691
Luigi Mangione wants his trial televised and open access to as much media and public as possible. Prosecution does not.
(discuss.online)
this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2026
691 points (99.1% liked)
Luigi Mangione
2877 readers
1 users here now
A community to post anything related to Luigi Mangione.
Please respect Lemmy.world ToS. Don't plot who should be murdered next in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
How crazy would it be if he actually didn't do it??
He couldn't have done it, he was at my house playing halo 3 and drinking game fuel
I remember that. Frankly, he was a mid Halo player. He was definitely present and not murdering anyone, though.
(*) he was definitely not executing someone in a justified act of self defence.
Ftfy.
I can confirm I was the game fuel
I drank you all night long in 2007 when Halo 3 launched. How does that make you feel?
Hmm
I saw him there too. His back was sore from your old couch.
If he was with me at that time (which he was) it would be MY back that was sore .
Not crazy at all, cause he didn’t do it.
i saw him hanging out in disney with bunch of other people,.
i have never bought into the story that he did it.
50/50 in my mind.
Like yes police incompetence should be expected, but they broke every rule arresting him, searching his bag, etc etc. Evidence being inadmissible aside, the police did a great job of substantiating our suspicions that Luigi was framed.
On the other hand, this doesn't sound like someone who didn't do it. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/R7R6dmYOVfc
Like maybe he's alluding to the framing being an insult to the american people. But me personally if I was being framed by the government and desperately trying to get help, I would say it more plainly.
Doesn’t take too much incorrect procedure for a case like this to fall apart
Regardless of guilt
As it should.
The police cornering someone in a McDonalds and "finding" evidence behind a wall of officers with zero transparency is exactly why courts dont' admit such evidence.
Maybe if police didn't have a documented history and widely known legacy of false imprisonment, planting evidence, and down right corruption...
If he did, literally all the evidence was faked in a parallel construction so obvious it makes me doubt these people could have managed any other in history. It makes me question whether drug dogs might even be a real thing
drug dogs are not actually accurate at finding drugs, they sound off when their handler indicates. do with that what you will.
Fun fact, if you're white, you can easily smuggle things by just not watching the search.
The cop is watching you to know when to signal the dog to alert.
They either watch you to know when to signal, in the cases where it actually "works" (which, as fucked up as it is, reading your body language is "working" for some definition of working), or they're just using it as an excuse to search/harass you, in which case they just signal when they want to.
Can you back this up or is it just a trust me bro?
https://www.bjjohnsonlaw.com/probable-cause-or-probable-fiction-the-legal-myth-of-the-drug-sniffing-dog
This doesn't prove dogs can't detect odors. At best it implies bias in officers which is not really what you suggested. It's also a lone study.
I work adjacent to this field so these kinds of claims coming from someone who clearly doesn't makes it sound like you don't really know what you are talking about.
Look man, I was just linking you to a study when you asked for sources. There’s no need for hostility here. Also, there are more studies discussed in the article if you actually click on the link.
And this frame up/parallel construction was so inept it makes me believe for a split second they are not adequately competenr manage to send those signals.
same here. I still believe that the real guy got the fuck out so fast they has to find the closest look alike to use as a scapegoat in order to prove the cops aren't incompetent
that is exactly what i believe.
The Adjuster is still out there, folks!!
He didn't do it he was with me December 4 in California
I still find it very suspicious that they claim he killed a man then went to McDonald's and ordered a meal and that's how they caught him?
What is the charge? Eating a meal?
A suculent Happy Meal?
Oh, that's a nice headlock sir, oh, ah yes, I see that you know your judo well.
A succulent McDonald's meal?
Was it a succulent meal?
He couldn't possibly have done it. He and I were playing mini-golf high as fuck.
There are a lot of jokes and etc... But I really think he didnt do it and they are framing him because he looks close enough.
Highly unlikely, given how they ran him down when he was carrying a second model of the ghost gun from the crime scene.
Impressive he made it as far as he did. Amazing he didn't make it father. Just going on a nature walk for a few days probably would have done it.
He printed the gun himself and was caught carrying a bag with the weapon and writings about the actions he took. No fuckin chance.
Innocent. 100%
These are all evidence brought to you by the state. It would absolutely not be the first time the entire thing was made up.
Police broke chain of custody on pretty much his entire kit. If it isn't submittable as evidence, the DA is going to have a hellish time putting him at the scene of the crime.
Oh okay sure pal, I guess since the files were on his home computer means he just sold the gun to the local police two states away who then committed the crime, tricked him into traveling there, and then framed him. /sarcasm
EDIT: BTW a judge ruled the evidence can still be shown to the jury.
The thing about ghost guns is that anyone can print them.
Past that, they can probably get him on some kind of conspiracy to print a dearly weapon charge with the computer files. But that's a long way from putting him at the scene of the crime with the murder weapon on the day in question.
It's not even a question of if he did it. It's the problem of bringing the evidence they have in front of a jury without it getting tossed by the judge first.
He left the suppressor on the scene, we're way past the stage of trying to tie the weapon to the crime.
Do the prosecutors have anything to tie him to it? Or did they just find a suppressor and assert it was his because he's the guy they caught?
If the plastic and infill used to print the suppressor doesn't match the other printed part still with the gun then I'm sure that will come up in court.