked why we were hung, didn't rule guilty or innocent. I said it was clear the State wanted this guy off the street but all the testimony was attacking the bicycle lady's credibility - welfare cheat etc, and never proved the defended intended to harm her rather than just frighten her.
We then learned defendant had been out of prison for a week and this would have been the third strike to put him away 10 years. Now there would have to be some other - inevitable - incident before he could be put away.
We're not all crazy here. With 40 million people and less than half of them California-born, we're just diverse. Don't be afraid to visit.
The woman was 80 ft away and was hit by a ricochet off the pavement. The drugged up crazy guy said he fired three times while the forensics guy testified the gun was fired once.
First degree murder would require that the idiot intended to kill her. The prosecutor made a grave error in choosing a more harsh charge than was supported by the testimony the jurors heard. They apparently were persuaded the crazy guy acted without intent to kill her and ruled accordingly as a rebuke to an overzealous prosecutor. I don't agree with that but I can see how it could happen.
I was on a jury in a similar but less serious case. Idiot lady laid down her bicycle in the middle of the street on a curve in the dark, while she talked to a motorist who stopped on the curve. Defendant had a reason to be angry at her, she had just left visiting his ex wife or something. Defendant roared up and ran over the bicycle at high speed. Attempted manslaughter? The jury discussion concluded that this wasn't proven by the testimony we heard. We would have supported a charge of intimidation or something but she wasn't hit and an intent to maim her wasn't proven. One other juror and I saw how this was going and refused to allow an acquittal, as a strategy to make a hung jury so that he could be tried again on the same charges.
Judge called us in and asked why we were hung, didn't rule guilty or innocent. I said it was clear the State wanted this guy off the street but all the testimony was attacking the bicycle lady's credibility - welfare cheat etc, and never proved the defended intended to harm her rather than just frighten her.
We then learned defendant had been out of prison for a week and this would have been the third strike to put him away 10 years. Now there would have to be some other - inevitable - incident before he could be put away.
We're not all crazy here. With 40 million people and less than half of them California-born, we're just diverse. Don't be afraid to visit.
I'm not sure CA. Yea, you have 40M but something like 1 in 10 workers (and the same ration of residents?) are illegals and your government is protecting them more than its citizens. Just friggin lunacy from your governor on down.
We did a vacation there just over a year ago, doing the San Diego to LA corridor and to be honest, putting that area in the rear view mirror was one of the highlights of the vacation IMHO. Absolutely beautiful State but ruined by the inhabitants.
California is forever more scratched from our travels. Y'all have some serious issues.
Look how much you missed! For perspective:
As for employment: it is the more conservative employers that you need to go after, to end hiring illegals. Never gonna happen. They have the lobbying power to set state policy.
As for employment: it is the more conservative employers that you need to go after, to end hiring illegals. Never gonna happen. They have the lobbying power to set state policy.