The jurors found the man innocent of any wrong doing in the death of Steinle.That's an interesting analysis since the article actually says ==
Legal experts said prosecutors had an uphill battle because there was no clear motive in the case. Further muddling the shooter’s intentions: evidence that the bullet hit the ground just 12 feet from the defendant before ricocheting those 78 feet into Steinle.
“On its surface, it seemed like a tough case to prove intent to kill,” said Jim Hammer, former head of the San Francisco district attorney’s homicide unit. “That ricochet, I assume, was a big thing for the jury.”
He said if there are two reasonable explanations on a criminal charge, one pointing toward guilt, one pointing to innocence, California law mandates that jurors must acquit.
Defense attorney Matt Gonzalez argued Garcia Zarate found the stolen pistol wrapped in a rag on the pier and that it accidentally fired when he picked it up.
We have a felon in procession of a stolen gun that killed another human being.
If you kill someone because of negligence, you're guilty of manslaughter.
The jury had the option of finding manslaughter, but did not.