Friday, December 1, 2017

The Steinle Death

https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rumpf/2017/11/30/lied-kate-steinle-case/ makes a good case that the jury's verdict of accidental death was not completely absurd,  and that the prosecutor should have tried for a manslaughter charge,  which could easily have fit the evidence.  It all helps to have the government not leaving its guns out to be stolen.

4 comments:

Karhu said...

The prosecutors did include the option of involuntary manslaughter, her complaint is that they didn't emphasize that enough.

StormCchaser said...

The prosecutor did try for a manslaughter charge, and failed. I can see how it might be hard to sustain a murder charge if there is lack of evidence of intent. But manslaughter?

I suspect this was a political verdict by a left wing San Francisco jury.

Windy Wilson said...

If the bullet extracted from Kate Steinle truly looked as if it had collided with concrete before it ricocheted to strike her, then the prosecutor should have included the possibility of manslaugter as a jury verdict.

If it was full metal jacket and looks like the "magic bullet so favored by conspiracy theorists/nuts, then it truly is a case of the jury wishing to stick a finger in the eye of President Trump (metaphorically speaking).

Clayton Cramer said...

If the prosecutor sought manslaughter and failed on this evidence, then it does sound like an SF jury "speaking truth to power."