Kate Steinlle's accused killer found not guilty of murder

#102
#102
n_huffhines said:
Just trying to make sense of your posts. No need to fuss.

So anybody who defends the jury is treating this like a win? I'd ask for you to defend your logic, but I'm afraid I'll be accused of being argumentative. :cray:
Click to expand...

Fine, I won’t accuse you of anything. I think that people who argue in support of the jury’s decision are doing so on political bias alone. This guy is a 7 time felon, how the hell is he not in jail anyways? 5 Times deported and he just has the bad luck of a gun “he found” on the pier going off? Get the **** out of here. It’s pathetic. I would say the same thing if the shoe were on the other foot. Meaning the white foot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#103
#103
On pbs tonight they mentioned he was acquitted but that the feds have filed charges. The next story was a guy from VW get 7 years in prison for cheating the emissions test. He would have been better off luring the investigator to SF and killing him.
 
#104
#104
I defend the jury's decision. It was just that. They saw all of the evidence and made a decision. If the guy was truly guilty... the prosecutors did not do their job well. It is, for better or worse, our system and I am not sure there is a better way to do it. Is it perfect? No, but Trump and others undermining the system is a disgusting display.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#106
#106
ClearwaterVol said:
I defend the jury's decision. It was just that. They saw all of the evidence and made a decision. If the guy was truly guilty... the prosecutors did not do their job well. It is, for better or worse, our system and I am not sure there is a better way to do it. Is it perfect? No, but Trump and others undermining the system is a disgusting display.
Click to expand...

The jury must have made up of illegals
 
#107
#107
ClearwaterVol said:
I defend the jury's decision. It was just that. They saw all of the evidence and made a decision. If the guy was truly guilty... the prosecutors did not do their job well. It is, for better or worse, our system and I am not sure there is a better way to do it. Is it perfect? No, but Trump and others undermining the system is a disgusting display.
Click to expand...

I don't know enough to defend the jury's decision, but I've read stuff from both sides and I see both sides of it.

The system is imperfect. It's amazing to me that people are just now realizing this. Minorities have been telling us the courts are ****ed up for years. Now us whites lose politicized criminal cases from time to time and it's the end of the world. Think how others feel after decades of this.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#108
#108
ClearwaterVol said:
I defend the jury's decision. It was just that. They saw all of the evidence and made a decision. If the guy was truly guilty... the prosecutors did not do their job well. It is, for better or worse, our system and I am not sure there is a better way to do it. Is it perfect? No, but Trump and others undermining the system is a disgusting display.
Click to expand...

But but but but but Trump!!!!
 
#109
#109
n_huffhines said:
I don't know enough to defend the jury's decision, but I've read stuff from both sides and I see both sides of it.

The system is imperfect. It's amazing to me that people are just now realizing this. Minorities have been telling us the courts are ****ed up for years. Now us whites lose from time to time and it's the end of the world. Think how others feel after decades of this.
Click to expand...

This case wasn’t about skin color losing and winning. Only retards think that way.
 
#111
#111
n_huffhines said:
I don't know enough to defend the jury's decision, but I've read stuff from both sides and I see both sides of it.

The system is imperfect. It's amazing to me that people are just now realizing this. Minorities have been telling us the courts are ****ed up for years. Now us whites lose politicized criminal cases from time to time and it's the end of the world. Think how others feel after decades of this.
Click to expand...

except for people ITT I wouldn't have known she was white. her skin color (and his) has nothing to do with the case. He shot her. or even more PC, one humanoid entity of an unknown self identifying gender shot another humanoid entity of unknown self identifying gender.

guy got away with manslaughter, and a host of other crimes. it stops and ends there, until someone else brings race into it.
 
#112
#112
n_huffhines said:
Who said it was?
Click to expand...

n_huffhines said:
I don't know enough to defend the jury's decision, but I've read stuff from both sides and I see both sides of it.

The system is imperfect. It's amazing to me that people are just now realizing this. Minorities have been telling us the courts are ****ed up for years. Now us whites lose politicized criminal cases from time to time and it's the end of the world. Think how others feel after decades of this.
Click to expand...
Bold
 
#113
#113
tumscalcium said:
Bold
Click to expand...

The case was not about race. Where the public stands in response to it depends largely on how they feel about race. The fact that it's a sanctuary city and that he's been been deported have literally nothing to do with the case itself, but it's the first thing anybody points out in every right wing article I've read.

If you think this injustice would have happened in the 60's, 70's, or 80's, you're crazy. This case is symbolic of the power whites have lost and it's scary. It's OK, tho. We still have the most power. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#114
#114
n_huffhines said:
The case was not about race. Where the public stands in response to it depends largely on how they feel about race. The fact that it's a sanctuary city and that he's been been deported have literally nothing to do with the case itself, but it's the first thing anybody points out in every right wing article I've read.

If you think this injustice would have happened in the 60's, 70's, or 80's, you're crazy. This case is symbolic of the power whites have lost and it's scary. It's OK, tho. We still have the most power. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...
.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    33.4 KB · Views: 34
#115
#115
n_huffhines said:
The case was not about race. Where the public stands in response to it depends largely on how they feel about race. The fact that it's a sanctuary city and that he's been been deported have literally nothing to do with the case itself, but it's the first thing anybody points out in every right wing article I've read.

If you think this injustice would have happened in the 60's, 70's, or 80's, you're crazy. This case is symbolic of the power whites have lost and it's scary. It's OK, tho. We still have the most power. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

wait, are you saying that just because there are some non-whites in power this happened?

racist much?

this case has nothing to do with race. its the continued slide into the realm of non-consequences. We live in a time where it is easier/more effective to blame an inanimate object than hold people accountable.
 
#116
#116
LouderVol said:
wait, are you saying that just because there are some non-whites in power this happened?

racist much?

this case has nothing to do with race. its the continued slide into the realm of non-consequences. We live in a time where it is easier/more effective to blame an inanimate object than hold people accountable.
Click to expand...

It's not what I said. I'm saying it doesn't happen under the old order. I'm saying this is a mistake made possible by today's norms.

Y'all throw the R word around too much. When did everybody become such PC *******? I got called out for saying "a black" and now for something I didn't even say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#117
#117
n_huffhines said:
It's not what I said. I'm saying it doesn't happen under the old order. I'm saying this is a mistake made possible by today's norms.

Y'all throw the R word around too much. When did everybody become such PC *******? I got called out for saying "a black" and now for something I didn't even say.
Click to expand...

you were the one that started arguing race.

Illegal is not a race.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#118
#118
LouderVol said:
you were the one that started arguing race.
Click to expand...

Wrong again, bro. I didn't make a peep ITT until Ob and SCV started likening this to racially charged incidents.

Obsessed said:
I know, let’s ask Trayvon...
Click to expand...

SpaceCoastVol said:
Where are the protests and burning cars?

No justice, no peace and all that crap.
Click to expand...

n_huffhines said:
What is your point?...

Even if you are right, your statement is completely out of left field and the implication is that your point is "See, white people are better. We don't riot." and that makes you a total douche.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#119
#119
n_huffhines said:
Wrong again, bro. I didn't make a peep ITT until Ob and SCV started likening this to racially charged incidents.
Click to expand...

They didn't bring up race, at least in your quotes. If anything I took it liberal vs conservative, no idea what the victim's politics were. In all three cases it didn't become a matter of race until other people got their hands on it, good job continuing the trend. Whats the opposite of tone deaf? You have seen the phrase so much you are applying it when it isn't there as well.

Surprised you didn't quote the first person to bring Obama into the argument for being racist as well.
 
#120
#120
LouderVol said:
They didn't bring up race, at least in your quotes. If anything I took it liberal vs conservative, no idea what the victim's politics were. In all three cases it didn't become a matter of race until other people got their hands on it, good job continuing the trend. Whats the opposite of tone deaf? You have seen the phrase so much you are applying it when it isn't there as well.

Surprised you didn't quote the first person to bring Obama into the argument for being racist as well.
Click to expand...
Huff has been called out for loosely throwing around the R word before.
 
#121
#121
LouderVol said:
They didn't bring up race, at least in your quotes. If anything I took it liberal vs conservative, no idea what the victim's politics were. In all three cases it didn't become a matter of race until other people got their hands on it, good job continuing the trend. Whats the opposite of tone deaf? You have seen the phrase so much you are applying it when it isn't there as well.

Surprised you didn't quote the first person to bring Obama into the argument for being racist as well.
Click to expand...

You're better than this, man.

Why on earth did they bring up Trayvon and rioting if their posts didn't have racial implications? Particularly SCV's post? I interpreted it to be about race and nobody objected until you forgot what the convo was about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#122
#122
Playing the race card both wins and ends the argument. Anyone who says that "white Hispanic" was justified in saving his life from Trayvon's attack is an obvious RACIST!
 
#123
#123
n_huffhines said:
You're better than this, man.

Why on earth did they bring up Trayvon and rioting if their posts didn't have racial implications? Particularly SCV's post? I interpreted it to be about race and nobody objected until you forgot what the convo was about.
Click to expand...

because they were pointing out the liberal hypocrisy in people getting shot. I think the non-cop aspect was a fair point to bring up with Brown. but as it was I was seeing most of the comments about it making sense it happened in a liberal utopia. then illegals (again not racism), and then you made it a brown vs white thing.
 
#125
#125
A few observations.

It appears murder wouldn't make sense as, for those that maybe didn't know, the shot fired was a ricochet from about 80'. Given the circumstances and murder pretty much requiring some element of demonstrable malicious intent I could see how a murder charge would be difficult to make stick. Now having said that...

The jury was specifically allowed to consider involuntary manslaughter, which under CA law covers:


  1. while committing a crime that is not an inherently dangerous California felony, OR
  2. while committing a lawful act which might produce death, without due caution
Given that we KNOW, as this charge actually stuck, that he was guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon how the hell is the threshold for IM not met?



Now people have talked about this "case" as only being this particular charge. Ummm, no. There absolutely is a larger issue with this case and it's that someone, a criminal even beyond his immigration status, in this country illegally FOR THE 6TH TIME, caused the death of a US citizen. This simple fact is absolutely a valid takeaway from this case and anybody peeved about it has damn solid ground on which to stand. Fortunately it appears federal charges are coming and more in line with what one might expect from an illegal alien felon that killed someone.



Whatever one thinks of the immigration debate in general I'd like to see a massive shift in how we treat illegals that are involved in criminal activity on this side of the border. If you enter the country illegally and are deported as a criminal the next time you're caught we send you back across via trebuchet. Come across again and you will essentially be considered, and treated, in the same manner as a terrorist. If you are here illegally and cause the death of a US citizen you move right to that line from day one.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top