Kate Steinle shooting: Jury delivers not guilty verdict



November 30, 2017 at 3:18 pm | UPDATED: November 30, 2017 at 5:46 pm

SAN FRANCISCO — In a stunning verdict sure to reignite a national firestorm over immigration, a San Francisco jury on Thursday found an undocumented immigrant not guilty in the shooting death of Kate Steinle two years ago on a San Francisco pier.

The jury, which included three immigrants, weighed charges against Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, 54, accused of gunning down Steinle in July 2015 while she was walking with her father on Pier 14 in San Francisco’s Embarcadero district.

Gracia Zarate, wearing a light white striped shirt and dark slacks, showed no reaction as the verdicts were read, only shifting forward once when the court clerk read that he was not guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

The jury of six men and six women, stared straight ahead, emotionless and not reacting. Department 13, Judge Samuel Feng’s courtroom, remained mostly silent during the verdicts, a stark contrast to the frenzy of media waiting in the hallways for news of the verdicts.

The jury, which deliberated six days, considered first-degree, second-degree, or involuntary manslaughter for Garcia Zarate. He was found guilty of guilty of possession of a firearm by a felon.

In an interview following the verdict, defense attorney Matt Gonzalez said this “verdict should be respected.”

Gonzalez said he was bracing for criticism of the verdict from the White House and said it was important to remember that the president, vice president, and attorney general were under investigation themselves and should appreciate that they would be afforded the protections of the justice system.

“Before you start tweeting or commenting on this outcome, just reflect on the fact that all of us get these protections. We get a right to a jury. We get these burdens of proof. We have to respect that a jury that spent this much time on this case got it right.”



The high-profile case against Garcia Zarate attracted national attention when details emerged about his immigration status. At the time of the shooting in 2015, then-presidential candidate Donald Trump and others blamed San Francisco’s “sanctuary city” policy for Steinle’s death. Garcia Zarate had been deported five times but was released from a San Francisco jail after being held on a drug charge instead of being sent back to his native Mexico.

Both the prosecution and the defense kept politics and the immigration debate out of the courtroom during the four-week trial, focusing instead on evidence such as bullet trajectories, gunshot residue, and security video analysis.

The San Francisco District Attorney’s Office argued that Garcia Zarate intentionally aimed a gun at Steinle and fired at her, before throwing the weapon into the bay and running away. The defense paints the shooting as a freak accident, arguing that the gun accidentally discharged and the bullet ricocheted on the concrete pier 78 feet before hitting Steinle.

Much of the trial focused on the Sig Sauer pistol that fired the fatal shot. The weapon was stolen from a federal Bureau of Land Management agent’s car several days before the shooting. Garcia Zarate, who was homeless, said he found the gun wrapped in some sort of cloth under a seat he was sitting on at the pier. The defense called a weapons expert, who said that make of gun has a history of misfiring, while the prosecution maintained that it would be difficult to fire it unintentionally.

Alex Bastian, a spokesman for the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, said it was a “verdict we were not hoping for.”

“We will respect that decision. This is really about the Steinle family, Our hearts go out (to) them.”

Law experts weighed in on the verdicts, how the case was pursued and the ramifications.

“They must have thought it was an accident,” said Bay Area criminal defense attorney Anthony Boskovich. “The verdict means they believed his version and his experts’ testimony.

“This is going to cause a furor, given our current political climate,” Boskovich added. “The feds are going to see this as a runaway San Francisco jury and it will further fuel the crackdown on immigrants.”

San Jose defense attorney Dennis Alan Lempert said the prosecution should have pursued a negligent discharge of a weapon conviction rather than murder in the first- or second-degree, or involuntary manslaughter.

“If he had been convicted of that charge, he would have faced at least a year in county jail and up to three years in state prison, depending on whether it was filed as a misdemeanor or felony.

“The notion that it was an intentional shot to kill somebody belies credulity,” said Lempert, a former reserve officer with the Los Gatos police, noting that the bullet ricocheted off the pavement, ultimately traveling 200 feet, the equivalent of more than 10 lanes of traffic. “But the pressure on the prosecution was enormous.”

Judge Feng thanked the jurors for their service, stating that they have “all been fantastic” during the three-week-long trial.

Garcia Zarate, who has spent more than two years in jail, faces 16 months to two to three years for a felon in possession of a firearm. There is no sentencing date.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/11/3...aches-verdict/