San Francisco's Mayor Needs To Be Thrown In Jail

BravoWhiskey5280

Active member
San Francisco prosecutors Monday charged an illegal immigrant -- with a lengthy criminal record and deported five times -- with the murder of a young woman at a popular city pier.

Francisco Sanchez, a 45-year-old repeat drug offender released from jail April 15 after law enforcement officials declined to prosecute him, was expected to be arraigned Tuesday in the killing of Kathryn Steinle, 32.

ADVERTISEMENT

The charge came hours after federal immigration officials fired back at San Francisco for putting Sanchez back on the street, saying "this terrible tragedy" could have been prevented if they had been notified of the suspect's release.

Sanchez, a Mexican national, had been in the custody of the San Francisco Sheriff's Department on a decade-old drug charge when he was released.

In a detailed statement released Monday, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) said that at the time it had turned over Sanchez to local law enforcement, it also had requested that they be kept apprised of any changes in his status -- and they weren't.

"We're not asking local law enforcement to do our job," ICE spokeswoman Gillian Christensen said in the statement. "All we're asking is that they notify us when a serious foreign national criminal offender is being released to the street so we can arrange to take custody."

More on this...

ICE: Suspect in deadly shooting had been deported five times

How did suspected killer manage to stay in US?

While saying the agency understands local law enforcement's "reticence" on the issue, Christensen said the bottom line is that if San Francisco authorities "had merely NOTIFIED ICE that they were about to release this individual into the community, ICE could have taken custody of him and had him removed from the country -- thus preventing this terrible tragedy."

The city did not notify ICE, she said, and, "As a result, an individual with a lengthy criminal history, who is now the suspect in a tragic murder case, was released onto the street rather than being turned over to ICE for deportation."

The circumstances surrounding Sanchez have reignited the debate over so-called sanctuary city policies.

As a sanctuary city, San Francisco like many other California cities often does not turn over illegal immigrants to federal officials.

However, Sanchez has a lengthy rap sheet.

According to ICE, he had been deported five times, most recently in 2009, and his record included seven prior felony convictions. ICE briefly had him in their custody after he completed a prison sentence in California, but turned him over to San Francisco on an outstanding warrant for a felony drug charge in late March. They lodged what's known as an "immigration detainer," which was not honored.

Freya Horne, an attorney for the San Francisco Sheriff's Department, told the Associated Press on Friday they had no authority to hold him.

Horne said federal detention orders are not a "legal basis" to hold someone, so Sanchez was released April 15. Horne said the city does not turn over people who are in the country illegally unless there's an active warrant for their arrest.

But a law enforcement official familiar with the issue told FoxNews.com there are "literally no jurisdictions" in the country where ICE gets a judicial warrant to request that local law enforcement notify them of a pending release.

The official called this claim by San Francisco "ridiculous."

Meanwhile, Sanchez reportedly has admitted in a jailhouse interview that he shot Steinle.

He told KGO-TV Sunday in a mix of Spanish and English that he found a gun wrapped inside a shirt while he was sitting on a bench at the pier and smoking a cigarette.

"So I picked it up and ... it started to fire on its own," Sanchez said, adding that he heard three shots go off.

Steinle was gunned down while out for an evening stroll at Pier 14 with her father and a family friend on Wednesday. Police said witnesses heard no argument or dispute before the shooting, suggesting it was a random attack.

A source familiar with the investigation told the San Francisco Chronicle that Sanchez said he was at the popular pier to shoot at sea lions, and discarded the firearm after realizing he had shot Steinle.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This is absolutely disgusting. San Frans mayor deliberately gave this five time felon/illegal immigrant sanctuary in the city of San Francisco and he refused to turn him over to the feds when they wanted him. He has to be held responsible for this poor girls murder. By ignoring multiple immigration laws and ignoring United States Constitution, the United States General attorney could definitely throw SF's mayor into jail if she wanted to. I know thats never going to happen though because the Obama administration is a piece of shit. There is no doubt that they could prosecute him if they wanted to though.
 
I might as well tell everyone that I'm not a racist right now because I already know that's there's someone on here that'll play the race card because they disagree with me.
 
I'll bite. While this particular event is indeed tragic, the perception of illegal immigrants as violent criminals is simply wrong.

There are just over 11 million undocumented immigrants in the US today, the vast majority of which come from countries that are much more lawless and conducive to crime than the US. There is a great deal of evidence to support the fact that illegal immigrants in fact commit crimes at a far LOWER rate than native-born citizens. This parallels the fairly obvious idea that, having entered a country illegally, immigrants strive to keep their profile as low as possible, i.e. not commit crimes that will most likely result in their deportation.

The conclusion that SHOULD be reached after reading about this event, is that US immigration policy is entirely broken. Better immigration policy requires two questions to be answered, 1) how can we prevent more non-citizens from entering out country illegally and 2) what do we do with the current population of illegal immigrants. Only one party ended up supporting the policy recommendations provided by the bipartisan Gang of 8, the other hasn't removed their thumb from their backside in 6 years. I'll let you guess which is which.
http://www.immigrationpolicy.org/ju...etting-record-straight-immigrants-and-crime-0
 
13457308:redherring said:
nice copy and paste, why would you post this on a ski forum?

I'd like to refer you to the Ski Gabber forum if you'd prefer not to read about non-skiing related content. I recommend you get more familiar with this website before posting again, we have enough people like you already in this community.

Cheers
 
For starters I think the whole "Safe Haven Cities" is bull shit. Second the mayor had his hands tied on this one. This was a law that was enacted before they were ever in office. While you can disagree with it, the mayor is bound, by law to uphold the laws that the people pass. Go ahead and hate the people of SF if you want, but going after the elected officials that were placed there by the people that voted said laws into effect is just silly. The People have to power if they choose to use it that is up to them.
 
topic:BravoWhiskey5280 said:
This is absolutely disgusting. San Frans mayor deliberately gave this five time felon/illegal immigrant sanctuary in the city of San Francisco and he refused to turn him over to the feds when they wanted him. He has to be held responsible for this poor girls murder. By ignoring multiple immigration laws and ignoring United States Constitution, the United States General attorney could definitely throw SF's mayor into jail if she wanted to. I know thats never going to happen though because the Obama administration is a piece of shit. There is no doubt that they could prosecute him if they wanted to though.

1. Maybe it was left out of your report, but why are you targeting the mayor here? While the mayor is in charge of the city, I don't think his direct responsibilities include preventing shootings of people (and apparently seals).

2. Even if the mayor is responsible, why would the Obama administration go after him? That is normally the job of the FBI/US attorney, who go after mayors all the time regardless of which president is in office.

3. What your report does point out is a HUGE problem of whose job it is to do what with illegal immigrants who commit crimes. If anything, this points out a rather important need for immigration reform, categorization of duties, and execution of said duties.
 
13457329:onenerdykid said:
1. Maybe it was left out of your report, but why are you targeting the mayor here? While the mayor is in charge of the city, I don't think his direct responsibilities include preventing shootings of people (and apparently seals).

2. Even if the mayor is responsible, why would the Obama administration go after him? That is normally the job of the FBI/US attorney, who go after mayors all the time regardless of which president is in office.

3. What your report does point out is a HUGE problem of whose job it is to do what with illegal immigrants who commit crimes. If anything, this points out a rather important need for immigration reform, categorization of duties, and execution of said duties.

1) It's not that the mayor directly has to prevent shootings. It's the fact that had the mayor not given sanction to this illegal immigrant, the shooting wouldn't have happened.

2&3 You're right about both of these.
 
13457346:Stose said:
1) It's not that the mayor directly has to prevent shootings. It's the fact that had the mayor not given sanction to this illegal immigrant, the shooting wouldn't have happened.

Which I do understand, but it's an argument about causation not negligence and said arguments are the whole basis for why conservatives say "it's not guns that kill people, people kill people". This case is no different when viewed in that light.

Arguments of causation amount to a chain of variables and by removing a variable the scenario cannot happen. For example, take away guns and you don't have any more gun violence or had the mayor locked him up, this wouldn't have happened. Both use the same argumentation, and eventually you could argue that if he had never been born it wouldn't have happened either. All of these causes are equally valid.

Arguments of culpability/negligence amount to who acted improperly due to their own actions and thus who is directly responsible. In this case, Francisco Sanchez the shooter is the person who is directly responsible since he (allegedly) pulled the trigger.

Now the case could be made that the mayor/law enforcement is also negligent in this case too, which is also very plausible. But don't use arguments of causation because everything is a cause and you can remove any variable in the equation equally and they all need to be there for an event to happen.
 
OP you have been on a strong copy and paste grind lately.

But my 2 cents, yes this is a tragedy, this guy certainly slipped through the cracks of our current system.

This does not mean we should jail the mayor of San Fran.

I'd go so far as to say if everyone released in the system was the sole jurisdiction of the mayor, and he had personally reviewed the file, he would have said no.

This is a tragedy indeed but it has been used by parts of the media in an attempt to villinize all illegal immigrants, when in reality there is no correlation between that group and increased violent crime. Rally the base, get them to vote on emotion rather than facts
 
13457352:onenerdykid said:
Which I do understand, but it's an argument about causation not negligence and said arguments are the whole basis for why conservatives say "it's not guns that kill people, people kill people". This case is no different when viewed in that light.

Arguments of causation amount to a chain of variables and by removing a variable the scenario cannot happen. For example, take away guns and you don't have any more gun violence or had the mayor locked him up, this wouldn't have happened. Both use the same argumentation, and eventually you could argue that if he had never been born it wouldn't have happened either. All of these causes are equally valid.

Arguments of culpability/negligence amount to who acted improperly due to their own actions and thus who is directly responsible. In this case, Francisco Sanchez the shooter is the person who is directly responsible since he (allegedly) pulled the trigger.

Now the case could be made that the mayor/law enforcement is also negligent in this case too, which is also very plausible. But don't use arguments of causation because everything is a cause and you can remove any variable in the equation equally and they all need to be there for an event to happen.

Oh I completely agree with you. I just thought you didn't understand why the OP was singling out the mayor so I was just explaining what he was trying to get at.
 
I just have a huge problem with these safe haven cities that harbor criminals. Remember, if you enter this country illegally than you are committing a crime so therefore you are a criminal. Get the picture? You can argue all you want wether or not these people are violent or not, obviously the majority of them are not. But there is no way to get around the fact that these people are criminals because of the crime they committed by entering this country illegally.

I especially have a problem with it because one of these illegals, I live in Denver aka a sanctuary city, crashed into my truck while he was driving drunk and then he fled the scene this past January. The cops pulled him over 15 minutes later and they told me that this was his ninth DUI and that he was an illegal! Of course he didn't have a drivers license's or insurance so guess who was stuck paying the $1000 deductible to fix my truck? Yeah, that would be me. So in a sense, if you're okay with these sanctuary cities than you are okay with the fact that you will paying for all the damages to your if you get in an accident with one of these illegals, even if they were the ones that are completely at fault.
 
13462305:BravoWhiskey5280 said:
The cops pulled him over 15 minutes later and they told me that this was his ninth DUI and that he was an illegal! Of course he didn't have a drivers license's or insurance so guess who was stuck paying the $1000 deductible to fix my truck? Yeah, that would be me. So in a sense, if you're okay with these sanctuary cities than you are okay with the fact that you will paying for all the damages to your if you get in an accident with one of these illegals, even if they were the ones that are completely at fault.

And as a side note, you can sue them in small claims court for that.

Let it be known, this is WHY we should allow illegal immigrants drivers licesnses, because if you live in this country legally and you are driving an uninsured vehicle without a license, you are always legally liable for damages caused, (same as with illegals) but get them the ability to get a license and insurance and you would see less of this.
 
Lol 20 bucks said op got all of this from the oreily factor about this, where he blamed it on Obama.

Think for yourself bud
 
13462305:BravoWhiskey5280 said:
I just have a huge problem with these safe haven cities that harbor criminals. Remember, if you enter this country illegally than you are committing a crime so therefore you are a criminal. Get the picture? You can argue all you want wether or not these people are violent or not, obviously the majority of them are not. But there is no way to get around the fact that these people are criminals because of the crime they committed by entering this country illegally.

I especially have a problem with it because one of these illegals, I live in Denver aka a sanctuary city, crashed into my truck while he was driving drunk and then he fled the scene this past January. The cops pulled him over 15 minutes later and they told me that this was his ninth DUI and that he was an illegal! Of course he didn't have a drivers license's or insurance so guess who was stuck paying the $1000 deductible to fix my truck? Yeah, that would be me. So in a sense, if you're okay with these sanctuary cities than you are okay with the fact that you will paying for all the damages to your if you get in an accident with one of these illegals, even if they were the ones that are completely at fault.

Every time you speed you break the law and become a criminal too. They're are people trying to escape a shitty life. It's funny how we used to be a country that welcomed others in rather than try our darbdest to keep them out. Building a wall will just cause people to work harder to find a way over the wall.
 
Back
Top