Adding insult to injury, the defense team for the killer of Kate Steinle is not content with a San Francisco jury’s political statement that let a murderer walk free.
Representatives for Jose Ines Garcia Zarate are now calling for their client to be retried on his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm because the jury based his “innocence” on the pretense that he never actually had the weapon.
Zarate is not only a convicted felon but also an illegal alien with multiple deportations who would have never been in the country to deprive the 32-year-old victim of her life if not for San Francisco’s being a sanctuary city.
The outrageous news will be yet another blow to Ms. Steinle’s family who had to suffer through the indignity of an activist jury letting a killer off scot-free to flip their middle fingers at President Donald Trump.
— SFGate (@SFGate) December 15, 2017
According to SFGate “Defense attorneys seek new trial in Kate Steinle shooting case”:
The man who was convicted of carrying a gun but acquitted of murder in the shooting of Kate Steinle on a San Francisco Bay pier never actually possessed the weapon in a legal sense and should be given a new trial on that count, the public defender’s office said Thursday.
Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, a 45-year-old homeless undocumented immigrant whose release from city jail before the shooting intensified a debate over sanctuary policies, was found guilty Nov. 30 of being a felon in possession of a firearm in connection with Steinle’s death on July 1, 2015.
Garcia Zarate was acquitted of murder, manslaughter and assault charges after defense attorneys asserted that the gun went off accidentally after he found it wrapped in a rag on the pier. The pistol had been stolen four days earlier from the nearby parked car of a federal ranger.
The verdict shocked many observers, and President Trump called it “disgraceful.” But defense attorneys said their client should have been fully acquitted if jurors found credence in the argument that the shooting wasn’t intentional.
The motion filed Thursday in San Francisco Superior Court stated that Judge Samuel Feng failed to, among other things, explain to the jury that “momentary” possession of a weapon is not necessarily a crime if a person only seeks to dispose of it and does not intend to keep law enforcement from seizing it.
“The court has misdirected the jury in a matter of law,” wrote lead defense attorney Matt Gonzalez.
Steinle, 32, was killed by a bullet that ricocheted off the pier’s concrete walkway and struck her in the back, piercing her heart. She died in the arms of her father. Prosecutors argued that the defendant intentionally fired the pistol, and that the Sig Sauer model cannot be discharged unless somebody firmly pulls the trigger. Prosecutors also suggested Garcia Zarate threw away the gun in an effort to avoid detection.
Defense attorneys conceded that Garcia Zarate tossed the gun in the bay after the shooting, but said he had thrown it away “to stop it from continuing to shoot.”
It was an outrageous perversion of justice that this guy was able to get off on the murder charge but it’s clear that the leftists in the San Francisco public defender’s office want to get another politically motivated jury to send another message to Trump.
Mr. Zarate, however, was recently indicted on federal charges and he may not be so lucky at that level.