The illegal alien who shot and killed Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier in 2015 didn’t wind up being convicted of anything other than a weapons charge which would result in no additional jail time. There was some talk about a possible warrant in Texas which might have put Jose Ines Garcia Zarate away for a while if he violated the conditions of parole on a previous conviction, but that remains unclear thus far. Now, however, the game has changed.
The Associated Press reports that the feds have stepped up (as many of us requested initially) and brought charges against Zarate. They would basically be the same counts of being an illegal alien and felon in possession of a weapon which the state convicted him on, but this time handled at the federal level
U.S. authorities on Tuesday charged a Mexican man with new immigration and gun violations less than a week after a San Francisco jury acquitted him of murder for the shooting death of Kate Steinle, a case that helped fuel a fierce national debate on immigration.
A federal grand jury in San Francisco indicted Jose Ines Garcia Zarate Tuesday on one count each of felon in possession of a firearm and of “being an alien illegally and unlawfully in the United States” in possession of a gun and ammunition, according to the indictment.
A San Francisco jury last week convicted him of a state charge of felon in possession of a firearm after acquitting him of murder and assault for the July 1, 2015 shooting.
It sounds like the Justice Department is looking at going after Zarate under 18 U.S. Code § 922 – Unlawful acts, section (g), which includes this provision:
(g) It shall be unlawful for any person— (5) who, being an alien— (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.
Is that going to be enough to get a stiffer sentence and put the killer away for any significant amount of time? Getting a conviction shouldn’t be too tough considering he was already found guilty of the identical crime at the state level. And if it brings a tougher sentence, why not at least give it a try? The worst case scenario is that he winds up being deported, which is what was going to happen now anyway. And, of course, that means he’ll probably be back in San Franciso roaming the streets in under two months.
I wonder if we could embed one of those tracking and ID chips in him like we do with lost pets? Naw… I’m sure somebody would complain about a human rights violation of some sort.