Quote Originally Posted by jmdaniel View Post
Honest question here, and please try to answer it without your escalating levels of snark; it's not a good look.

From the article:

Weisberg, the criminal justice professor, who was not involved in the case, said he was "particularly surprised" that the jury did not convict Garcia Zarate of manslaughter. "It's not improbable to think that the shooting showed a gross kind of negligence," he said.

Weisberg said prosecutors may have had trouble reconciling the first- and second-degree murder charges with the involuntary manslaughter charge. "It could be that they were just in a situation where they couldn't make an argument that the shooting was both accidental and intentional," he said.

I honestly don't know how/why the charges are/were connected; 1st, 2nd, and involuntary. I thought, (and I'm obviously not a lawyer), that juries could consider each charge in isolation. If so, at least in my mind, (but it appears also in others), that it was clear her death occurred at least in part due to careless handling of the gun by the perp. No intent, no malice, just a dumbass with a gun. Thanks for any info you can provide.

I did kinda chuckle when I saw the Feds are after him now. I suspect his treatment here in Texas will be a bit different.
I agree with your logic here... and I had the same thoughts and question of the multiple charges leveled in this trial. It seems reasonable to believe that jury consideration of each charge, in order of descending degree, would result in at least some finding of guilt. If the jury couldn’t get to 1st murder... and neither could they reach 2nd... then I would expect them to find for manslaughter, at least.

I would have loved to sit in the gallery on this and observe the proceedings first hand.