(11-30-2017 09:26 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Steinle family should file a massive civil suit against the city of San Francisco and the State of Californication.
Harboring a fugitive, failure to enforce existing law, negligance, whatever else they can throw at them.

Yep, give it a try.

(11-30-2017 09:26 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Steinle family should file a massive civil suit against the city of San Francisco and the State of Californication.
Harboring a fugitive, failure to enforce existing law, negligance, whatever else they can throw at them.

Don't forget wrongful death.

(11-30-2017 09:20 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Sanctuary policy is to blame, county Sheriff did not notify the Feds they had him locked up. 7 prior felony convictions. Perp is guilty of at least manslaughter. If the perp's last name was Jackson or Schmidt guilty. Perp was deported 5 times.

Guilty of manslaughter? I agree, then charge him with manslaughter. The jury had the duty to come up with a verdict based on what he was charged with. And that was murder. The prosecution over reached.

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

(11-30-2017 09:31 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:26 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  Steinle family should file a massive civil suit against the city of San Francisco and the State of Californication.
Harboring a fugitive, failure to enforce existing law, negligance, whatever else they can throw at them.

Yep, give it a try.

They did. Judge dismissed it

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

My friend is the top S.W.A.T. range instructor in Cincinnati. He is brought in on any accidental discharge investigation on the force. They all say the same thing. It just went off!

He sets the gun that "just went off" on the table and stares at it with the involved officer in silence for minutes on end....says, "this one? Just went off? I've yet to see one do that. Should we keep watching?":lmfao:

(11-30-2017 09:47 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

My friend is the top S.W.A.T. range instructor in Cincinnati. He is brought in on any accidental discharge investigation on the force. They all say the same thing. It just went off!

He sets the gun that "just went off" on the table and stares at it with the involved officer in silence for minutes on end....says, "this one? Just went off? I've yet to see one do that. Should we keep watching?":lmfao:

Nah man, Californians are mostly morons. The smart ones should just leave. Bring that stupid shite were I live and find out what happens.

(11-30-2017 09:38 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:20 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Sanctuary policy is to blame, county Sheriff did not notify the Feds they had him locked up. 7 prior felony convictions. Perp is guilty of at least manslaughter. If the perp's last name was Jackson or Schmidt guilty. Perp was deported 5 times.

Guilty of manslaughter? I agree, then charge him with manslaughter. The jury had the duty to come up with a verdict based on what he was charged with. And that was murder. The prosecution over reached.

He was charged with multiple felonies. Do you even read news or TV or understand the multiple charges against him?

What kind of jail sentence would have Jose got if he shot and killed a sea lion?

(11-30-2017 09:55 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  What kind of jail sentence would have Jose got if he shot and killed a sea lion?

Probably 25 to life. Wait. He's an illegal alien. Make that three years.

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

Yeah, that is what he said to police. He did not testify. Do you think he going to say yeah I shot her she gave me a dirty look.

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

That's not an accident. At best that is just plain old recklessness with wanton disregard. No accident.

(11-30-2017 10:15 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

That's not an accident. At best that is just plain old recklessness with wanton disregard. No accident.

Exactly.

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

I'm sorry if someone has their finger close to the trigger while twirling the gun...

that moves way past the point of a accident

If that's the case a person who drinks a six pack and drive his car into a wall and it ricochet off and hits the lady walking on the side and kills her. Is a accident.

I'm of the opinion that it's also a crime and 99.9% of the time a person is going to be found guilty of this "accident"

(11-30-2017 10:18 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

I'm sorry if someone has their finger close to the trigger while twirling the gun...

that moves way past the point of a accident

If that's the case a person who drinks a six pack and drive his car into a wall and it ricochet off and hits the lady walking on the side and kills her. Is a accident.

I'm of the opinion that it's also a crime and 99.9% of the time a person is going to be found guilty of this "accident"

Yes guilty of the accident. But not murder in the 1st degree. Surely you see this, right?

Second degree was a lesser included charge.

Wonder what the demographic composition of that jury was.

San Francisco and it's local government is an embarrassment to the rest of the country. The Steinle family deserves better then this.

(11-30-2017 10:29 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:18 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:08 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  From what I'm to understand, he was playing with the gun, the gun accidentally goes off, the bullet strikes a concrete pier, ricochets off, and kills the young lady. Are those the facts? If so, charging him with murder was a reach beyond belief. He should have been charged with a lesser crime. No jury in their right mind would convict someone on a murder charge based on that evidence. No way in hell would I have found him guilty of murder either. Reckless endangerment causing the death of or something similar.

You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

I'm sorry if someone has their finger close to the trigger while twirling the gun...

that moves way past the point of a accident

If that's the case a person who drinks a six pack and drive his car into a wall and it ricochet off and hits the lady walking on the side and kills her. Is a accident.

I'm of the opinion that it's also a crime and 99.9% of the time a person is going to be found guilty of this "accident"

Yes guilty of the accident. But not murder in the 1st degree. Surely you see this, right?

I see a 6 time felon illegal immigrant that shot a young woman in the back in broad daylight with a gun stolen from an idiot bureau of land management federal employee.

Fry them.

(11-30-2017 10:32 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:29 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:18 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:05 PM)Old Blue Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  You know how I know that you don't know anything about guns?

If the safety is off and he was twirling the gun old west style, then yes it can accidentally go off. Unless he purposely shot the concrete knowing the ricochet would hit her? That would kinda make him the male version of Annie Oakley.
Here is the link to the story:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2017/11...der-trial/

I'm sorry if someone has their finger close to the trigger while twirling the gun...

that moves way past the point of a accident

If that's the case a person who drinks a six pack and drive his car into a wall and it ricochet off and hits the lady walking on the side and kills her. Is a accident.

I'm of the opinion that it's also a crime and 99.9% of the time a person is going to be found guilty of this "accident"

Yes guilty of the accident. But not murder in the 1st degree. Surely you see this, right?

I see a 6 time felon illegal immigrant that shot a young woman in the back in broad daylight with a gun stolen from an idiot bureau of land management federal employee.

Fry them.

Like bacon.