We can, though, at this point, distill the voluminous amount of fact to a few conclusions:
- Zarate had been deported five times before.
- He had a drug history, but no record of violent crime.
- The SIG Sauer is designed to fire within a split second
- The bullet ricocheted off the ground before hitting Steinle.
- Whether he committed a murder and what degree thereof depends on an accurate parsing of his motive.
- Whatever his thought process was in those seconds before the gun went off, San Francisco's sanctuary-city policy bears much of the culpability for this tragedy.
That's nuts. Even Trump is right about thiis verdict.
ReplyDeleteAnd sanctuary cities are on trial too. Verdict pending. In the courts. But if you don't trust the courts, who will you cede power to?
ReplyDeleteBut the bullet did ricochet off the ground first and the jury had to have bought that there was no intent to murder. Does Trumbtrumbthis with his ass wipe tongue?
ReplyDeleteSanctuary cities have to undergo scrutiny in a separate trial, of course.
ReplyDeleteFrom the outset, the judge barred any mention of Jose Ines Garcia Zarate's immigration status or the five times he was arrested and deported to Mexico before he came back across the border. The judge said the jury should consider only Garcia Zarate's intentions on the July evening when Steinle was shot.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/trial-focused-on-shooting-despite-spotlight-on-immigration/ar-BBFZEcH?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=SL5JDHP
I think we’ll see a sea change in public opinion about sanctuary cities
ReplyDeleteProbably. I hate to see Trump get a boost from this though.
ReplyDelete