News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
You know, I thought that too at one point, but if the defendant's lawyer is trying to use double jeopardy to get this incredibly high profile, publicly scrutinized case thrown out, we should just sit down, shut up, and listen to the professionals
It’s likely just a tactic to set him up for an appeal later. The only reason you can appeal a case is if you can show that you weren’t given a fair trial.
So this is his lawyers going “you’re probably going to be railroaded and found guilty, so let’s at least ensure you have as many avenues for appeal as possible. If we force the courts to officially put it into record that you have to defend both trials at the same time, you can argue that your attorneys weren’t able to effectively do so, and therefore your constitutional right to an attorney was violated.”
Right, sure. At which point, pointing out that "double jeopardy doesn't apply" is kind of just needless pedantry.
I mean, it doesn’t apply. That is already pretty firmly established by precedent. But again, this is simply getting the courts to officially acknowledge that the prosecutors are pushing ahead even though they know the lawyers are stretched thin.
I'm not saying I agree with the doctrine; in fact I think it's unjust and would prefer it being tossed, though I seriously doubt he has any chance of succeeding on this claim, especially with the current SCOTUS. And I doubt the state's lawyers are that incompetent as to ignore it.
Nah fuck em, we all know he did it.
We usually don't like saying that due to a phenomeome called 'Trial by public opinion'. He has not yet been proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, neither can you prove so. Decreeing someone guilty, even outside of court, without proof, can negatively influence jurors to deliver a guilty verdict even if the defense creates a reasonable doubt.
If I were the prosecutor in this case I think leaning on the fact that Luigi Mangione travelled to the area of the crime scene, was seen on cameras nearby, and left the area of the crime and city quickly and discreetly with a backpack full of $20,000 cash and a Glock-19, a 9-millimeter semiautomatic pistol, with a custom part that Luigi Designed and 3D Printed in his home which matches the profile of the weapon used to murder Brian Thompson, might be beyond reasonable doubt. If not, then at least conspiracy to commit a crime, because bro was not on a vacation or business trip that is for certain.
https://youtu.be/P5xjR-M3BsY
If you can't take the time to explain what your link is, I won't click it.