He got away with it, plain and simple. There truly was no justice! Where has the justice department gone when politics can now decide the fate of a person being charged with a crime? How is it justice when you can now get away with murder simply for being a certain ethnicity? It’s almost like saying, “If you fit my narrative I won’t convict you”
The Kate Steinle case has been in the spotlight long enough for people to know some of the facts. However, it boggles my mind that some people on the left say, “So what how is this any different than any other San Francisco Murder?”
- It’s confirmed he did it- The thing is, she died because of his actions there’s been NO debate on that. Even though he painted it like an accident.
- They had him IN custody- Not every killer can be taken in because there’s either not enough evidence to arrest, or they simply never find the killer.
- The gun that killed Steinle was designed so that it was safer and wouldn’t misfire!
- His defense stated that it accidentally discharged… when he had to manually place it into a certain position FOR it to discharge.
- The weapon was a handgun, meaning he had to pick it up to at least a certain level before it went off.
- The issue was turned into a race issue for anyone NOT liking the verdict (talk about victim blaming)
Some say that the verdict only seems like an injustice because of the individual details of the case. The reality is, the individual details of the case are all based upon the defense saying it went off by accident, with no evidence to support this thoery. If anything there is more evidence to support that it could not have gone off by accident. So they made the verdict based upon believing the word of a four-time criminal felon NOT on the evidence.
One must ask why he picked the gun up to begin with? If he saw some random gun why would he pick it up instead of just leave it? What if this gun were involved with a previous murder; did he really want his fingerprints all over it? The very fact that he picked it up at all can be considered a negligent action, especially when he has a track-record of being violent. It shows intent to use the weapon by just picking it up.
Picking up a weapon, when you’re unfamiliar with that weapon, in a public and populated place, is a negligent action. However, if you were familiar with that weapon, then you’d know the weapon has a specific device that prevents it from going off. Either way- you’re guilty of something.
Many point out that if the government had done its job, this wouldn’t have happened in the first place. Which is the reasoning behind people requesting the wall to be named “Kate’s Wall”.
The reality is this isn’t just like another case in San Francisco, they dismissed the charges based on the word of a man who is untrustworthy. Even though there was more evidence to convict him, the jury based their verdict on sympathy on nothing more than the fact that he was an illegal alien. They opened their ears to him because of his ethnicity. People fight saying he shouldn’t be considered guilty based on him being deported five times. We’re not saying that, we’re saying that we had the evidence for guilty; it was the verdict of not guilty that was based on him being illegal.