It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Department of Justice filed an arrest warrant for Jose Inez Garcia Zarate, the illegal immigrant acquitted Thursday in Kate Steinle’s murder trial.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Metallicus
What about the trial did you find unjust out of curiosity? What is the warrant for?
The Department of Justice released a statement saying: "There is an existing federal detainer that requires this defendant to be remanded into the custody of US Marshals Service to be transported to the Western District of Texas pursuant to the arrest warrant."
The warrant says Zarate violated his supervised release on a federal sentence for illegally re-entering the U.S.by possessing the gun that killed Kate Steinle on July 1, 2015. The warrant was originally issued July 14 of that year but an amended warrant was unsealed Friday following the verdict. The warrant issued by the U.S. District Court for the western district of Texas says Zarate was sentenced in Texas on May 12, 2011 to 46 months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release, for illegally re-entering the U.S.
The rule of felony murder is a legal doctrine in some common law jurisdictions that broadens the crime of murder: when an offender kills (regardless of intent to kill) in the commission of a dangerous or enumerated crime (called a felony in some jurisdictions), he/she is guilty of murder.
originally posted by: Templeton
This isn't a good thing if true. The fed should not be relitigating this case. They should deport him and build the wall to keep him out.
If this is true then the Coroners report would be able to show this. though I think that since this person had a handgun to begin with is an item that should have been looked at. If the person was deported 5 times from the country, than how did he legally have a firearm?
This case looks (to me at least) as a case of a state legal system trying to give the middle finger to the President, rather then applying the law. If a white middle class guy had been convicted of trespassing on federal property 5 times, then shot a person with a fire arm (accidental or intentional), would he had been treated the same way?
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Templeton
They're not. They're going after him for what he was found guilty of: having a gun and violating his release.