KATE STEINLE’S KILLER ACQUITTED, SPARKING SHOCK, OUTRAGE

 

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Immediately following the announcement late Wednesday that Kate
Steinle’s killer, an illegal immigrant going by the name of Garcia
Zarate (he had many aliases), shown, was only going to be charged with
felony possession of a handgun and not first-degree murder or even
manslaughter, social media lit up. Cyrus Firth twittered:
“Let’s get this straight … in San Francisco, can you: – come here
illegally? YES; – Unlawfully obtain a gun? YES; – Kill an innocent girl?
YES; – be found “not guilty” for all? YES. THIS IS WHAT A SANCTUARY
CITY LOOKS LIKE.”

Others were more temperate. President Donald Trump, who used outrage
over the killing of Steinle back in July 2015 as part of his campaign
for the presidency, called the verdict “disgraceful,” adding, “No wonder
the people of our Country are so angry with illegal immigration.”
Attorney General Jeff Sessions blamed San Francisco’s politicians for
Steinle’s death:

Jim Steinle, Kate’s father who was with her when she was shot,
expressed shock at the jury’s verdict: “We’re just shocked — saddened
and shocked — that’s about it. There’s no other way you can coin it.
Justice was rendered but it was not served.”

The narrative surrounding the charge of murder or manslaughter in the
case is familiar: an illegal alien, who had been deported five times
but returned to the United States a sixth time, with a record of seven
felony arrests, is allowed to go free by San Francisco authorities even
when they knew ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) agents asked to
be notified so they could pick him up for deportation. Within a few
months, said illegal immigrant finds a gun, mishandles it, sending a
round off the pavement and into the back of a young girl who dies within
hours.

After weeks of hearing testimony the six-man, six-woman jury — three
of whom were legal immigrants — deliberated for six days before reaching
a verdict. They had to decide whether the shooting was intentional, or
an accident. The lawyer for the alien immigrant, Matt Gonzalez said the
verdict was legitimate and should be respected:

The challenge facing the prosecution was somewhat sizable: There was
only circumstantial evidence upon which it could build a case. It had to
prove that Zarate’s killing of Steinle either was both willful and
premeditated, or was the unlawful killing of a human being without
malice aforethought. For first-degree murder charges to stick, the
prosecution had to prove to the jury “beyond a reasonable doubt” that
Zarate intended to kill Steinle. The Legal Dictionary defines that term
as such “that no other logical explanation can be derived from the facts
except that the defendant committed the crime, thereby overcoming the
presumption that a person is innocent until proven guilty.” The only way
Zarate could have been convicted was for the prosecution to be so
persuasive that the jurors “have no doubt as to the defendant’s guilt,
or if their only doubts are unreasonable doubts.” The prosecution had to
prove to the jurors, at the very least, that Zarate pulled the trigger
of the gun. His pulling of the trigger in a public place, resulting in
death, would have led to a negligent homicide conviction. The jury
evidently believed that the gun went off accidentally, without Zarate
pulling the trigger. In gun-familiar Montana or some other state where
gun owners would recognize how unusual an accidental misfire would be
with that type of gun, a jury might have convicted. In San Francisco,
not.

After six days of deliberation, they acquitted Zarate. All that is
left is their ruling that he was a felon in possession of a gun, which
demands a jail term of between 16 months and three years. ICE officials
have said they will immediately deport Zarate for the sixth time once he
has served that sentence.

Some good is likely to come out of this unhappy and painful incident.
Attorney General Sessions said, “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.”

It’s helpful to remember that if immigration laws had been respected
and enforced, Kate Steinle would most likely still be alive, and Zarate
would never have been in the country, much less mishandling that firearm
on San Francisco’s Pier 4 on July 1, 2015. Kate may be deceased but her
cause lives on.
______________________________________________________