- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Can confirm. He didn’t do nuthin
Maybe the lack of quick access to life saving resources, procedures and experts immediately after the shooting, aka ‘healthcare’, was what actually killed him?
This makes me believe it really wasn’t him. If he actually wrote a manifesto, he’d have declared himself guilty, taken credit, and done a speech about how he was now a martyr for the cause.
If he’s sticking to his story, then I believe him. They couldn’t find the real killer so they just went with whoever “fit the description”, as per usual.
I tend to think it’s because they charged him as a terrorist. I assume it’s a different law in which case he might be able to prove it’s not terrorism.
Of course it was him. That doesn’t mean from a legal perspective he is best served by pleading guilty. Pleading not guilty also means he’ll get a jury trial and his lawyers can introduce evidence that embarrasses private health insurance providers, or proves his state of mind, or otherwise casts doubt.
That’s now how it works: In the US “justice”-system there are only extremely limited cases where it makes sense to plead non-guilty, because it pretty much just means that you skip the trial and get sentenced directly. Especially if you want Jury-nullification, you have to plead non-guilty so that the Jury can find you innocent despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
What overwhelming evidence in this case? The evidence made public definitely seems to imply he’s not the one who shot the CEO.
Why would a person take such a carefully planned route through the city to Central Park, change clothes and dump their bag, only to keep their gun, fake IDs and hand written manifesto/confession on their person three days later while eating lunch at a restaurant? If Luigi was the shooter and looking to take credit as what has been released of the manifesto implies, why hide out for three days instead of publicly turning themselves in after informing the press so it’s recorded and likely televised?
Its obviously NOT him, footage from the murder shows thin eyebrows, white skin (like Irish white) and way smaller dude than Luigi… I still cant understand that people still believe Luigi could be the killer…
Wouldn’t be surprised if he was in New York on some legitimate business, they caught him on camera at a Starbucks near the murder, blasted his image all over the news and social media, and just waited for someone to call.
Then when they got the call, they grabbed a backpack with “evidence” and claimed he had it on him when they arrested him.
Did anyone believe that he was wondering around for 3 days with a bag that was holding the murder weapon, fake IDs, and a hand written manifesto? He ditched another bag, and escaped on an e-bike. Why would he then run around for three days with the rest of the evidence.
Either he is the dumbest man alive, or the police really wanted to just go with the first guy who fit the description knowing that they’ll look like heroes to their corporate overlords, and that if another guy bites the dust they can just say it was a copycat.
Innocent until proven guilty. It’s the government’s job to prove him guilty. He doesn’t have to help them.
If Innocent until proven guilty, why the fuck do we lock people up to await their court date?
Because it makes money, and a splash of long standing racism
Personally, I am sad that is all it takes for you to believe something. Businesses, media, governments, and more are trying to make people believe things (unrelated to luigi) that aren’t true. You need to raise the bar, not lower it. Maybe you want to believe he didn’t do it, but I hope you don’t actually believe that based on so little information.
There’s too much that doesn’t add up, it’s just too convenient that he had the gun and manifesto on him.
I mean, if he can away with it while not undermining his original intentions, why not do it?
There’s various ways he could go unpunished that would prevent a retrial and so he’d then be set up to be influential in some kind of healthcare reform.
Heavy on the cope though.
That doesn’t explain why he keeps mogging the camera, or what he yells to the journalist in that one video.
I don’t know if it’s him, but I think whoever it is, is just following their lawyer’s advice, not trying to be a martyr
The thing is they’ve actually made a mistake charging him with terrorism. It is surprisingly narrowly defined so even without a sympathetic jury he might get a not guilty verdict for it and it weakens the whole case against him. But most of all by including it they’ve made all his intentions and politics central issues to the case. All the evidence and his statements about this will have to go into the public record. If he had pleaded guilty that wouldn’t happen nor would there be a chance for jury annulment. Pleading not guilty is simply the smarter option to take.
A jury could just find him not guilty on that one count but guilty on all others. Not seeing how it weakens any other part of the case.
I think it’s along the lines of ‘if the prosecution presented an accusation that is obviously false, how well standing is the rest of the case’
If I were in the jury, a case that is part bullshit would definitely compel me to think again about how well the investigation was done
Hope this is true
Its fucked up the news is acting like Sandy Hook wasn’t a decade ago. All this guy is accused of is shooting a CEO.
I don’t really think it’s a conspiracy of sorts, it’s just news media being news media. They want the most clicks, doesn’t matter much what for or what the consequences are. it’s the same reason why trump yet again got so extremely much news coverage. Had news organizations all decided not to waste their time with trump, we wouldn’t have his presidency now. In reality though, everyone and their mother had to talk about trump, it was trump before and after and now we have yet again to deal with this fuck face for a other 4 years. I know that news media aren’t the only ones to blame, theyight now even be the worst, but he’ll do they have a large share of the blame for all the shit that had been happening lately, and it’s all about the clicks, it’s all about the money
Like you mentioned, it’s the biased part of the business which wrestles with journalistic integrity.
ie. Return on Investment, special access or limited access compared to your competitors depending how your piece is written.
It’s not entirely surprising when journalistic integrity is at odds with the finances that fund said journalism, but it most certainly can be disappointing.
This is the disheartening part that highlights the class divide. Shootings of common folk barely make the news where I’m from. How much have taxpayers paid for this so far? Justice clearly isn’t being applied equally.
Maybe if it happens enough, we can normalize billionaire CEO murder as well.
CEO or not, billionaires gotta go
Ya you don’t have to be a CEO to hold massive investments across the board
The problem here is the frequency of the crimes. If CEOs were being shot on a weekly to bi weekly average in groups of 3 or more, this crime would become one of the many others the American media wash over.
That sounds like a challenge
We’ve come a long way with fun trends. Planking, owling, cat breading, an now CEOing, what a time to live in
They got Luigi’d!
Indeed, the powerful would be left on their own like they left our children on their own. Only unlike our kids, they could do something about it…
The billionaires would be totally “scrooged”, better share the wealth assholes. A poor man, isn’t a murdered man.
cackle
Well, I can dream…
pretty sure the affect on stonks would make congress address it differently
Sandy hook was instead normalized, and happens multiple times over across the nation annually. Pew pew ‘muricuh
Speaking to CBS, the BBC’s US partner, on Sunday, Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said that the online rhetoric has been “extraordinarily alarming”.
“It speaks of what is really bubbling here in this country,” he said. “And unfortunately we see that manifested in violence, the domestic violent extremism that exists.”
Did he care about the domestic violent extremism before it started to affect the wealthy? What about the domestic terrorists who go after the queer community, POC communities, women, doctors providing reproductive healthcare…the list goes on.
Violent extremism isn’t new here. It’s just that this one affects people with power.
You’ve got far right militias blowing up America’s electric grid infrastructure, threatening politicians, having standoffs on federal property, and patrolling hurricane impacted areas trying to capture federal employees that are there helping, and I’ve never heard those people referred to as terrorists.
Because they’re only making the poor unhappy.
They’re not only making the poor unhappy, the chaos they sow disproportionally affects the working class, the majority of the population. The more fragmented the majority, the better for the leech ruling-class minority. Chaos provides opportunity for those with power to consolidate further power - financial, social, and political.
Those people are terrorists!
Yeah, the rules of society say they won and they think all the losers beneath them just have to accept it. The social order and status quo are great for them. That something would violate it is extremely disturbing to them and provokes an emotional response.
I think that’s why they seem to be so clumsily overreacting to the murder. Maybe it’s working in segments of the population I don’t see, but everyone in my social network is either outright happy it happened or at least get why it happened. Some will have perfunctory “murder is wrong” statements, but the thrust is about what a corrupt and evil business health insurance is. That’s all the way up to the boomers and crosses political boundaries.
Things like the perp walk, excessive charges, and corporate comedy pretending everyone just thinks Mangione is a bad guy just highlights the us vs. them of class war rather than trying to somehow quell or redirect the bubbling unrest. I think they’re doing this because their peers and masters are emotionally demanding a visible and recognizable show of power and obedience. If they knew what was good for them they’d be triple-timing it to make some token effort to reform the system, but even a token effort in response to the killing of a rich person would infuriate them, so clumsy performances it is.
When my usually “civil” boomer dad said he gets why he did it and wasn’t outright condemning him, I knew the ruling class wasn’t in control of the narrative as per usual this time.
My 75 year old Canadian aunt laughed when I showed her this
Everyone hates these people except the people who want to be these people.
I’m actually rather impressed that so many people get what’s actually happening here. I don’t know if it’ll ultimately amount to anything, but it shows that it is actually possible to get through to people sometimes. It’s a shame that no avenue but violence has been left to us.
I think most people have known about the situation for years. Apathy isn’t a result of disinterest or lack of care, it’s a result of lack of agency and lack of hope. Now both of those are slightly more on the table.
By making a big show of this arrest, they’ve ensured that what they don’t want to happen will happen.
They will share out of fear.
They’re worried if they give that we’ll go all the way and demand total equality and they’ll have to be plebs with real jobs. Boo fucking hoo assholes I’d make you do my job but you’re not good enough. Also you’ve hurt my patients enough already.
It’s going to happen.
I know two things.
- Luigi didn’t do it
- What happened was a Christmas miracle, the rich will only share if it’s profitable or if they’re scared.
If we learn something from “A Christmas Carol”, it’s that a rich person must go through at least 3 traumatic events before they repent.
Spot on
Did he care about the domestic violent extremism before it started to affect the wealthy?
No, not at all. They’re only mad because for the first time, the elite feel mortal.
You ever heard of the “less dead”, well, Brian Thompson is “more dead”
And for those who haven’t “Less Dead” is a saying used to describe people who’s deaths the police don’t look into because they’re “not important enough”
Many serial killers get away with their crimes simply because they’re smart enough to only kill those who would be deemed “less dead”
What about the domestic terrorist corporations who assassinate whistleblowers? Or are there so many hands involved there that it’s not worth the trouble to dismantle those terrorist organizations?
Just as long as the shareholders stay happy and the line goes up.
“Nah, they cool.” - these assholes, almost certainly
If someone would say this shit on the news in real time, I might actually watch it. But it’s all so scripted and tame I can’t bring myself to care.
What about them? They just got their picks elected as the next president and dipshit-in-chief.
Mayorkas said white nationalists are the biggest threat to domestic security. He was impeached by Nazis. He doesn’t repeat bullshit about immigration. Not necessarily a standard asshole that fails upwards.
deleted by creator
The terrorism “charges” are laughably flimsy and clearly contrived. Trumped Up, you might say.
The terrorism charge is absolutely the dumbest thing they did. Now it’s on them to prove it was more than just murder.
He is so hot
Someone commented that they’re REALLY trying to take a bad photo of him. Literally anything they can play off as malicious, unhinged, or even “thuggish,” but every single time the man pulls a barney stinson. They tried putting him in a suicide smock (which I strongly question, even in psychiatry I’ve only had to use one a handful of times in almost ten years). They even tazed him until he pissed himself and he’s standing tall with his chin up. The man cannot take a bad photo and while I hate to say it’s true it probably will actuality give him an advantage in the court proceedings.
In addition to a long stream of journalists waiting for the suspect to appear, members of the public - almost all of them young women - were in court, some of whom told CBS, the BBC’s US partner, that they were there to show their support.
(emphasis mine)
They’re really trying to say that “Oh he’s handsome, that’s why people like him.”
No it’s not his looks, it’s the fact that he lit the fires of rebellion just be being accused of this act of self-defense.
Ain’t hurtin’ his case though. Imagine the incels:
Classrooms are for pricks, boardrooms get chicks.
Classrooms get you shade, boardrooms get you laid.
Classrooms are for pussies, boardrooms get pussy.
I mean last I counted he had like 200000 alibis so…
Luigi Mangione was with me December 3rd, 2024 through December 7th, 2024. He couldn’t possibly have been in New York since i don’t live there.
And he looked fabulous doing so
Just leaving this link here for no particular reason:
I keep wondering why the shooter had a different color backpack than the one Mangione was caught with. The jacked and hoodie seemed like they were potentially different, but the nose and eyebrows matched.
Holy shit. Do his lawyers believe he can beat these charges?? What’s going on
The evidence against him appears to be that the guy who murdered the CEO might have similar eyebrows to Luigi Mangione, but it’s hard to tell from the security video. There’s nothing else that puts him at the scene. They can say it’s him all they want, but they’ll have to reveal some better evidence if they want us to believe it.
Didn’t he have the burner gun still on him? Honestly asking, I know a lot of disinformation tends to go out early, and I haven’t followed up on verified facts.
Thats what they said, which is extraordinarily suspicious. The weapon is to be disposed of, literally everyone knows this. And to carry it to another state for days?
They said he had a gun, but a) I’m not convinced of the accuracy of techniques like striation matching which are used to determine whether a bullet was fired by a specific gun, and b) it could have been planted by the police, even if it was the murder weapon (they might have found it in NYC, lied about not finding it, and then planted it on their preferred suspect to construct an evidentiary link where none existed).
The whole gun planting take seems like conspiratory nonsense to me. And I’ll trust the forensic science on the striations.
the famously rigorous and well tested field of forensic “science”.
Rofl. OK. So forensics is fake science now, too? Because it could implicate someone you’d rather see go free?
How is this kind of mental gymnastics any different than the covid deniers.
It’s famously subjective. My highschool taught it and showed how you could push any narrative as long as the evidence was gray. It’s almost always gray in these situations.
a lot of forensics is legitimately junk science that’s been disproven by much better science
tacking the word “science” on to something doesn’t make it scientific. much of it is based off of wild assumptions and “common sense” that was never actually studied or confirmed through testing. its about as scientific as alchemy.
I don’t have a source, but I’ve been hearing for a while now that there is a lot of pseudo science in matching barrels to bullets.
Polygraphs ended up being pretty much complete bullshit and roadside drug tests are real bad about false positives.
IDK, it’s basically a tool mark. I’ve looked at those under microscopes. They vary a whole lot when things are running well. I would think you could only really match something if there was a distinctive abnormal feature.
It does seem weird to me that he would still have all the evidence on him in Middle-of-Nowhere PA, a couple days later, but I mostly just talk about that as a way to point out this is all still allegations
Eh. He could have intended to use it again, or didn’t find an opportune time to ditch/destroy it. Or maybe he’s not the master People’s assassin that everyone wants him to be.
If you’re going to court for any criminal charge, you plead not guilty. The DA is going to have laid the strongest charges they believe they can get a conviction on, but there is always risk in going to trial. The prosecution generally cares a lot more about getting a conviction than what charge that conviction is on, or what penalty that conviction carries.
So. You’re caught dead to rights, charged with a crime. If you plead guilty, you are also waiving your right to trial, and taking whatever conviction and (probably) penalty the prosecution advises the judge.
On the other hand, if you plead not guilty, now you have the opportunity to accept a plea deal from the prosecution - changing your plea to guilty - which would include what charge and what penalty. Depending on what you’ve done, this can save you a lot of money, reduce or eliminate probation or incarceration time, or take the death penalty off the table.
You can always change your plea from not guilty to guilty. You can’t do that the other way around. Whenever you see headlines about “So-and-so pleads not guilty,” that doesn’t (in most cases) mean they intend to beat the charge. It’s just what you do.
Another huge, important, but subtle distinction to make here is that the trial is not to decide whether you did the thing. It’s not always a mystery who perpetrated an alleged crime. Even if you pull out a gun and shoot somebody on the 50-yard-line at the Super Bowl, and 300 million people see it, they can’t just take you off to prison for murder. They have to give you a trial to determine whether you violated the law.
There’s a thing called an affirmative defense, as in, “yes, I did the thing, but it wasn’t a crime, because…” If you can, say, convince a jury that you’re a time traveler, the ref was going to make a bad call in the 4th quarter that cost your team the Super Bowl win, and that justified shooting him, well, then it wasn’t a crime. That’s what a jury is ultimately charged with deciding.
This is not to say that Magione’s attorney plans to present an affirmative defense, just that there are a number of good reasons to plead not guilty, even if it’s 100% certain you did the thing.
(Edit: Typo.)
Judicial system working like this (including the previous comments about pleas) is something I would’ve probably doubted if I read it in a fiction, but here we are
Thank you for your comment
Guilty or not, always plead not guilty at the start. You’ll often have a chance to accept a better plea deal before trial if you want. Or you can go to trial.
Unless you are looking forward to serving time (free food, warm bed, access to healthcare).
free food, warm bed, access to healthcare. I’d kill for that right now.
You can kill for that
A Healthcare CEO if you wouldn’t mind
Plead not guilty, then wait for jury nullification. This is the way.
NYC residents:
If you are picked for a jury, I know it can be annoying and take time out of your busy life. But honestly, it is the last purely democratic area of our life. The jury has the power to ensure the laws are fairly and equally applied.
Remember that your job as jury is to not only find the facts of the case but also to make sure that the charges fit the crime.
There is one more job you have: is the law correct in this specific crime?
Judges won’t tell you this. Prosecutors will make you leave this choice outside the courthouse. But you have it.
The responsibility of the jury is protected so that you cannot be held accountable or even questioned (in an official setting anyway) as to why you voted the way you did. You have the power to view the facts, know that the defendant is guilty, but vote to acquit because you believe the law is wrong in his case.
Don’t let prosecutors or the judge trick you.
All in Minecraft, of course.
Yeah, the absurd terrorism charges are probably possible to beat, so no reason to plead guilty to them. They are probably not questioning the murder charges, but that’s beside the point.
I’m sure they’re contesting all of it. There isn’t a downside and a conviction depends on the state having all it’s ducks in a row, which they do fuck up sometimes.
There is also even a real possibility that he’s innocent and they’re trying to pin it on him.
What’s the downside exactly? Pleading guilty doesn’t really come with any upside especially if they’re putting the death penalty on the table.
