Way to go San Francisco, California , Leftist slim . When it's your daughter or son who's the next victim of your ignorance I hope you remember that mock trial and bought jury . I bet this one goes all the way up to Soros and even Obama . Sicko people .

Seven time felon , five times deported was inadmissible . What a joke .  

If NOKO does go overboard ........

Sure, it may seem like accidently killing someone would be Involuntary Manslaughter, but that is only because you are a citizenist believer in honky male concepts like "law" and "reason" and "logic" and need to check your privilege.  He is non-White.  He is an Illegal.  Therefore he is sacred and should not be held to the same standards as the rest of us.  If our laws are enforced fairly and impartially, the Nazis will have won.    

Let the word go out from this time and place that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Libtards, willing to make others pay any price, or bear any burden, or meet any hardship, Libtards willing to betray any citizen, give sanctuary any illegal alien, to assure the end of the survival of these racist sexist heteronormative United States!  
Extremism in Resistance to Trump is no Vice, Moderation in Resistance to Trump is no Virtue!
Resistance to Trump Uber Alles!

As much as I hate that verdict, it is supported by the evidence that Kates tragic death was an accident.  According to the facts, the gun used had been stolen 4 days prior from a park rangers car.  Azarate claimed he found the gun under the seat he was sitting in wrapped in a t-shirt.  As he was unwrapping it, it went off.  The round ricocheted off the concrete surface of the pier and struck Kate who was nearly 100 feet away.

The prosecution could not prove that Azarte ever aimed the gun at Kate or anyone else, so no criminal intent could be shown.  Since the gun went off accidentally and there was no intent by Azarte to actually fire it, there was no legal basis for negligent homocide/involuntary manslaughter.  Under these facts, it was a tragic accident and no crime could be proven.  That’s how the law works.

The fact of Azarte’s immigration status is simply irrelevant except to racists who are trying to make this case into something more and other than it is.

Involuntary manslaughter in California occurs when one person kills another unintentionally, either
1.while committing a crime that is not an inherently dangerous California felony, OR
2.while committing a lawful act which might produce death, without due caution.1  

Under California Penal Code 192(b), the key feature of California involuntary manslaughter is that it does not require intent to kill another person—unlike Penal Code 187 murder, which requires “malice aforethought.”2

Whether it was an "Accident" or whether he aimed at her is immaterial to that charge if he didn't show due caution when handling a firearm, which he didn't if he accidently discharged it.  Secondly, it is very convenient that he "found" the stolen gun isnt' it because possessing the stolen firearm might involve case 1.  So, your defense of the verdict means that if the prosecution has proof that a gun was stolen, you had it, you shot it, and it kills someone, but you assert, Honest Injun! that you didn't steal the gun, and you didn't MEAN to shoot it, and you neither confess nor is there a witness or camera to show you shooting it on purpose, you walk free?  Honest I swear I didn't mean too! becomes a lib's get out of jail free card.

Azarte's immigration status is relevant in two respects.  First, even if we buy your naïve and credulous theory of accidental discharge (which itself is illegal and negligent) **He Should Not Have Been There**. He only was because of Liberals treating his kind of law breaking as a special kind, because he is not American and not white, two sacred categories, therefore they gave him sanctuary from the law.  Second, not believing that the Lib San Fran Trump Resistance jury considered his sacralized status is like believing the black ladies who acquitted OJ didn't consider he was a black man who killed one of those blonde bitches stealing their men, or believing that Harvard really gave no preference to a minority "Indian" woman over say a white man for Law School hiring.  

In both cases, you defense relies on credulity of those who protest they didn't do anything wrong, promise.

because while I will admit this is not a case I have followed very closely, from what I have heard and read, I am inclined to agree with you on this one.

 
As far as his immigration status, I also have to agree that while he should not be in this country, it would have been both prejudicial to the jury and irrelevant as to whether or not he had committed a crime.  Assuming those were the "facts" of the case of course. If the "facts" turned out to be something else, obviously my opinion would change if it turned out that wasn't how the shooting occurred after all, but since all I have to go by is the same information presented to the jury, I have to agree they made the right call.

Involuntary manslaughter requires a volitional act in California and elsewhere.  The usual example is you were aiming your gun at a paper target, not realizing there is somebody standing behind it and you kill the person.  You should have reasonably known there was somebody there.  You owed that person a duty of care and breached that duty.  

It does not lie in an accidental discharge while handling a gun without negligence.  Involuntary manslaughter is also known in other jurisdiction as negligent homicide.  The prosecution was not able to prove that Zarate handled the gun negligently ir even knew about Kate. So no manslaughter.  

I do understand this is s difficult concept to grasp.  To better understand the jury’s finding you should read the instruction given them CALJIC 580.  

Whether it not Zarate actually had stolen the gun was not in evidence because there was no evidence of that in spite of substantial investigation trying to link him to it.  But yeah I agree it looks fishy.  Unfortunately looking fishy is inadmissible.

can go on when logic, reasoning and facts are set aside for stupid partisan rant.

why were you not the prosecuting attorney?  

The prosecutors didn't call you on the basis of your in-depth knowledge of California Law and you didn't offer your services, why?

Do you realize how stupid you sound? Probably not.

I agree your read on the law is correct.  But to this, " Involuntary manslaughter is also known in other jurisdiction as negligent homicide.  The prosecution was not able to prove that Zarate handled the gun negligently ir even knew about Kate. So no manslaughter.  "  Given the verdict I again have to agree.  

But I would love to know the prosecutor's argument. Finding a gun, and then handling it in some manner so it goes off is not this guys fault?  Do we believe the testimony that he somehow kicked it and it went off, and while the gun from a position on the ground fired a bullet that somehow skipped off the pavement up into the poor girl?  Did they find a mark on the pavement in a spot which would support the path of the bullet? By my calcs it would have to be within 1-2 feet of where the gun was supposedly on the pavement, assuming the 100 ft distance and the girl being shot about 40 inches above ground.  This mark would confirm or deny the "kicked it" claim.

In a world where we routinely find lawyers who can prove to juries that some action was someone else's fault and they were negligent this jury could not be convinced that the one person who in some way touched the gun so as to make it fire was not negligent.  Sad to say, based on some jury experience I had, I can see that some people will buy anything.

I absolutely hate this case and the fact it occurred and I get why people are so angry. I’m fucking angry about it!  Zarate should have not been in that place with a gun and the whole thing resulted from some terrible fuck ups by the feds.  

First ICE ignored the SFPD notification that this guy was being released and to come and pick him up.  ICE never replied and SFPD couldn’t legally detain him - SFPD has no jurisdiction over immigration matters and had to let the guy go.  This is why the “sanctuary city” designation is such bullshit.  All cities are “sanctuary cities” because immigration is solely in Federal Jurisdiction.  ICE routinely ignores local requests for transfer unless its a big name drug lord or a known terrorist.  If those idiots at ICE did their fucking job and paid attention to its criminal enforcement duties instead of raiding clothing factories for once, this tragedy would have never happened.  Unfortunately ICE is immune from any lawsuit for failing to do that.  The government writes the laws and one thing they did was to grant themselves immunity from suit for failing to exercise a non-mandatory duty.  It’s called discretionary immunity.  It why we need to change that law and hold these morons responsible when they ignore their job duties.  If it were you or me working in the private sector, we’d be fired for that.  These bozos get a medal.

Next, some dumb ass BLM ranger leaves his duty weapon in his unlocked car overnight.  Of course it’s gone the next day.  The whole story of Zarate finding it wrapped up in a t-shirt under the bench he was sitting in sounds like bullshit, but it is possible.  Fortunately (in a relative manner that is) Kates family is suing BLM for negligence and I hope they end up owning the Presidio.

But I’m more angry about these Trumtards on this board trying to politicize this by stupidly crying “its the libs fault!”  That is utter ignorant moronic bullshit and if I ever happen to meet any of you I will beat the living shit out you in hopes of beating some brains back into you.  That’s what we call schooling down on the ranch.  I have to go shovel horse shit now - I will feel better afterwards.

So yes, :shutter:: I do watch fox news. I was had, based on the tone of fox news. I thought this guy, Zarate, stalked, and murdered Kate Steinle in cold blood, like it could have been a robbery gone wrong or something along those lines. Then as I read or find out more about this, this was unfortunate accidental death, I mean the bullet hits a cement wall, ricochets around the Transamerica building, make its way through the Embarcadero District, makes a left to Pier 14 and strikes Kate Steinle. Yup this sounded planned to me.  
It was a horrible accident, by someone who shouldn't have been here...but I'm sure if you look a MADD, you'll see correlations in drunk drivers death.

I don't really watch a lot of Fox News, but until a couple of days ago I too thought we were talking about a MURDER, perhaps committed while the perpetrator was trying to rob or rape her.  

 
I too was rather surprised to learn the actual facts of the matter and the only real debate was how "negligent" Zarate might have been or not been, and that NO ONE was claiming he had ANY intent to do this poor woman harm.

 
I will give you this opportunity to change your mind about this case, I know it will most likely be a bit embarrassing to find out that I not only agree with you on this subject, but on your latest post on GD as well. Don't worry, you have four hours to edit your post. lol

Next you'll be seeing old broads and I'll be hitting on 20 yo's with a bottle of tequila under my arm...fuck, the horror!!!!
What have we become...lol

to clarify the issue, while Trump continues to make it about a political issue regarding immigration and sanctuary cities, and bash our judicial system. He is sliming the good men and women on that jury panel, who, I imagine did the best they could, to give a fair verdict, based on the information given.