08-31-2015, 10:24 AM
The Charges and Legalities
It's been difficult to find good legal (non-political) coverage of the case against Lopez-Sanchez.
This was compiled from various media reports of last week's preliminary hearing and review of the California law/codes.
1. Prosecutors are seeking to prove probable cause exists to try Lopez-Sanchez for Second Degree Murder.
Second Degree murder does not require express malice or intent to kill. It requires implied malice. Implied malice can be found when the defendant intentionally committed an act, the natural consequences of which were dangerous to human life. In this case, that act would be intentionally firing a gun in a crowded public area.
2. The defendant, Lopez-Sanchez, claims he accidentally fired the gun.
He said he found the stolen Bureau of Land Management ranger's gun, a Sig Sauer .40-caliber pistol, wrapped in a t-shirt underneath a bench (that's not disputed, as far as I know) at Pier 14, where the shooting took place. He and his defense attorney maintain that he did not intend to pull the trigger.
Jim Norris, a forensic science consultant and former director of the San Francisco Police Department's Forensic Services Division was called by the defense last Thursday.
Norris' testimony contradicted that of the prosecution's expert witness. Norris said a Sig Sauer P239 .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol has no safety switch and the weapon has a trigger that requires little force to pull, therefore supporting the defense position that it could have accidentally gone off.
3. The Prosecution contends that Lopez-Sanchez intentionally pulled the trigger.
Early last week, San Francisco police criminalist and ballistics expert Gerald Andrew Smith, who examined the gun, testified that the trigger required about 5 pounds of pressure and had to be intentionally pulled for the gun to go off. Smith admitted during cross-examination that the gun could have misfired.
4. The fatal shot was not a direct hit; the victim was struck by a ricocheted bullet.
San Francisco's chief medical examiner Dr. Michael Hunter, who took the stand on Wednesday, said the victim suffered an atypical, rectangular entrance wound, consistent with a ricocheted bullet. The bullet was severely flattened on one side, indicating that it had hit a very hard surface like concrete or steel before penetrating Kathryn Steinle's back. This is not disputed -- both sides acknowledge that Kate was hit by a ricocheted bullet and not by direct fire.
--For Second Degree Murder to apply: Lopez-Sanchez would have had to intentionally fire the gun in the crowded tourist spot. The prosecutor has gone one step further and is alleging that Lopez-Sanchez also intentionally aimed the gun at Kate when he intentionally pulled the trigger. A lesser related charge would be manslaughter; an unlawful killing without malice, but with a "conscious disregard for human life. The penalty for Second Degree Murder is 20 years to life. The penalty for manslaughter is up to 5 years.
--For a Murder charge to be denied: The judge would need to find that there is no probable cause to dispute the defendant's claim; that Lopez-Sanchez mishandled the gun and it accidentally fired (no intent to pull the trigger), releasing a bullet that hit a hard surface and then ricocheted into the back of Kathryn Steinle.
The judge continued Lopez-Sanchez' preliminary hearing until 9 a.m. on Sept. 3 to allow additional witnesses to take the stand.
If Judge Conroy finds that there is probable cause to believe Lopez-Sanchez committed the crime of murder, the defendant will stand trial.
Sources:
http://abc7news.com/politics/expert-pier...t-/959901/
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/08/....html?_r=0
http://www.criminallawconsulting.com/mur...ghter.html
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-...-laws.html
It's been difficult to find good legal (non-political) coverage of the case against Lopez-Sanchez.
This was compiled from various media reports of last week's preliminary hearing and review of the California law/codes.
1. Prosecutors are seeking to prove probable cause exists to try Lopez-Sanchez for Second Degree Murder.
Second Degree murder does not require express malice or intent to kill. It requires implied malice. Implied malice can be found when the defendant intentionally committed an act, the natural consequences of which were dangerous to human life. In this case, that act would be intentionally firing a gun in a crowded public area.
2. The defendant, Lopez-Sanchez, claims he accidentally fired the gun.
He said he found the stolen Bureau of Land Management ranger's gun, a Sig Sauer .40-caliber pistol, wrapped in a t-shirt underneath a bench (that's not disputed, as far as I know) at Pier 14, where the shooting took place. He and his defense attorney maintain that he did not intend to pull the trigger.
Jim Norris, a forensic science consultant and former director of the San Francisco Police Department's Forensic Services Division was called by the defense last Thursday.
Norris' testimony contradicted that of the prosecution's expert witness. Norris said a Sig Sauer P239 .40 caliber semi-automatic pistol has no safety switch and the weapon has a trigger that requires little force to pull, therefore supporting the defense position that it could have accidentally gone off.
3. The Prosecution contends that Lopez-Sanchez intentionally pulled the trigger.
Early last week, San Francisco police criminalist and ballistics expert Gerald Andrew Smith, who examined the gun, testified that the trigger required about 5 pounds of pressure and had to be intentionally pulled for the gun to go off. Smith admitted during cross-examination that the gun could have misfired.
4. The fatal shot was not a direct hit; the victim was struck by a ricocheted bullet.
San Francisco's chief medical examiner Dr. Michael Hunter, who took the stand on Wednesday, said the victim suffered an atypical, rectangular entrance wound, consistent with a ricocheted bullet. The bullet was severely flattened on one side, indicating that it had hit a very hard surface like concrete or steel before penetrating Kathryn Steinle's back. This is not disputed -- both sides acknowledge that Kate was hit by a ricocheted bullet and not by direct fire.
--For Second Degree Murder to apply: Lopez-Sanchez would have had to intentionally fire the gun in the crowded tourist spot. The prosecutor has gone one step further and is alleging that Lopez-Sanchez also intentionally aimed the gun at Kate when he intentionally pulled the trigger. A lesser related charge would be manslaughter; an unlawful killing without malice, but with a "conscious disregard for human life. The penalty for Second Degree Murder is 20 years to life. The penalty for manslaughter is up to 5 years.
--For a Murder charge to be denied: The judge would need to find that there is no probable cause to dispute the defendant's claim; that Lopez-Sanchez mishandled the gun and it accidentally fired (no intent to pull the trigger), releasing a bullet that hit a hard surface and then ricocheted into the back of Kathryn Steinle.
The judge continued Lopez-Sanchez' preliminary hearing until 9 a.m. on Sept. 3 to allow additional witnesses to take the stand.
If Judge Conroy finds that there is probable cause to believe Lopez-Sanchez committed the crime of murder, the defendant will stand trial.
Sources:
http://abc7news.com/politics/expert-pier...t-/959901/
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/08/....html?_r=0
http://www.criminallawconsulting.com/mur...ghter.html
http://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-...-laws.html