DOJ files arrest warrant for illegal immigrant acquitted in Kate Steinle case

a reply to: theantediluvian

The guy above said this:

"The perp's first story that he was down there shooting at sea lions...The last story was that the gun 'fired itself' 3 times"

Is that actually true Ante?

Did he really change his story?
And did the gun fire 3 times? If so do they know the trajectory of the other two shots?

What kind of weapon can accidentally discharge 3 times at once? Something with burst mode I guess?

originally posted by: muzzleflash

originally posted by: Templeton
This isn't a good thing if true. The fed should not be relitigating this case. They should deport him and build the wall to keep him out.

I don't know if they are re-litigating it yet.
It seems unclear what the warrant is for exactly.

I think they are just throwing the book at him hoping something/anything will stick.

You can't relitigate in the united states. That's called Double Jeopardy. If you're found not guilty, than that's it -- period, the end.

The bottom line is, justice was served here. Forensics proved it was an accidental discharge, that's not murder or manslaughter, that's an accident.

I don't look to see an untoward response, however I have seen 2 or 3 accidental shootings this year from deer hunters(poor ones I gather)being prosecuted as 3rd degree murder down to manslaughter. 

This man deserves manslaughter at the least, if it was truly an accident, the punishment may well do what it's supposed to. 

Politics shouldn't of ever been involved here, it's a tragedy all around.

a reply to: Iscool

Thank you for commenting and pointing that out.

I admittedly don't know anything and I'm going to get yall ATSers to educate me about all this.

I really want to know so I'm curious how this thread will develop.

I did not read the main thread. I hardly have time for the 2 threads I'm reading tonight already. Maybe tomorrow I can read the main one.

I'm still open minded. Every time one of you convinces me a new layer opens and I'm like "whaaaat?".

I'm kinda dumb though so I'll have a lot more questions as I find out more.

a reply to: SRPrime

They can charge him with something else though. If the govt wants you they have tons of options.

a reply to: introvert
oh no, he got it spot on. There could not be a more bullseye strike than that.
a reply to: theantediluvian
Intent does not need to be proven with felony murder. Teenagers and gang members are frequently charged and convicted of it after car jackings and a number of typically mild felony property crimes. In fact, IIRC there was a case in Chicago where a teenager was charged with felony murder even though it was the police officer who shot and killed his friend, because it happened from the commission of a felony crime. I am pretty sure you may recall that as well... if not here it is .

A Reader investigation found ten cases since 2011 where police killed a civilian in Chicago and charged an accomplice with the murder.

a reply to: Metallicus

a reply to: queenofswords

This is getting crazy.

I'm flip floppin because everyone is convinced of their side and the more I learn the more bizarre this gets.

I see why it's national news now.
I also feel like a fool because I can't make my mind up for longer than an hour.

I just don't know enough yet. Seems there is conflicting stories here.

I will probably revert back to my sarcastic cynicism tomorrow when I get up, it's my pattern lately.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

I will probably go back to my original gut instinct "feel" by tomorrow morning.

Ante came in and brainwashed me with his well developed posting style.

Or did he?
I can't wait to find out where this leads!

I'm a completely malleable mind here and I'm getting frustrated.

a reply to: muzzleflash
also in regards to double jeopardy , here is my post from last night:
originally posted by: worldstarcountry
a reply to: face23785
because I have a couple minutes left ...

Jeopardy only attaches to prosecutions of the same criminal acts by the same sovereign. 43 Thus a state may prosecute individuals for a crime which they stood trial for in federal court. Federal authorities may also prosecute individuals for crimes they stood trial for in state court. The double jeopardy defense does not apply to either of these actions.
Example: Officers of the Los Angeles Police Department, were tried and found not guilty of assault on Rodney King in Ventura County Superior Court in 1991.

Some of those same officers were later charged and convicted in federal court for violating Rodney King's civil rights.

The federal charges and convictions arose out of the same incident as the previous state case in Ventura County Superior Court. However, because the state of California and the federal government are separate sovereigns, double jeopardy did not bar the prosecution of those officers in federal court.

She died during the commission of a felony in the state of California, that being his possession of a firearm as a prohibited person.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

Ok cool, that makes sense.

I admittedly only studied how Dounle Jeopardy worked under one single sovereign (Tennessee) and did not look into how it affected Federal possibilities.

I naturally assumed they could relitigate though especially because of the diversity of laws available to apply.

I do know that the "elements" of a crime are what is in question - and for DJ one of the charges has to contain all elements that the other contains (though obviously the greater charge will add additional elements).

a reply to: muzzleflash
well, im learning this all as I search for information on the internet, so I am likely to be corrected at some point since I am by no means any kind of legal advisor or anything like that.

a reply to: muzzleflash

Easy one first: there was only shot fired.

There's a lot to unpack regarding the interrogation but for some reason the sea lion thing seems to have been grasped onto hard. The context:

Zarate was homeless, apparently has a second grade education and multiple drug convictions. The interrogation was conducted from like 2 am to 6 am, with questions and answers going through a translator. The interrogators were overtly aggressive at times with one of them pounding his fists on the table and demanding that Zarate tell them what he'd done.

Zarate also tried in vain to stop the interrogation more than once though the prosecution argued that his attempts weren't expressed clearly enough and that the fact that he continued to speak was tacit consent to the interrogation continuing without an attorney. Furthermore, the interrogators told Zarate that they had all manners of evidence they didn't possess. He actually gave a number of contradictory accounts, with some aspects that were clearly untrue and then there were a couple of bizarre things like him saying that he was born in 1863.

SF Examiner - Jurors hear confession of Kate Steinle’s alleged killer for first time

But after police presented him with what Lt. Anthony Ravano, the lead investigating officer in the homicide, called “fake evidence,” Garcia Zarate admitted to sitting on the pier, shooting Steinle and throwing the gun off the pier.

In one exchange with homicide investigator Sgt. Chris Canning, Garcia Zarate said the shooting was both accidental and intentional. Garcia Zarate spoke to the officers in Spanish through police translator Officer Martin Covarrubias.

“Did you mean to do it?” Canning asked.

“No,” Zarate responded.

“Was it an accident?”

“Yes.”

“But you made the decision to pull the trigger, correct?”

“Yes.”

“What did you think was going to happen after you pulled the trigger?”

“That I was not going to be able to keep it in my hand because it was big and fat.”

Defense attorney Matt Gonzalez told reporters after court that police pushed and led Garcia Zarate into his answers during the interrogation that lasted until nearly 6 a.m.

“The fact that very skilled and experienced and educated interrogators can get a second-grade [educated] Mexican immigrant to adopt what they are saying, like that Kate Steinle was five-feet away when the gun discharged, that doesn’t make it true,” Gonzalez said.

Ravano said in court that investigators lied to Garcia Zarate about witnesses who saw the shooting, gunshot residue recovered from his hands, the handgun they pulled from the water and a DNA match connecting him to the weapon.

Garcia Zarate said he was homeless, collecting bottles and cans for work, when he found the gun wrapped in a heavy rag or shirt on the pier.

“When I was walking along, there was a rag and stuff and I stepped on it and then it fired,” Garcia Zarate said in Spanish, according to the translation from Covarrubias. “I was trying to prevent the gun from firing by itself.”

The only motive for the shooting that Garcia Zarate offered to police was that he was aiming at a sea lion. When asked whether Steinle made him mad, spoke to him or looked at him in a bad way, he said “No.”

He also told police that he was born Sept. 1, 1863.

KTVU - Steinle murder suspect's interrogation video played in cour

Speaking largely through a police interpreter, Garcia Zarate first denied being near the scene of the shooting, saying he was instead sitting near the ballpark eating cookies or crackers, and gave police a false name and date of birth.

He also declared early in the interview that he is Colombian and would pay for a lawyer.

As the interrogation progressed into the early hours of the next day, Garcia Zarate acknowledged his involvement, but still gave several versions of events.

"When I got there, I was walking along, there was a rag and I stepped on it and it fired and then I picked it up," the interpreter translated him as saying.

A short time later, Garcia Zarate agreed twice with police when they asked if he pulled the trigger, but when they asked him again why he threw the gun in the water he responded through the interpreter "Because the gun was firing by itself."

Giving frequent answers of "I don't know," Garcia Zarate never indicated a motive for the shooting, saying that Steinle had not done anything to make him want to shoot her and indicating that he had not known that he shot her. At one point, in response to repeated questions, he told police he was shooting at a sea lion, or a fish.

Outside of court today Matt Gonzalez, chief attorney for the public defender's office, noted that Garcia Zarate had willingly agreed to statements suggested by police that later turned out to be false, such as when he said he was only 5 feet away from Steinle when she was shot. He was, in fact, around 90 feet from her, evidence shows.

Of course, since we don't have access to a video or transcript, we can only make inferences from what's been reported.

The defense tried to have the initial interrogation tossed, arguing that it was coercive (they also f'd up the translation of the Miranda rights) but the judge allowed it. The defense also tried to have an interview he'd given to a local ABC affiliate admitted but the judge didn't allow it. More on all of that here.

a reply to: muzzleflash

I haven't looked at this at all either, so I'll learn myself along with you, ok?

While testimony had yet to establish what happened on the pier, Lopez-Sanchez said in a jailhouse interview with KGO-TV that he had found a gun — a .40-caliber pistol that had been stolen from a federal agent in a car burglary four days prior — wrapped in a T-shirt under a bench.

It went off, he said, after he took sleeping pills he found in a trash can. His attorney, Matt Gonzalez, has said the evidence in the case points to an accidental shooting.

...

A witness account and surveillance video from a nearby fire station led investigators to believe that Lopez-Sanchez had thrown the gun into the bay, Ravano said, and police divers were able to recover it in the water.

Ravano said Lopez-Sanchez had given officers a series of different names. When he was brought to the homicide unit for questioning, he fell asleep, Ravano said.

sfgate

Found the gun under a park bench wrapped in a shirt and the gun turns out to belong to a federal agent who had it stolen from their vehicle a few days prior to the death of Kate Steinle.

Steinle’s alleged shooter, Francisco Sanchez, had five previous convictions for re-entry after deportation, according to court records, and seven prior felony convictions.

abc news

So not only had he been deported 5 times before, he had seven other felony convictions against him. Don't know what those were for at the moment, but suffice it to say this does not seem like an upstanding individual.

Steinle was strolling arm-in-arm with her father, Jim Steinle, on Pier 14 the evening of July 1. Shots rang out, and a bullet hit her in the back, according to prosecutors. She was pronounced dead at a hospital shortly thereafter.

Lopez-Sanchez told KGO-TV that he found a gun wrapped in a T-shirt on the ground near a bench that evening and that it accidentally fired three times when he touched it. He said he kicked the gun off the pier and walked away, unaware anyone had been shot.

The weapon turned out to have been stolen from a U.S. Bureau of Land Management vehicle.

latimes

So there's the 3 shots fired, "when he touched it."

This report seems to contradict the 3 shots, however:

San Francisco police criminalist and ballistics expert Gerald Andrew Smith took the stand Wednesday and held up for the judge to see in court the black Sig Sauer P239 .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol, that was recovered from the San Francisco Bay near Pier 14 the day after the homicide.

Smith processed the loaded pistol, which later was discovered stolen from a Bureau of Land Management ranger during an auto burglary, and determined that one of the bullets had been fired.

He said that upon examining the one spent bullet retrieved from Steinle's body during the autopsy, it is his opinion that the signatures of the bullet matched the test bullet he fired from the pistol.

Smith noted that the bullet is damaged significantly on one side, leading him to believe that it likely ricocheted after being fired, but

before striking Steinle.

"There was no mechanical malfunction," Smith said, explaining that this firearm is commonly used by law enforcement officials because of its reliability.

San Francisco police Inspector John Evans, who was tasked with investigating the crime scene, said that on July 5, investigators located a strike mark on the cement pier.

pleasantonweekly

I don't know man, I think they maybe overreached when they shot for murder and should have gone for manslaughter instead. Maybe a DA wanting to make a name for themselves or one who purposefully sought charges they knew could not be sustained.

It doesn't really seem to have been planned, at least to me.



Just spent a little time a few gun forums reading up on this gun and it is very highly thought of and considered extremely reliable. This does not seem to be a weapon that would be prone to misfires or any other sort of similar malfunction, otherwise it would not see as wide a use among law enforcement as it does.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical
So could we say that this case draws parallels to Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman?? Screwed up by the prosecution?

I suppose the state wanted a hit man to kill someone when they came to their state so they set him free so someday he can do their bidding on a high profile government official they want whacked.

I can twist this into fake news just like MSM does

Oh wait, it seems when I think I am making things up, they are true. Bummer, I never get to discover anything new.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

The jury was allowed to deliberate lesser charges, including involuntary manslaughter, and they acquitted him. I think prosecutors blew this case...perhaps intentionally.


***

Garcia Zarate faced a charge of second-degree murder, but jurors also were allowed to consider first-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter convictions.

Link

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Is Francisco Lopez-Sanchez an alias for Zarate?

a reply to: MotherMayEye

Well, that is interesting.

As I mentioned, previously, I don't think this was a malicious act and so should not be punished as such. For the person who fired the gun to face no consequence for those actions, though, does not seem right or just.

Also, going back and rereading what ante posted, it seems as though his mental capacity may not be fully developed or otherwise hindered. This, while it should be considered, still does not absolve him of responsibility for his actions related to this incident.



a reply to: queenofswords

Not necessarily an alias, it could just be more of his name. People from Guatemala (that's where he's from, right?) often have multiple first, middle and family names. As a property manager of a self storage facility, I've rented to a lot of them and Hondurans as well, for use to store their landscaping equipment. Whenever they whip out their passports or consulate cards, I have to ask them by which sets of names they are most commonly known.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

So his name is Jose Garcia-Zarate Francisco Lopez-Sanchez??

ETA: He is already in Wikipedia and he is from Guanajuato, Mexico.

Juan Francisco López-Sánchez (or Francisco Sánchez; given name José Inez García Zárate),[17] of Guanajuato, Mexico, had been deported from the U.S. a total of five times, most recently in 2009.

a reply to: queenofswords

Or some combination thereof, or early reports do indeed have him identified by one of his aliases; that is a possibility.

When I worked in restaurants, we would lose a cook because they got caught and deported only to show back up a week or so later with another set of paperwork with the same names in different order. My GM knew all about it, as did his boss and so on up the line. They'd get their jobs back and round and round they go.



ETA:

Thanks for that wikipedia link. So the name thing is not just South America. Where he is from specifically is really tertiary to the fact that he did not follow legal immigration procedures and perpetrated actions which resulted in the death of a young woman with a full life ahead of her.