San Fransico gun shooting twist

[dragon]

Ok so people were up in arms about how a person that was deported 5 times was able to get a hold of the gun that was used to kill a girl out for an evening stroll. Well guess what they tracked the serial number and guess to whom it belonged.

A federal officer.

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The gun used in the seemingly random slaying of a woman on a San Francisco pier belonged to a federal agent, a law enforcement official briefed on the matter said Tuesday.
Related Stories

Clinton: San Francisco wrong to free immigrant from jail Associated Press
Interview: Suspect in SF pier attack admits he shot woman Associated Press
Felon in immigration furor pleads not guilty to San Francisco shooting Reuters
SF sheriff defends prior release of suspect in pier slaying Associated Press
Slain woman's parents focused on healing, not sanctuary law Associated Press

The official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the case and spoke on condition of anonymity, said a police check of the weapon's serial number shows it belonged to a federal agent. The official declined to elaborate further.

The San Francisco Police Department, which is investigating the case, declined to comment.

The revelation was the latest dramatic twist in a tragic case that has become a new flashpoint in the country's debate over immigration policies.

The suspected gunman, Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez, has been deported to his native Mexico five times and is suspected of living in the United States illegally when Kathryn Steinle, 32, was gunned down last week while on an evening stroll with her father along San Francisco's popular waterfront area.

Federal officials transferred Sanchez to San Francisco's jail in March to face a 20-year-old marijuana charge after Sanchez completed his latest prison term for illegally entering the country.
View gallery
Francisco Sanchez walks into the court for his arraignment …
Francisco Sanchez walks into the court for his arraignment at the Hall of Justice on Tuesday, July 7 …

The San Francisco sheriff, citing the city's "sanctuary city" policy, released Sanchez in April after prosecutors dropped the drug charge, despite an Immigration and Customs Enforcement request to hold him for federal authorities so deportation proceedings could begin.

Sanchez pleaded not guilty Tuesday to first-degree murder.

He told two television stations who interviewed him in jail that he found the gun used in Steinle's killing wrapped in a shirt on the pedestrian pier she was walking on. Sanchez said the gun went off in his hands, and his public defender, Matt Gonzalez, said Tuesday that the San Francisco woman's death appeared accidental.

Regardless of the reason behind Steinle's death, the shooting has touched off criticism from leading Republican lawmakers — and from top Democrats, including both of California's U.S. senators.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton told CNN that San Francisco was wrong to ignore the ICE detainer request and release Sanchez from custody.
View gallery
San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, left, talks …
San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi, left, talks to members of the media after Francisco Sanch …

"The city made a mistake, not to deport someone that the federal government strongly felt should be deported," Clinton said. "So I have absolutely no support for a city that ignores the strong evidence that should be acted on."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein called on San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee to start cooperating with federal immigration officials who want to deport felons such as Sanchez. Feinstein served as San Francisco mayor from 1978 to 1988.

"I strongly believe that an undocumented individual, convicted of multiple felonies and with a detainer request from ICE, should not have been released," Feinstein said. "We should focus on deporting convicted criminals, not setting them loose on our streets."

The mayor's office said it has reached out to Homeland Security officials to determine if there's a way to cooperate while still upholding the city's sanctuary policy.

"Mayor Lee shares the senator's concerns surrounding the nature of Mr. Sanchez's transfer to San Francisco and release," said Christine Falvey, a spokeswoman for the mayor. "As the mayor has stated, we need to gather all of the facts as we develop potential solutions."
View gallery
San Francisco Public Defenders Jeff Adachi, left, and …
San Francisco Public Defenders Jeff Adachi, left, and Matt Gonzalez, right, talks to members of the …

Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer, also from Northern California, said she asked Gov. Jerry Brown if state law was followed in Sanchez's release.

"For decades, I have supported deporting violent criminals, and I have always believed that sanctuary should not be given to felons," Boxer said.

San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi has defended Sanchez's release and the city law requiring it to ignore ICE detainer requests. The sheriff said ICE could have obtained a warrant or court order to keep Sanchez in custody.

"ICE knew where he was," Mirkarimi said Monday.

State and federal Republicans, meanwhile, said they would look into the matter.
View gallery
San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi gestures during …
San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi gestures during an interview Monday, July 6, 2015, in San Franc …

Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, who chairs the Senate's homeland security committee, criticized federal officials and demanded to know why Sanchez was not deported.

"Does that make any sense to you?" Johnson demanded to know at a hearing Tuesday. "Because I'll tell you it doesn't make any sense to the American public."

Republican state Sen. Jeff Stone said he would introduce legislation in Sacramento to require cities to comply with ICE detainer requests.

At Sanchez's arraignment Tuesday, prosecutor Dianna Garcia argued against releasing Sanchez on bail, saying, "This was an act of random violence, shooting an innocent victim in the back."

The judge set bail at $5 million, which Gonzalez said will keep Sanchez jailed pending trial.
View gallery
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee …
Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., left …

A downcast Sanchez spent most of the hearing with his head bowed, appearing to fight back tears while the judge explained the charged to him. Sanchez was aided by a Spanish-language interpreter and entered his plea in Spanish.

Outside court, his attorney said Sanchez has a second-grade education and a non-violent criminal record.

He could face life in prison if convicted.

link

[LadyTevar]

Do you think he was someone's "little birdie"?

[Joun_Lord]

Yeah this is all kinds of freakin' weird. Dude was deported a shitton, shot some random (atleast so far it appears to be random) lady with a gun belonging to a Fed, and this was after San Fran released him despite being a convicted felon.

I'm not a jet fuel can't melt steel beam kinda guy but I gotta admit this shit is like conspiracy theory gold.

This guys entire story is probably bullshit but one thing that is extra bullshit is him saying the gun just "went off". Modern firearms of reputable make have all kinds of safeguards in place to prevent the gun from just shooting itself if you jiggle it. It might theoretically go off if you drop it, the Sten submachine gun was notorious for doing so though it was also an incredibly bare bones and cheap design, but even that is highly unlikely with a modern gun.

Most likely the only way it would have went off is if he did so intentionally, which is likely, or was a dumb enough asshole to be fingerfucking the trigger when he picked it up, also likely considering I've seen plenty of people pick up guns exactly that way.

My probably wrong firearms knowledge aside, I'm going to love reading about how this guy got a Federal agents service piece.

[dragon]

In general modern firearms are a bit less likely to go off accidentally. However there are times where it will. I know some law enforcement types mod their guns with a hair trigger so they can get off a shot faster despite the safety issue.

Also if the gun hadn't been maintained properly it can lead to accidental discharge. I knew one person never took care of his weapon, ended up shooting himiself in the foot because it went off when he wasn't expecting it.

Then there are what we in the IT field call DAU (dumb ass users) , the person could just be an idiot and have know idea what he is doing with a gun.

[General Zod]

Here's an article with some more useful details. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015 ... /29811735/

Relevant bits quoted:

Citing sources, the San Francisco Chronicle, KGO-TV and KNTV-TV reported Tuesday night that the gun used in the shooting was stolen from a federal agent but that it was not clear how Lopez-Sanchez got it.

Sources told the Chronicle that the weapon, a .40-caliber pistol, was the agent's personal firearm and had been stolen in a downtown auto burglary not long before the shooting.

The case has divided law enforcement agencies, with federal immigration authorities lashing out at local police for having ignored a request to hold Lopez-Sanchez so that he could be deported. The slaying also has inflamed the politics of immigration and worked its way into the 2016 presidential campaign.

The tragedy unfolded as Steinle, a medical device sales representative who recently moved to the city from nearby Pleasanton, was posing for photos at Pier 14 with her father, who had his arm around her.

"There was a pop, and Kate went down," 68-year-old Jim Steinle told the San Francisco Chronicle. She died later at San Francisco General Hospital.

Police said that the suspect never exchanged words with Steinle and that the shooting appears random.

In an interview Sunday with KGO, Lopez-Sanchez confessed to the shooting but said it was an accident. He said that he found the gun, wrapped in a T-shirt, under a bench and that it went off three times when he picked it up.

He said he then kicked the gun into San Francisco Bay and walked off, not knowing he had shot someone until police arrested him an hour later on a nearby street corner. He reportedly first told police he had been shooting at sea lions.

Lopez-Sanchez also told an interviewer he was high on sleeping pills and marijuana at the time.

Police were helped in their search for the suspect by photos taken by bystanders.

The next day, a gun believed to have been used in the shooting was recovered from the water next to the pier by police dive teams using sonar equipment.

"ICE places detainers on aliens arrested on criminal charges to ensure dangerous criminals are not released from prisons or jails into our communities," she said. "The agency remains committed to working collaboratively with its law enforcement partners to ensure the public's safety."

While acknowledging the immigration detainer request, the Sheriff's Department said that at the time Lopez-Sanchez was booked into the jail "there was no active (CE) warrant or judicial order of removal for him."

Once the local charges were dropped, a 2013 city ordinance and Sheriff's Department policy on immigration detainers "deemed him ineligible for extended detention."

​Under the sheriff's policy, undocumented immigrants will be detained only if two requirements are met: a violent felony conviction within seven years, and an active violent felony charge that has advanced beyond a preliminary hearing.

Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi, a former city supervisor, defended releasing Lopez-Sanchez, who was held two weeks longer than required by the department's rules.

​"ICE knew that he had been deported five times," he said. "You would have thought he met a threshold that he required a court order or a warrant. They did not do that."

Immigration "detainers," or "holds," have become controversial in recent years as some local law enforcement agencies have fought back against the federal government's requests to hold suspects based on their immigration status, arguing that the practice costs them money and damages their credibility with the communities they serve.

In addition, federal courts have struck down cases involving "holds," stating that these detentions are not voluntary and violate the Fourth Amendment, according to civil rights organizations.

During his interview with KGO-TV, Lopez-Sanchez said he came to San Francisco knowing it was a so-called sanctuary city, where he knew local policies helped shield him from immigration agents.

San Francisco became a sanctuary city in 1989. A local ordinance prohibits city employees from helping ICE with immigration investigations or arrests "unless such help is required by federal or state law or a warrant." The move was intended to stand "firmly against repressive immigration proposals in Congress and immigration raids that separate families."

[Lagmonster]

Someone close to me pointed out that this story is a goldmine for several major talking points not matter what kind of ideologue you are - immigration, gun control, racism, police incompetence, not to mention the tried-and-true shock of the senseless murder of a pretty white girl - there's something in there for everybody to exploit politically.

[General Zod]

Someone close to me pointed out that this story is a goldmine for several major talking points not matter what kind of ideologue you are - immigration, gun control, racism, police incompetence, not to mention the tried-and-true shock of the senseless murder of a pretty white girl - there's something in there for everybody to exploit politically.

If you assume the guy's telling the truth, finding a federal agent's gun that just went off due to improper care or deliberate fiddling makes a lot more sense than a random senseless shooting. Which isn't to say he should get off the hook in the slightest.

[Patroklos]

One shot fired accidentally? Unlikely as described but possible. Three? Infinitesimally small chance with that sort of weapon.

[General Zod]

One shot fired accidentally? Unlikely as described but possible. Three? Infinitesimally small chance with that sort of weapon.

Randomly murdering some girl for no plausible reason than she just happened to be there . . . isn't much more likely. At best I can see negligent homicide without more details of how the gun went off.

[Grumman]

One shot fired accidentally? Unlikely as described but possible. Three? Infinitesimally small chance with that sort of weapon.

Randomly murdering some girl for no plausible reason than she just happened to be there . . . isn't much more likely.

Imagine you're a cop. You find a convicted felon in illegal possession of a firearm and a dead body shot by that gun. Which is more plausible: that somebody who went to the trouble of stealing a federal agent's gun left it under a bench, out of everyone in Los Angeles it was a convicted felon who found it, that the gun went off multiple times when it was picked up and somebody just happened to be standing in front of it to be mortally wounded, at sufficient distance for the convicted felon to not even notice someone had been shot OR that a convicted felon murdered someone without any obvious motive?

[General Zod]

Imagine you're a cop. You find a convicted felon in illegal possession of a firearm and a dead body shot by that gun. Which is more plausible: that somebody who went to the trouble of stealing a federal agent's gun left it under a bench, out of everyone in Los Angeles it was a convicted felon who found it, that the gun went off multiple times when it was picked up and somebody just happened to be standing in front of it to be mortally wounded, at sufficient distance for the convicted felon to not even notice someone had been shot OR that a convicted felon murdered someone without any obvious motive?

Death by stray bullets are common enough that it's not outside the realm of possibility regardless of how the gun went off. The fact that he's a convicted felon is immaterial to motive and method.

[Glocksman]

It's still apparently a conspiracy aganst the local poice post.
Let the trial sort it out before we hang the stooges.
Erragtitless to meanes or motif.

[General Zod]

It's still apparently a conspiracy aganst the local poice post.
Let the trial sort it out before we hang the stooges.
Erragtitless to meanes or motif.

It's possible he was just really stupid about gun safety and tried to fire the gun a few times to see if it worked. But he cooked up the "accidental discharge" story because he doesn't want to sound completely moronic.

[Simon_Jester]

Random senseless shootings happen on a regular basis in America, alas.

Guns 'accidentally' going off three times... that really does sound mechanically impossible.

[TheFeniX]

Guns 'accidentally' going off three times... that really does sound mechanically impossible.

This is a problem on custom-made AR-15 and it's derivatives when people mess around with them themselves. One trigger-pull can fire off multiple rounds, so it's not mechanically impossible, it's just that the trigger reset (or another part) isn't functioning correctly. You can basically end up with the gun "slam firing" itself. Also happened to my brother on some WWII pistol he was doing work on. I won't go into how fucking stupid it was for him to have live ammo around when working on a gun, but it does happen, even to someone with years of firearms knowledge and experience.

However, "accidentally" pulling the trigger three separate times does not seem all that likely. Nor does "I picked it up and it fired 3 times without me touching the trigger." If it was that poorly modified or in that bad of condition, the previous owner likely would have had his own bouts of accidental discharges. Also, without know the make/model of the gun, I can't give more information on what's possible.

[Azazal]

Has there been any mention of the handgun's make and model? Everything I've seen has been "federal agents handgun" or "40 caliber fire arm" etc... I'm going to guess a Glock or SIG, but I would like to know for sure.

If the sear or other parts were wore or in disrepair, it could go full auto for a few rounds. That is a very very heavily emphasized could there. Which is why I want to know the make and model to see if there have been similar reports in the past.

[Simon_Jester]

I would also fondly hope that a gun which (it is implied) was fairly recently in the possession of a federal agent would not be in such miserable disrepair that it could fail in such a bizarre way.

That said, I'm prepared to accept that the laws of physics allow a handgun to accidentally fire three times when picked up, and that out of hundreds of millions of handguns in America it occasionally happens.

Thing is, random shootings by lunatics and jackasses are also a thing that happens, and my gut feeling is that the "random shooting for no understandable reason" hypothesis fits the available data better than the "felon innocently picked up random gun lying on the ground and it went off in his hands three times."

[General Zod]

I would also fondly hope that a gun which (it is implied) was fairly recently in the possession of a federal agent would not be in such miserable disrepair that it could fail in such a bizarre way.

That said, I'm prepared to accept that the laws of physics allow a handgun to accidentally fire three times when picked up, and that out of hundreds of millions of handguns in America it occasionally happens.

Thing is, random shootings by lunatics and jackasses are also a thing that happens, and my gut feeling is that the "random shooting for no understandable reason" hypothesis fits the available data better than the "felon innocently picked up random gun lying on the ground and it went off in his hands three times."

I like to think that there's some sort of middle ground we're just not seeing here. The vast majority of people, even convicted felons, aren't just going to go shooting some random bastard for no good reason. As far as I know the guy doesn't have any obvious signs of mental illness that might provoke that sort of thing outside of the possibility of being incredibly dumb.

[Sea Skimmer]

One shot fired accidentally? Unlikely as described but possible. Three? Infinitesimally small chance with that sort of weapon.

I know someone who tackled someone else who managed to do EXACTLY that with an M1911 and had some kind of bizarre brain panic meltdown about what they were doing when they fired the weapon while trying to clear it... but had forgotten to eject the magazine. And then did the exact same thing twice more before being tackled.

However all three shots went into the floor, and this was certainly not one single action, or something that would excuse a death if it occurred anyway. This involved no malfunction. I cannot comprehend a malfunction which could allow three shots without three trigger pulls, but wouldn't also empty the magazine. And even that's really just getting a bit past credibility and only with certain types of handgun action. In this case, three rounds into another person, yeah fucking right.

[General Zod]

Where does it say she was shot three times? From what I gather the gun went off three times but only one of the rounds made its way into the victim.

[Borgholio]

I know that there was a Japanese handgun from WW2 that was notorious for it's ability to go off all on it's own...but even IT didn't go off three times in a row. I find it highly unlikely that a properly maintained modern firearm could do that.

[Simon_Jester]

I like to think that there's some sort of middle ground we're just not seeing here. The vast majority of people, even convicted felons, aren't just going to go shooting some random bastard for no good reason. As far as I know the guy doesn't have any obvious signs of mental illness that might provoke that sort of thing outside of the possibility of being incredibly dumb.

The flip side of this is that the defense being presented here is almost like a bad parody of the kind of dodgy defense people mount when they know the state has them well and truly caught.

[General Zod]

I like to think that there's some sort of middle ground we're just not seeing here. The vast majority of people, even convicted felons, aren't just going to go shooting some random bastard for no good reason. As far as I know the guy doesn't have any obvious signs of mental illness that might provoke that sort of thing outside of the possibility of being incredibly dumb.

The flip side of this is that the defense being presented here is almost like a bad parody of the kind of dodgy defense people mount when they know the state has them well and truly caught.

But you can't demonstrate that there was any motive, malice or forethought, so charging him with manslaughter or negligent homicide would make more sense than a flat Murder charge.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Um, didn't the guy admit he was high on sleeping pills and weed? It's entirely possible that he sincerely believes his story but it just isn't true.

[General Zod]

Um, didn't the guy admit he was high on sleeping pills and weed? It's entirely possible that he sincerely believes his story but it just isn't true.

Even if he did that's not enough to make it first degree murder. At best you've got second degree murder going on, but more probably voluntary manslaughter.