Kate Steinle’s accused killer found not guilty

[John Connor]

This sanctuary city BS is the start of a civil war. Just look at how that started.

 

[John Connor]

I would think there needs to be extraordinary circumstances for me to think the jury got the verdict wrong.

So you think juries never get verdicts wrong? Hmm, why I bet you think OJ Simpson is an honest man caught up in a murder. Wonder who really murdered his wife and Ron Goldman?

 

[SViscusi]

So right now, go rob the 7/11 down the street. Point the gun at the wall and floor and fire it. Hit one or two people with richochets and kill them.

Scott free!

Hell.. make it even easier. You don't even TOUCH the gun. Have your buddy rob the 7/11 and you just stand dumbly by and watch as an accomplice. Have him fire the gun at the floor and richochets kill someone.

You'll get off Scott free. I promise.

You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?

 

[John Connor]

You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?

Intent doesn't matter dummy.

 

[sandorski]

I think you're making it sound too simple. Had the bastard not been here in the first place it wouldn't have happened. How the fuck do you "accidentally" pull the trigger? Never mind the fact the cock sucker was deported 6 damn times and was a multiple felon. Why would you have a gun in the first damn place? This right here underscores the fact this verdict is bullshit to the highest order. I personally think this San Fran nut job jurists wanted to stick it to Trump, and in the process a murderer gets off Scott free, the family gets no justice and your "murcia" is up in arms.

moot

 

[sandorski]

Intent doesn't matter dummy.

It does, always.

 

[SViscusi]

Intent doesn't matter dummy.

Then why exactly are there differrent degrees in murder, robbery, manslaughter and a whole host of other crimes like intent to distribute?

Do you try and be this stupid or does it come naturally?

 

[Maxima1]

Then why exactly are there differrent degrees in murder, robbery, manslaughter and a whole host of other crimes like intent to distribute?

Do you try and be this stupid or does it come naturally?

I think his point was that you can get manslaughter for not intending to harm anyone.

But from little I know, they tend to be lenient on accidents involving guns.

https://newrepublic.com/article/121632/why-are-states-so-reluctant-prosecute-gun-negligence-crime

 

[Zaap]

You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?

Do you even bother to read anything before posting?

The whole case revolves around these "aspects".

 

[John Connor]

It does, always.

No, it doesn't "always."

 

[John Connor]

Then why exactly are there differrent degrees in murder, robbery, manslaughter and a whole host of other crimes like intent to distribute?

Do you try and be this stupid or does it come naturally?

You answered your own question.

 

[Victorian Gray]

You answered your own question.

It's both natural *and* you work at it?

 

[John Connor]

It's both natural *and* you work at it?

What?

 

[SViscusi]

Do you even bother to read anything before posting?

The whole case revolves around these "aspects".

Do you even read your posts. You're point was that this decision somehow meant that ricochets negated culpability irregardless of other factors.

 

[John Connor]

Do you even read your posts. You're point was that this decision somehow meant that ricochets negated culpability irregardless of other factors.

So I am gonna pull the ricochet defense when I kill someone. Yeah, that'll work out for me.

 

[Muse]

The writing was all over the wall on this one. It was obvious they had to find him not guilty. There was no evidence he even intended to pull the trigger. The bullet ricochet off the tarmac before it struck her. The gun may have been in his pocket, IIRC. He was itinerant, completely footloose, likely addled (major drug problems) may indeed have simply found the gun. There was zero evidence he intended to shoot her other than the fact that the bullet hit her. Tragic incident, absolutely, but this guy wasn't convictable of murder given the facts.

 

[SViscusi]

So I am gonna pull the ricochet defense when I kill someone. Yeah, that'll work out for me.

You're really getting dumber by the post. The whole point is there is no valid ricochet defense when there is the intent to harm or that there's a reasonable belief that harm may be caused by a specific action.

 

[Victorian Gray]

What?

You said that he answered his own question.

 

[Puffnstuff]

One thing is for sure. Trump just got reelected.

As king of the a$$hats.

 

[Muse]

This right here just goes to show you just how damn fucked up California and San Fransisco truly. is. This is an outrage and this despicable piece of shit will be judged by the only true judge, God.

Dude, you are just showing how uneducated you are. God is in that courtroom, God found him not guilty. This is a court of law. The man was judged on the evidence which demanded an acquittal except that he should have known that as a felon he couldn't possess a gun. There is no evidence that he even intended to fire the gun, much less at the victim. The bullet hit the ground before it hit her.

 

[Muse]

Yet if illegals weren't here they wouldn't be killing any Americans now would they?

Is that John Wayne speaking?

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yet if illegals weren't here they wouldn't be killing any Americans now would they?

not necessarily

 

[ch33zw1z]

It's both natural *and* you work at it?

the hard work is really paying off

 

[pcgeek11]

You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?

It does, always.

Intent doesn't always matter.

I agree that the murder charge was way over the top and there was no way for that to stand. I do feel that by definition he was guilty and should have been convicted of Involuntary Manslaughter.

Involuntary manslaughter usually refers to an unintentional killing that results from recklessness or criminal negligence, or from an unlawful act that is a misdemeanor or low-level felony (such as a DUI). The usual distinction from voluntary manslaughter is that involuntary manslaughter (sometimes called "criminally negligent homicide") is a crime in which the victim's death is unintended.

The case meets all of these:

unintentional killing that results from recklessness or criminal negligence, or from an unlawful act that is a misdemeanor or low-level felony (such as a DUI)

He didn't intend to kill anyone, but he did.
Criminal negligence, Unlawful Act - It was a crime when he possessed the firearm.

 

[Victorian Gray]

the hard work is really paying off

Apparently.