16 replies to this topic

[The Average Joe]

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=51497686

 

Absofreaking unbelievable. What a travesty of justice....and people outside the court cheered! We are so far into the looking glass...

[Chris]

Yes, terrible.....!   SF, the city of my birth, my youth, is just so far gone....!   And note how the left wing press always says "undocumented immigrant" in place of "illegal alien"....!   Such BS....!   I could think of a few undocumented things I'd like to be....!   Like an "undocumented" owner of a .45 Thompson machine gun, or maybe I could be the owner of an "undocumented" Ferrari F12 Berlinetta...?   Or maybe I can be "undocumented" to the IRS and not have to send them any paperwork and my hard earned cash again this year...?  Yep, undocumented my arrrse.....!  Chris

[2 Aces]

Michael Savage was right. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

[folsombound]

Prosecutor did a lousy job and overreached in attempting to get a murder conviction.  If he had just gone for Manslaughter he probably could have gotten it.  Not sure of that but overall the prosecutor did a lousy job and all the defense has to show is "reasonable doubt".  Terrible outcome!

[2 Aces]

You're wrong about manslaughter. This was classic *jury nullification*, similar to the OJ trial. Put idiots on a jury and this is what happens.

[folsombound]

You're wrong, but the prosecution did a lousy job ( as they did in the OJ murder trial as well)!

[Who_Do_You_Trust]

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=51497686

 

Absofreaking unbelievable. What a travesty of justice....and people outside the court cheered! We are so far into the looking glass...

 

There is another aspect to this that is beyond mind-boggling.  Very simply put - Unless you actually sat on the jury, you have ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS to comment on the outcome.  

 

Everyone seems to be an armchair judicial expert, which they are not.  You can voice your opinions, but they are totally unfounded. I've sat on many juries over the years and in every case, we delved into excruciating details to be certain we arrived at a fair and impartial verdict.  I suspect the same occurred in this case. 

 

Remember, there could be a day in your future when you will be sitting in that defendant's seat.  I'm certain you'll be demanding your jury give you equivalent consideration.   

[2 Aces]

Typical dumb comment by an excuse-making Lib. It's a stupid verdict and plenty of people on both sides of the aisle have said that. I'm guessing you may be over-analyzing it. Or you're just ignorant.

[Rose White]

I still can't believe the outcome of this trial!

 

He picked up a gun and was trying to kill a seal????  That is illegal, is it not?  Isn't there any longer a law against the careless and disregard of life, by playing around with a firearm? 

 

The fact is, had the law been served in the manner it was intended, this man wouldn't even have been in this country and Kate would still be alive.

 

To me, that's the bottom line.

 

Accident?  Vehicular Manslaughter is an accident, but drunks still go to jail for it.

[Chris]

And where did he get this gun....?   Two days before, stolen backpack from a car, owner was a law enforcement officer I believe.  What idiot leaves a backpack in their car is SF let alone with a gun in it.  I rarely go to SF anymore, for many reasons, most of them because of what a "liberal" paradise it has become, crime, the smell of piss and vomit, poop on the streets, can't walk a city block without being asked for money 5 times by aggressive turds, outrageous taxes on meals and hotel rooms, lack of parking, thieves, bums, homeless, more homeless, tents on sidewalks, men walking around with no clothes on, meth heads, sanctuary city where my rights are worth less than an illegal alien....   I could go on....   And on..........   My solution, I just pass through there, I don't go there, don't spend a dime except for the Bay Bridge toll.   Chris

[The Average Joe]

 

There is another aspect to this that is beyond mind-boggling.  Very simply put - Unless you actually sat on the jury, you have ABSOLUTELY NO BASIS to comment on the outcome.  

 

Everyone seems to be an armchair judicial expert, which they are not.  You can voice your opinions, but they are totally unfounded. I've sat on many juries over the years and in every case, we delved into excruciating details to be certain we arrived at a fair and impartial verdict.  I suspect the same occurred in this case. 

 

Remember, there could be a day in your future when you will be sitting in that defendant's seat.  I'm certain you'll be demanding your jury give you equivalent consideration.   

 

Um, wrong. The facts are not in dispute. He was in possession of the gun when it was fired. He is a felon...in possession of a gun...whose discharge killed somebody. at the very MINIMUM, he should have been charged with gross negligence resulting in death with an addition for the felon in possession charge.  If you break your neck on a crack in the sidewalk and die, the city could be held criminally negligent.

 

How in the world you see any justice in this verdict is beyond me.  I pray I never have to be tried by a jury as most people are incredibly ignorant, have no concept of nuance, and the jury pool is certainly not filled by my peers.  Plenty of student, retired, unemployed and state workers though

[Rose White]

Chris.....I boycotted San Fran-sicko fifteen years ago and have told all my relatives back east, to avoid it and Los Angeles like the plague.

They are dirty dangerous cities that everyone should avoid until they clean up their act. Spending money in these cities only supports their destructive ways.

 

But with California becoming a sanctuary state, not many of my friends or relatives even want to visit our state now. I don't blame them and wish I could move out of it.

 

Did you happen to hear what Judge Jeanine said about this trial?  If not, google it.  You will not be disappointed, trust me.

[The Average Joe]

And yet, here is the WaPo's take on it...what a bunch of agenda driven hacks...

 

White nationalists angered by Mexican immigrant’s acquittal in Kate Steinle’s killing https://t.co/LejPAii8t1

— Washington Post (@washingtonpost) December 2, 2017

[Who_Do_You_Trust]

 
Um, wrong. The facts are not in dispute. He was in possession of the gun when it was fired. He is a felon...in possession of a gun...whose discharge killed somebody. at the very MINIMUM, he should have been charged with gross negligence resulting in death with an addition for the felon in possession charge.  If you break your neck on a crack in the sidewalk and die, the city could be held criminally negligent.
 
How in the world you see any justice in this verdict is beyond me.  I pray I never have to be tried by a jury as most people are incredibly ignorant, have no concept of nuance, and the jury pool is certainly not filled by my peers.  Plenty of student, retired, unemployed and state workers though

 
Again, unless you've sat on a jury, you have no basis to criticize this verdict. 
 
A verdict is based on much more than the facts of the case.  It's also based on the exact wording of the law that the defendant is being charged with violating.  If the facts of the case don't align exactly with the letter of the law, then a guilty verdict will probably not happen. 

[2 Aces]

Funny how you will tie yourself into a pretzel trying to justify a dumb comment. The vast majority of people believe the verdict was a travesty of justice. But you can continue to go against the flow, Pretzel Man.