now at the hall of justice. what is happening as we wait for this verdict to be read? >> larry, dion, i have to tell you, the anticipation level has gone from 0 to 60 -- >> in a few seconds. >> the last 30 minutes initially since it was anoubsnounced thers a verdict. we're waiting for people to be screened, the press to be screened to go into the courtroom. the defense team is inside. as well as the prosecution. they went inside about ten minutes ago. >> that's right. and cornell, it took about, i would say -- yesterday was 22 hours or so. so add another four or five hours. less than 30 hours of deliberations. and, again, as you've said before, you know, it took a long time to get here for the jury. this started on october 23rd. and so let me tell you what is going to happen. right now, you see a long line of people who, from the press who will go inside the courtroom.

i'm one of those people, cornell, my colleague here will stay outside to talk a little bit more about the process, how we got here. i'll be inside. and during that time where the votes, the prosecution and the defense will be there along with the jury, the verdict will be heard. and then after the verdict is heard, each member of the jury will be polled, meaning do you agree with this verdict? and it's something that's done all of the time. that's something, if you know the judicial system, it has to be done. so that's going to take a little longer. in the meantime we are not allowed to leave, meaning the press is not allowed to leave the courtroom while this is going on. so it's going to be really interesting to find out -- you find out how, you know, the verdict, what the verdict was -- what verdict was reached. and let me just say, if you want to go over the -- what he faces. jose ines garcia zarate is

charged with second degree murder for the shooting death of kate steinle, 32 years old. now, remember that the prosecution also asked them to consider first degree murder as well as involuntary manslaughter. they could consider those. we were also thinking that perhaps, because it was taking so long, thatha the jury was not reaching or agreeing on some things. >> deadlocked. >> possibility of a hung jury. apparently not. >> we got here at 9:00 a.m. the jury, like they have been doing for the last six days, auks in. about 10:00 a.m. there was a lot of swiexcitement in the hallway. the prosecution team was summoned to the courtroom, and defense team was someoned

summoned to the courtroom and what they needed to see again. >> one of the things that happened this morning that took us by surprise, one of my sources told me, was that the gun used to kill kate steinle was brought back into the courtroom. all of us kind of scratched our heads. because why this late in the game was that gun brought back inside. it was the bailiff who brought the gun in a bag, in a brown bag, brought it in. the attorneys went inside, of course the press is not allowed to be inside per the judge. so we didn't know, we weren't there, we didn't see what they -- what happened with that gun, if any questions were asked about the gun. but we know that that has been confirmed that the gun was brought in back. now did they have a question about the weight of the gun? we don't know. did they have a question about, perhaps, the trigger, or, you know -- but one thing that

people should know is that the members of the jury were not allowed to quote/unquote experiment with the gun, meaning they weren't allowed to -- >> pick it up, hold it. >> and pull the trigger to see if -- what the defense has said, that perhaps the trigger was pulled accidentally, or that it went off accidentally. >> the court said it's the key to this case. >> right. >> was it a tragic accident? was it a willful and intentional act as the prosecution contends? >> that's right. >> i interviewed the defendant 48 hours after he was arrested. he told me he found the gun, wrapped in a t-shirt on pier 14 underneath a bench. the defense attorney went along with that as well. but it came down to how easily did that gun go off when he picked it up? >> right, the prosecution also says, though, on the other hand, that he had the gun with him all

along. >> right. >> that garcia zarate brought it to the pier, had it in his hand, and aimed the gun at the steinle family. remember, kate steinle was there with her father on pier 14 and a friend. they were walking. so the prosecution again contends that the -- garcia as a ta tee aimed the gun at the steinles and pulled the trigger. there was never a motive, it was never clear here. so that's what we are -- was discussed in court. i have to say also that the steinle family for you, for all of you who want to know, will not be here. that was a decision that was made a while back. they decided that they didn't want to be part of the, you know, the issue of politicizing this whole event as many people have done. remember, garcia zarate is an undocumented immigrant who had been deported several times and

also with a number of nonviolent felony convictions. >> right. >> so of course it became a political hot bed in the united states. they will not be here, but they will issue a recorded -- previously recorded statement which we will have both online at abc 7 news.com and also for you on our newscast. so, again, in case you were wondering -- well, joining us and wondering what we're doing here, we are waiting for -- to go inside. some members of the press with our credentials, and we will be there -- i don't know how long, 30 minutes perhaps. but anyway, we're going to be inside. i'm going to be dark, as they say, for a while without able -- without being able to communicate with you all. but my colleague cornell will be here answering questions and going live from here. >> and the judge and the court administrators have made it very

clear, no electronic devices inside. once the verdict is read, you cannot get up and rush out like we've seen in many cases. >> we will be quickly to enter with the prosecution and the defense and perhaps members of the jury once this is all said and done. they are just calling -- >> no ear piece around your neck. >> okay. >> and just announced that this device right here, which is what i use to hear you, i cannot take it in with me, or any kind of electronic device. >> right. they said around 3:15 this would be a verdict in about 30 minutes. clearly it's going to take much longer for all the members of the media, all the people who entered a pool, members of the public to be a part of -- being in the courtroom witnessing this verdict being read clearly it's going to take a bit of time. >> that's right. so we should -- should know in

about maybe 30, 45 minutes, an hour, perhaps longer. keep it here because we've been here since october 23rd. we know the case very well. and it's, of course, of great interest to so many people, not only in this san francisco bay area, but clearly around the country. >> clearly a case the nation is watching. larry, dion, let's take it back to you now. >> cornell bernard and leanne menendez, thanks to you. it's so important to note the procedures in this free flowing process. it's going to be something we watch for all the evening. >> well, hopefully it will be resolved. and here is the process, and i want to bring in long-timal me ca county deputy district attorney john craig, now retired. let's talk about the process, first of all. the court doesn't operate under these time constraints of

immediacy. everybody has to be brought into the courtroom. nobody gets to leave. you can't tweet out the information. this takes a while. >> that's correct. the jury will be brought in. they will hand the verdict forms to the clerk. the clerk will hand them to the judge. the judge will review them. and then he will ask the clerk to read the verdicts. >> so what are we looking at, maybe an hour? >> could be less than that. but, i mean, nothing will happen until presumably the media is admitted into the courtroom. >> okay. let's talk about the possibilities here because when you and i spoke, i was really enlightened as to how this may go. i think many of us thought, based on the facts that we knew about involuntary manslaughter was a likely outcome. but let's start from the top and the possibility of first-degree murder, what would have to be proved, and what the sentencing would likely be for that. >> first-degree murder you have to prove not only that the defendant had an intent to kill ms. steinle, but that he thought

about it beforehand. he premeditated and deliberated about it beforehand. the facts supporting that charge are thin. >> okay. >> second-degree murder requires an intent to kill, or an intent to do an act so reckless, which is firing a gun in a crowded pier, with conscious disregard of that danger. in other words, he knew it was dangerous and he didn't care and did it anyway, even though he may not have intended to kill ms. steinle, doing that act in such a reckless and disregarding way will permit a conviction for second-degree murder. >> before you go on, i know you want to jump in here, give me the penalties or first-degree and second-degree. i think this is a key part of this case. >> first-degree murder is 25 years to life. >> okay. >> and second-degree murder is

15 years to life. however, the jury -- there are use enhancements, use of a handgund ose could add some timo that. >> perhaps 10 to 14 years? >> well, actually 25 to life. >> oh, really? okay. >> yes. >> okay, and something i wanted to point out is that leanne had mentioned during this process, you know, very late in the game this gun was brought back to the jurors. what do you think some of the possible reasoning for this is? i know that there are circumstances surrounding if the gun went off accidentally as, you know, he has wanted to claim, what could some of these options be? >> well, it's my understanding that the defense attorney made an issue of this in closing argument and invited the jury to test the pressure, the trigger pull on this handgun. i suspect that perhaps one or more of the jurors focused in on that and wanted to handle the gun and test the trigger pull.

>> would they be allowed to do that? because i thought our reporter said that they couldn't test it out. >> well, it's an interesting question. the judge instructs the jury at the conclusion of the case. and one of the instructions given is that the jurors are not permitted to go to the scene. they're not permitted to consult sources such as dictionaries or social media or the internet. and they're not to conduct experiments. in this case -- so, for instance, if a juror was to go home and take his gun and test the trigger pull on that, that would be an impermissible experiment because that's not the gun at issue and it has no relevance to this case. >> right, right. >> but the gun in this case has been admitted into evidence, and presumably both sides have made an issue of the trigger pull.

so it seems to me that that wuld be a permissible experiment for the jury to conduct under controlled circumstances, of course, if permitted by the court and with the consent of both parties. >> okay. it's unclear at the moment whether that was allowed. we'll find out later on. >> as long as the experiment doesn't go beyond the scope of the evidence or the issues presented, and it's done in a controlled -- in the jury room with all present. >> right, right. >> then that's permissible. >> let me go back to involuntary manslaughter as we were going down the possibilities, because that's four years max. right, as a penalty, so that could be another option here? >> correct. involuntary manslaughter in this case would mean handling or brandishing the gun in such a reckless way as to be labeled criminal negligence. and if it results in a death,

then he would be liable for involuntary manslaughter. >> and then you have the gun enhancement possibility on top of that. >> yes. >> well, i think we are going to take a short break. john craton, our league

the uncertainties of hep c. wondering, what if? i let go of all those feelings. because i am cured with harvoni. harvoni is a revolutionary treatment for the most common type of chronic hepatitis c. it's been prescribed to more than a quarter million people. and is proven to cure up to 99% of patients who have had no prior treatment with 12 weeks. certain patients can be cured with just 8 weeks of harvoni. before starting harvoni,

your doctor will test to see if you've ever had hepatitis b, which may flare up and cause serious liver problems during and after harvoni treatment. tell your doctor if you've ever had hepatitis b, a liver transplant, other liver or kidney problems, hiv or any other medical conditions and about all the medicines you take including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with harvoni can cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects of harvoni include tiredness, headache and weakness. ready to let go of hep c? ask your hep c specialist about harvoni. we are awaiting the verdict in the trial of the man accused of killing kate steinle. we have a live look of team coverage for you, six reporters that lyanne melendez has gone into the courtroom, from what we understand, cornell barnard

waiting outside. we are expecting the verdict to happen any minute now as anticipation continues to build. >> while we wait for the decision of the jurors, we'll take you back. remember the shooting happened, it was a busy public space, we're talking about pier 14 near san francisco's ferry building, right along -- and a reporter is at the scene of the shooting. >> reporter: an area here at pier 14, an area that's considered safe by so many who either live in the bay area or visit. and as you say, it was two years ago, july of 2015 that kate steinle was here with her family prior to shooting. she had been walking along here, something people who live and visit the bay area do all of the time when she was shot and killed. we know in covering the story the last couple of years that she had said to her father numerous times after she was shot that she needed help. she was asking for help,

seemingly unaware of what had just happened. we also know in talking to her closest friends and family members over the years that she was someone who was truly enjoying her life at the time of this shooting. everything was going exceptionally well at work. she was dating someone. she had traveled quite a bit. we've learned that she really enjoyed yoga, loved to travel, and was very spiritual in nature. i want to show you here the bench that has been dedicated in her memory with a plaque, with the words that say "whatever's good for your soul, do that." these are the words that kate steinle posted to her facebook page the day before her death. we're here live at pier 14 also awaiting this verdict. for now, though, back to you. >> very poignant message there on that bench. melanie, thanks to you.

something we should point out. when it comes to where the press can be, there are very strict rules. which is why we have a team in place at multiple different locations. >> yeah, and the case has captured so much attention, both in san francisco and nationally as well. abc 7 reporter wayne freedman live at san francisco city hall where officials there are waiting to hear what the jury has decided. >> good afternoon, yes, they're waiting. for the most part they have not wanted to influence the outcome of this trial. after we get a verdict we'll get more information from them. this was, of course, much more than a murder case. the man was homeless, undocumented immigrant and had been previously reported. as a candidate, president trump and others blamed san francisco's sanctuary city policy for this murder. or shooting, however the jury rules on it. earlier today we tracked down mayor lee to ask his opinion.

>> we are and will remain a sanctuary city, no matter what the attorney general of the united states tries to do, or the president tries to do, because we believe and we know for a fact we're a safer city as a result. that's why we'll continue being a strong city for immigrants, pfor diversity. we're not going to blame people. but we are going to hold folks individually accountable for their actions. >> okay, and just moments ago you say wayne freedman, our reporter outside of city hall, explaining the sanctuary city status of san francisco, and how the mayor of san francisco insists that despite whatever outcome of this case we will remain a sanctuary city. >> it's very controversial because you can see both sides of this argument where you can't -- you don't want to have somebody that has continually been deported coming back five times. >> correct. >> as was the case with garcia zarate, and then committing this heinous crime, whether it was

intentional or not. it's a problem, and you understand the issues on the law enforcement side where they say if you prevent these people or if you get ice involved, then we'll never get any of of these people as sources to find out about bigger crimes that may be occurring. that's the whole political argument that can be discussed at a later date. for the moment we're going to pause while we wait for the verdict and we'll do something lighter and check on the weather. >> yeah, let's get a check now with spencer christian standing by. from what we've seen from the live shots it's a lovely sunny day outside. >> it's been this way for several days now. you can see we have bright skies, the view from rooftop camera. you can see the moon up there in the distance under mainly -- or against a mainly blue sky. 58 degrees in san francisco. san jose 65. gilroy 63 degrees. and check out the setting sun. temperatures in the low to mid-60s right now at santa rosa,

napa, novato, fairfield, concord and livermore. it will be another chilly start to the day tomorrow morning, bright and mild conditions in the afternoon. and a slight chance of weekend showers. over night, though, look for mainly clear skies with low temperatures ranging from upper 30s in the north bay valleys to low and mid-40s about everywhere else. tomorrow we'll have another sunny and relatively mild day with high temperatures ranging from low and mid-60s at the coast to low and mid-60s around the bay and inland. look ahead with forecast an mission, starting at noon on saturday we'll see an increase in clouds over the weekend. although the weekend should be mainly dry, we could see a few light showers or scattr scattr t sprinkles. which is where the forecast animation depicts the clouds going into saturday evening. not expecting significant rainfall. seven-day forecast, clouds increasing, slight chance of sprinkles late saturday into

early sunday and then sunny skies and mild conditions once again at the beginning of next week. things looking good. >> not too shabby at all. >> thank you, spencer. stay with us, everybody, we are going to get you back with more details from when that verdict -- when that comes in. >> we are waiting, minutes away from the verdict being read in the kate steinle case and we'll fi

sfx: tsfx: feet shufflingc life can change in an instant. be covered when it does... ...with a health plan through covered california. we offer free expert help choosing the best plan for you. and all of our plans include free preventive care. financial help is available, so check for yourself to see what savings you qualify for. for health insurance starting january 1st, enroll by december 15th. because you never know when life...

...will change. get covered today. welcome back to abc 7 news at 4:00. we are awaiting the breaking news. we know a verdict has been reached in the kate steinle case. we don't know what the verdict is. this is a live look from inside the hall of justice where reporters are waiting. there's another group of reporters inside the courtroom and nobody can leave until the whole process is complete with each juror being asked and casting their verdict. it takes a while. it may take up to a half an hour for this process to be completed and jury instructions. and so it's not an immediate thing where people come running

out and they yell out the verdict, as you may remember with like in the o.j. simpson case as i recall. anyway, this is inside. outside there are news vans and vehicles local, national crews, all covering this story because the story does have national implications. as soon as we know the verdict you will know the verdict right here on abc 7 at 4:00. >> take a look at the live picture, some people in the news room, some curious as to there there be protesters outside, folks up in arms about what this verdict happens to be because of the immigration debate? >> we'll have to see what it is and get the reaction. >> kate steinle grew up in pleasanton. her father was with her from pleasanton on that pier when it all happened. in pleasanton is where we find eric thomas joining us live. >> reporter: as you mentioned

dion, kate steinle lived on beal street close to the shooting. we are here in down town pleasanton which likes to think of itself as a small town with all american values. the hot button issue has been immigration as related to the tragic death of kate steinle. we are waiting to get reaction from people who live here. some people think of this as a relatively conservative city. let's remember the congressional representative is eric swalwell, a democrat who is not very conservative at all, one of the more liberal members of the congress. what we know about kate steinle, she was 32 at the time of the shooting as we have mentioned. she went to amito valley high school. graduated from cal pal lee. she was working for a medical supply firm. we do know people will have strong reactions it's a case that has generated strong reactions. we are waiting for the verdict

and to get reaction from pleasanton folks in a few minutes, we hope. eric thomas, abc 7 news. >> we'll get a check back in with eric later on in the newscast. >> minutes away from reading the verdict publicly. the reporters will come outside and tell the rest of us what's going on. it might

live breaking news. thanks for staying with us through breaking news. we are awaiting word of the verdict in the kate steinle trial. our own leanyanne melendez is inside the courtroom waiting for that to be read. >> outside the courtroom is cornell barnard. cornell, what's happening? the anticipation outside the courtroom has to be palpable. >> it is very thick in the air, larry and dion, for sure, all eyes on courtroom 13. that is where, since october 23rd, the kate steinle murder case has been going on. about an hour ago it was announced that there was a verdict in this case. my colleague and other members of the lyanne melendez is inside as that verdict is being read. this could take five minutes or 30 minutes. te judge has made it clear that

members of the media are not allowed to leave the courtroom until the proceeding has been completed. that includes polling, possible polling of each juror. now, of course, 45-year-old jose ines garcia zarate has been on trial since october 23rd in the killing of kate steinle. two years ago i sat down in an exclusive interview with the defendant. he told me that he shot kate steinle. it was an accident. here's a portion of that interview. >> did you shoot kate steinle? the lady who was down on pier 14? >> yes. >> you did shoot her? >> uh-huh. a boom boom, three times. >> he claims he kicked the gun into the bay, lit up a cigarette and walked off, not knowing he shot someone until he was arrested by police hours later. >> where did you get the gun? >> on the ground, when the -- over there in the

my leg and i see a t-shirt, and i see over there something. i feel sorry for everybody. >> you feel sorry for everybody, including kate steinle's family? >> uh-huh, yeah. >> yeah, garcia zarate told me he had a lot of remorse for kate steinle, for her family, and was very sorry about what happened. he said he went to pier 14 that day, found the gun wrapped in a t-shirt. he picked the gun up and the gun went off. the defense attorney stuck with that story. the prosecution said, though, this was pure fiction. he went to the -- to pier 14 that day, where he intentionally and willfully shot kate steinle. possible verdicts that the jury may decide on here, and it's very possible that the verdict has been read in court.

we are waiting for that, waiting if myrrh colleague for my colle. first-degree murder, second-degree murder, involuntary mms, or is he innocent, not of the charges? we may know here in a few moments. waiting for my colleague lyanne melendez who's been covering the trial from the get-go and tell us what the verdict is. larry, dion? >> thank you, cornell. we've been told that the san francisco prodigal, joined by our legal analyst, long-time -- we've been told the chronicle has tweeted not is the verdict. we're working to confirm that. how surprised would you be at that outcome? >> i would be surprised, yes. >> how could the jurors -- and here's the tweet. "acquitted of murder and manslaughter in the killing at pier 14 in san francisco."

what would be the minimum barrier the prosecutors would have to achieve in order to get involuntary manslaughter? what we're saying is the prosecutors could not prove he even fired the gun? >> well, the prosecutors couldn't prove that he negligently -- >> one moment. we have a new update from cornell barnard from inside the hall of justice, cornell, i take it you also have confirmation with leanne who was inside, what can you tell us? >> lyanne melendez, just out from the courtroom. is there a verdict? >> there is. surprising, first-degree, murder, not, second-degree mrder, not, involuntary manslaughter, not. now, there was one guilty found by the members of the jury, and that is possession of a firearm. also, there was another charge, if you remember, and that was a -- the second one, which was

possession. that was found guilty. but using a firearm, he was found not as well. >> wow. >> so very surprising, and very surprising for us, too, because if he was found guilty of possessing a firearm, how is it that he was found not on all those charges? again, first-degree murder, not, second-degree murder, not guilty, and not guilty with regard to involuntary manslaughter. >> what was the reaction in the courtroom? >> the reaction, interesting, i was looking at the defendant. jose ines garcia zarate, he never showed any emotion whatsoever. as you remember, he has headsets on. he just was very stoic looking always at the judge. and again, no reaction from him. i think i saw briefly matt gonzalez, who is his attorney, utter something like wow. did not see a reaction from the

prosecutor at all. but it was very interesting because the way it went, cornell, was that the judge asked the members of the jury, have you reached a verdict? and they said we have. and by the way, it was the foreperson who delivered with an envelope to the judge and he spent about three minutes reading over it. i can tell you you can hear a pin drop. it was so quiet in there. everybody very anxious to find out what the verdict was. and that's -- i've just told you, they arrived to that conclusion. >> wow. was each juror member polled? >> no, i think that's something they may do later. what the judge did tell them was that their names, their addresses, will not be given out. that information will be sealed for the time being, until further notice. so he really wants to protect

the members of the jury. remember, this is a very, you know, touchy case, has been very controversial. and so they don't want that information, the members of the jury leaving this courtroom. so he promised them that that would be sealed, not given to anyone. he also thanked the members of the jury for their service, putting in their time. he said it was a long, long process, and he thanked them again. and, you know, this was -- took six days, cornell. and i counted about 28 hours of deliberations, which is, i guess, sort of in between, maybe normal. so yeah, it was a very long process. and i think there were a lot of people surprised in that -- in that courtroom, especially with the verdict.

so this is the district attorney. >> please move the cameras. >> ms. garcia, do you have any comments? can you comment at all? >> we'll be right back. >> okay. >> that was the prosecutor, diana garcia, the deputy district attorney for san francisco. >> she's got to be surprised. >> i think so. she worked very hard on this, as all the attorneys did, really. to get to this point, she really didn't win the case. i mean, that's the bottom line. again, there was only one guilty verdict. >> we've lost the signal. obviously we'll get back. it's going to be fascinating to hear from both attorneys, and it will be interesting to see whether this jury pool decides

to make themselves available to the media to explain themselves and to what will likely be perceived as a controversial verdict with jose ines garcia zarate being found not guilty. leanne told us he was found guilty of a possession of a firearm. let's bring our consultant, our legal brain here. john craton. let's talk about the penalties of possession of a firearm, and what that would mean with jail time. >> maximum of three yeerz in prison, which would be served at halftime. he would be eligible for release after serving a year and a half. he's been in custody for longer than that already. >> for all intents and purposes he would be a free man as of -- >> except for the possible federal hold, which i believe may have occurred so that he would go into federal custody for proceedings regarding his deportation. >> john, let's get your personal

take on this. according to lyanne melendez many people in the courtroom seemed shocked. this was not the outcome they anticipated, many people did not anticipate this. >> it's surprising, yes. what it tells me is that the jury rejected, obviously, an intent to fire the gun, or an intent to kill ms. steinle. >> we have to go back to lyanne. we keep interrupting you. let's go back to lyanne melendez with more details right now. >> you know, expressing my sincere condolences to the steinle family, i hope that they do not interpret this verdict as diminishing in any way the awful tragedy that occurred, and that their family has suffered. this jury's verdict should be respected. they heard the evidence. they deliberated as a group.

they heard readback testimony. they looked at the physical evidence. and they rendered a verdict to the best of their abilities in accordance with the law. i want to thank the public defender of san francisco who has given us support throughout the trial. he's given us good advice. and we're very grateful for his assistance and help and support. for those who might criticize this verdict, there are a number of people that have commented on this case in the last couple of years, the attorney general of the united states, the president and vice president of the united states, let me just remind them that they are, themselves, under investigation by a special prosecutor in washington, d.c. and they may, themselves, soon avail themselves of the presumption of innocence and

beyond a reasonable doubt standard so i would ask them to reflect on that before they comment or disparage the result in this case. i'm going to allow the attorneys to make a few remarks. thank you all. >> this is a powerful day for all of us. i also offer my condolences to the steinle family. this was just an incomprehensible tragedy and many of us who are parents really can feel the just extraordinary tragedy of what happened. i do want to talk about the critical ramifications of this case. from day one this case was as a means to foment hate, to foment division, to foment a

program of mass deportation. it was used to catapult a presidency along that philosophy of hate of others. and i believe today is a vindication for the rights of immigrants, that today we have to reflect, all of us, on how we talked about this case in the beginning and how this swarm of reflection and reaction on the base of what i believe to be the racial dynamics of this case. nothing about mr. garcia zarate's ethnicity. nothing about his immigration status, nothing about the fact that he is born in mexico had any relevance as to what happened on july 1st, 2015. we believe the verdict is a correct and accurate reflection of the law and what happened on that day. thank you.

>> that's all we have, thank you very much. you have been listening to an impromptu press conference, surrounded by the media, people including the district attorney matt gonzalez who asked the public to respect the jury's decision, to respect their privacy. we heard from our producer now that the jurors are refusing to talk to the media, given the polarizing nature of this case. >> there's a lot of people that would like to ask the jury many, many questions, so you can understand them not wanting to be in front of the media at this time. i think the second attorney we heard from really hit the nail on the head. they're going to be national ramifications. i can almost see president trump getting ready to go to twitter to discuss this. because he was very vocal about

the situation and now we have a case where, in the eyes of many, this innocent young girl was walking along with her father, gets shot and then the man that everybody believes, but apparently could not be proved, pulled the trigger is going to be set free, or facing very minimal time, if any, depending on what the sentencing finally is. so try to put this in perspective. let's put the politics aside for the moment and concentrate, john, if we can on the legal side of this. we started talking about it. the prosecution could not ultimately prove that he even fired the weapon, even though we have an interview with one of our reporters where he said he fired the weapon. how is this conceivable to you? >> probably there was not sufficient proof beyond a reasonable doubt to satisfy all 12 jurors that he either deliberately pulled the trigger on that gun or handled the gun,

brandished it in such a reckless manner that it constituted criminal negligence. >> let me jump in right there. so essentially they did buy the argument from the defense attorney, matt gonzalez, that perhaps the gun went off accidentally? >> that would seem to be the case. >> maybe that's the line of reasoning they used. frankly, i'm trying to be totally impartial here, but i'm frankly stunned by what came back, and i think we all are, to a certain extent, and, you know, you have two daughters, i have two daughters. so we kind of sympathize with the steinle family. my mind is boggled by what i've just heard. >> it is a little hard to d digest, yes. >> this is the law and this is our system. we live with this. maybe that's really what it comes down to, they just believe the gun misfired -- maybe it did. we don't know what happened. none of us were there. it is still surprising that the prosecution couldn't make a case that would stick for anything

more, and -- >> with involuntary manslaughter the standard is not simple negligence, like ordinary mistake, or -- >> you know what, this is jeff odache at the podium right now. >> a lot of statements that were made that mr. garcia zarate could get a fair trial in san francisco. today the jurors demonstrated that, that regardless of the -- again, the tremendous amount of negative publicity in this case, before the facts were even known, before the evidence or the ricochet even came out, that he was able to get a fair trial. we want to thank the jury, for anyone that would question the outcome in this case, this jury was deliberating for six days. most of you were here waiting hour by hour and so you know how hard this jury worked, how closely they looked at the evidence, and how important it

was that we had a jury that listened to the evidence. and the judge in this case, i think, made it very clear to the jurors that they should not be influenced by extraneous factors. and the last thing i want to say, i just want to acknowledge just the incredible work. a trial like this takes a tremendous effort by everyone from the court staff to the district attorney's office, to our office. but i particularly want to thank matt gonzalez, the chief attorney, the second in command in our office. and so he has the responsibility of managing the entire office. but at the same time was able to put his heart and soul into trying this case. francisco rigarte, our immigration specialist in the public defender's office, and he worked day and night on this case. the investigator, danielle thompson, zachary dillon, the

paralegal, mike hinkley who volunteered in this case. a lot of times when you think about the public defender's office, people do not think that the office -- the public defender's office can provide topnotch representation. and i hope today, by this verdict, and by the presentation in this case, that is clear that our office not only provided the best representation to mr. garcia zarate, but provided even better representation than what he could hope for if he could afford counsel [ inaudible question ] >> it was the evidence. because there was a tremendous amount of misinformation that was spread about this case from day one. you had then candidate trump espousing that, you know, this was an intentional shooting. you had other people lying, that this was a situation where an

illegal immigrant took a gun and fired it directly at kate steinle. so the challenge of the defense was that they had to present the evidence not only to the jury, but also to the community. and i think that it was important that matt gonzalez, and we know this, he spoke to you, and he was not sort of hiding behind the courtroom doors. and instead it was important that people understood the narrative of what really happened in this case. because that was not coming out through the traditional media. i also want to thank the media, particularly the local media that covered this case. as the facts came out at the preliminary hearing and at the trial, i think that the coverage, particularly of the local reporting, was excellent. >> what's that? [ inaudible question ] >> the possible sentence to a

possession of a gun by an ex-felon is 16 months, two or three years. the reason why there are three possible sentences is what's called a triad sentencing scheme? california. what will happen on the next court date is both the district attorney and the public defender will be able to argue for what they believe a fair sentence would be, given that range. and then the judge will decide amongst that range what sentence to impose. >> that he was found not guilty on all the counts except for possession. >> right. the crime of possession of a gun only requires that the person knowingly possessed a firearm. that's the only requirement. and so if the jury found that mr. garcia zarate knew that he was possessing a firearm, and

that there was no intent for him to hurt anybody or shoot anyone, that's completely consistent with them finding not guilty on the principle counts and guilty on the count of possession. [ inaudible question ] >> that's a possibility. >> are you planning on appealing that one conviction? >> i'll leave that question to mr. gonzalez. [ inaudible question ] >> we haven't computed the credits yet, but he has a couple of years in county jail. so that will be applied to whatever sentence he receives. [ inaudible question ] >> i don't have any information about that, no. again, thank you very much. you have been listening to public defender jeff odachi address the media as to the verdict in this kate steinle murder trial, at times praising

the press for immediate coverage, saying the jury took this very seriously and took all details into account when coming to this verdict, including three not guilty verdicts, but only guilty on that one charge of the knowing possession of a firearm. >> yeah, just to recap, if you joined us late here, jose ines garcia zarate, not guilty of first degree murder and second degree murder and involuntary manslaughter. only possession of firearm. based on the rules of california, he may be released based on time served. let's go to melanie woodrow at pier 14, the scene of the crime. melanie? >> reporter: yeah, absolutely, this is where kate steinle was shot and killed in july of 2015. and as lyanne melendez shared that verdict with you, and all of our viewers, we began talking to people here at pier 14. a couple of them seeing the

verdict on their smart phones, but several of them telling us they hadn't heard. and the reaction for the people we've been speaking to is one of shock. i want to read to you, an interview, a sound bite we aren't able to turn around quickly enough here. sarah jay said i was really surprised and shocked as well because somebody died. it might have been an accident, but a life was lost. that is the sentiment of people out here at pier 14. many of them telling us that they're not surprised he wasn't found guilty of first-degree murder but that they were expecting a guilty verdict on involuntary manslaughter. that's where it seems most of the shock in this reaction is coming from. another woman who i just spoke to said she's not sure a guilty verdict would have helped the steinle family, but she says i imagine this hurts. live at pier 14,

woodrow, aabc 7 news. we have a system in the united states, and i'm thankful we have that system, but if you're the parents, this has to be a crush. nothing they would have ruled today is ever going to bring kate back, but to think there's a possibility that this man could be set free, sent back to mexico ultimately, and then come back into the country again, it's just mind boggling to me. >> it's a scary thought. and during this trial kate steinle's parents, her family have been adamant on not appearing, you know, in that courtroom. and we are still awaiting a quote from that family. there is going to be a statement issued. >> yeah, yeah. >> from the chronicle any minute now, and of course we'll bring that to you as soon as it comes in. >> i don't know, we have less than a minute before we have to break. the threshold to get involuntary manslaughter, what -- because obviously the jury didn't go for that. >> it's more than ordinary negligence. it has to be reckless behavior,

so reckless it creates a high degree of risk of death. so he would have had to, according to the prosecution, he brandished the weapon in such a reckless way that he would be culpable under an involuntary manslaughter for the death of her. >> you think maybe because there were no witnesses that saw this, maybe getting to that barrier was too difficult for the prosecution in this case? >> the defendant apparently said he found the gun, picked it up, nobody saw him brandishing it. >> so there we are. we'll have to leave it right here. going to take a break right now going to take a break right now (hard exhalation) honey? can we do this tomorrow? (grunts of effort) can we do this tomorrow? if you have heart failure symptoms, your risk of hospitalization could increase, making tomorrow uncertain. but entresto is a medicine that was proven, in the largest heart failure study ever, to help more people stay alive and out of the hospital

than a leading heart failure medicine. women who are pregnant must not take entresto. it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren. if you've had angioedema while taking an ace or arb medicine, don't take entresto. the most serious side effects are angioedema, low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high potassium in your blood. ♪ tomorrow, tomorrow... ♪ when can we do this again, grandpa? well, how about tomorrow? ask your doctor about entresto and help make tomorrow possible.

jurors, as you've heard, have reached a verdict in the kate steinle murder trial. the man has been found not guilty. live with team coverage all over the city. this a live picture of the hall of justice. that is ground zero in this case tonight. >> announcer: now from abc 7, live breaking news. and good evening, i'm dan ashley. >> i'm kristen sze, breaking news in the verdict of kate steinle murder. >> jose garcia zarate found not guilty of first degree murder and not guilty of second degree murder. >> and not guilty of manslaughter, guilty of only one charge, that is possession of a firearm. >> the shooting death of kate steinle invoked a national debate on