As soon as the news came out that Jose Ines Garcia Zarate had been acquitted of the murder and manslaughter charges, a headline campaign exploded across Instagram and Twitter. One of the most prominent images that rolled around was a picture of a noose that was captioned with a description of the acquittal. The original poster explained that the immigrant came to this country illegally, and was given a free lawyer on the taxpayer's dime, and a trial in which he could argue his innocence. The author insisted that a crime had been committed against all of America that could never be repaired
I'm going to take this moment to posit that I do find the acquittal for the murder charges to be absolutely appalling. Garcia Zarate is an absolutely disgusting human being, and the fact that he was here in the first place demonstrates the failure in the legal system of our country. Multiple reports show that Jose had been deported five times, and was continually allowed to come back into the country. With two days elapsed, the commentators have come away from the initial shock of the verdict, and have begun to focus on lax enforcement of immigration that allowed this to happen in the first place. By all rights, none of this should even be an issue right now, but it is. It's too late to change the law or the immigration enforcement to bring Miss Steinle back from the dead, so now we have to go forward.
Perhaps the most disappointing thing to me is the idea that is going around that Mr. Zarate should have been carried directly off of the pier and directly to the gallows. While nobody has ever said it outright, it does seem to be the underlying theme with all the pictures of nooses floating around Twitter. The people who are posting seem enraged over the fact that the accused was offered counsel and a fair trial. I'm sorry to give an opinion that is far from the most popular opinion floating around, but I hate that line of thought. When I read some of postings insisting that there should be no considerations for an illegal, I wanted to vomit.
One of the things that modern-day conservatives have loudly touted since the election of Barack Obama is that they are committed to the constitution as written, no exceptions. It is this point that makes the reaction to the Steinle verdict so unsettling. See, the majority of people on the conservative side consider the rights given in the constitution as God-given, rather than government provided. If this is true, that means the rights that are extended to people within our borders should be concrete, regardless of immigration status. Our founding fathers felt that every man have an opportunity to be tried for his crimes rather than just being assumed guilty because someone said so. They also believed strongly that a man should never be defenseless in front of a court. The right to legal counsel means that no one should be forced to answer for a crime without understanding the process or the charges in front of him, and all men should be allowed an expert to represent him before such a court. Mr. Zarate is a despicable human being, but he was allowed basic human rights as prescribed by the men who found this country. The same men who many of the people raising the fuss over the extension of them love to cite on any other topic in modern politics. While it is true that Zarate is an animal, if we were to convict him without a proper trial or representation, we are really no better.
If there is any blame to be placed on the lack of justice served in the case of the death of Kate Steinle, there really isn't any that can be placed on the justice department. The arrest and trial were performed properly, and I couldn't blame a public defender for representing a defendant to the best of his ability. You can't really throw a case deliberately. If there is any blame to be had, it rests on the Jury who interpreted the evidence presented to them. But ultimately, everyone involved did the job they were meant to do. While this is a great loss for the American people, though, it is a big win for the illegal immigration agenda and the wall.
Do you think we should extend the rights of the constitution to illegal immigrants? What would you have done differently? What new rules and laws can we implement going forward to prevent further tragedy? I always welcome comments and discussion both here and over on Twitter. My handle is @edsblogtw1tter if you want to follow me to comment or read previous articles from my feed. If you like what you've read, go ahead and hit that like button, and consider hitting the retweet button as well. That would be cool of you. Remember, never take the words of journalists, bloggers, or podcasters as Gospel. Find all the facts, and draw your own conclusion. Thank you for reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment