Hopefully. We'll see see in September.
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
132 points (95.2% liked)
Just Post
1063 readers
13 users here now
Just post something π
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 32 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
I hope so, but it really depends how the judge/jury are to him and it ain't looking real great on that side. Still hoping for the best tho π
That's because there's a bizarre inclination in the average person to trust the cops, even over their own eyes. Probably because the average person is ignorant as fuck. And the cops are doing everything they can to make their most likely fabricated evidence stick as hard as possible.
He's a murderer. The end.
Welp, at least 57 people are OK with vigilante justice.
Then why shouldn't his family go murder him?
The police failed to read his Miranda rights and performed an illegal search when arresting him. One officer began to search his bag when another officer told her that she needed a warrant to do it. She repacked the bag, turned off her bodycam, then 11 minutes later turns it back on and continued to search it without a warrant:
Patrolwoman Wasser continued her warrantless search of the backpack. Patrolwoman Wasser first re-opened the same backpack compartment that she had started searching at the McDonaldβs before immediately closing that compartment and opening the front compartment of the backpack as if she was specifically looking for something. Instantly, she βfoundβ a handgun in the front compartment.
The cops planted the gun. Of course its a "ghost gun", super convenient that it's impossible to prove whether or not he owned it. Guess we just have to take the cops good word on it π and the entire point of one is to ditch it at the scene or shortly afterwards without risk, so it makes no sense that he still had it on him. Luigi doesn't look like the shooter in any of the other videos or pictures. The whole story of him being caught doesn't make sense, either. The shooter put in a great effort to escape while remaining untraceable, but then was randomly found, with no leads or connections, hanging around in public at a mcdonalds, literally carrying around a confession and the gun, instead of lying low??? Oh come on, if you wouldn't believe that garbage as the plot of a crime show on TV, it's reasonable doubt. He's innocent. The end.
https://gizmodo.com/luigi-mangiones-legal-defense-fundraiser-tops-1-million-2000598676
https://cdn.sanity.io/files/detu0qji/production/1b9e211bd3c7770699b4244c4e9bc5074498ee82.pdf
It is justifiable homicide.
βThe victim must reasonably believe, under the totality of the circumstances, that the assailant intended to commit a criminal act that would likely result in the death or life-threatening injury of an innocent person.β
The only part in debate would be βcriminal actβ. I think the former CEOβs conduct rises to that level - murder of a depraved heart, perhaps:
βIn United States law, depraved-heart murder, also known as depraved-indifference murder, is a type of murder where an individual acts with a "depraved indifference" to human life and where such acts result in a death, despite that individual not explicitly intending to kill.β
Correct. Fortunately for a lot of people though he got shot so he couldnβt keep killing
Supposing he is a 'murderer', is there some reason he should be handled any different than any other murderer? Why the death penalty, tv coverage, nationwide man hunt, etc? Why don't all murderers get federal charges and the death penalty by default?
The point is, if he's going to be treated special by the prosecution then it's fair to treat him differently on the defense side, and that meant in the court of public opinion as well. Why villainize him while letting someone else off with a public defenders and a half asleep state prosecutor?
While I don't approve of unethical health insurance companies, in general I think it makes sense to treat attempts at societal change through assassination of high profile figures differently than other murders. Consider that guy targeting democrat state congresspeople, or the unabomber. If there's an expectation that this is just a normal part of how things work and the government isn't able to catch or convict the assassins, that's destabilizing for the whole country and brings us closer to something like a state of civil war.
Did he do that? Was there a threat that would make anytime think that's what happened? Was that known before he was treated 'differently'? Or was he treated differently just because the person that was murdered was rich? If the guy that has been killed had been a homeless person or a drug dealer do you think we'd have seen his face on national news?
Wasn't "delay deny defend" written on the bullet casings? The healthcare CEO was seemingly killed for how his company does business, a business that plays a central role in the lives of Americans and affects millions, the story here is not just about his bank account. You can argue that company affects people negatively. You could argue that politically motivated assassination in this case was good or justified. But I don't think it's a good argument to try to say that there is no reason to give such assassinations special attention, because there obviously is; preventing vigilante acts of assassination from being the determining factor in how the country is run.
There actually isn't a lot of evidence that connects him to the crime. The police say they found a weapon and a "confession" letter in his bag, but there are chain of custody issues.
Yep, it's absolutely extremely incredibly absurdly lucky and convenient that he just happened to be carrying a confession and the gun on his person for the cops to "find".
Otherwise, they would never have been able to connect him to the crime and wouldn't have a prosecutable case, eyebrow pics just aren't enough.
Finding the ghost gun in his posession is literally the only way it could have been useful evidence against him, if they had found it ditched at the scene or in any other place, it couldn't have been traced to him without doubt. Why would he still have had it when the whole point of using a ghost gun is to ditch it?
Hopefully his lawyers insist on an independent ballistics report.
Ballistic analysis is pseudoscience nonsense. A report from the National Academy of Sciences debunks nearly all fields of forensic "science", besides DNA analysis. Fingerprinting, shoe/tire print analysis, blood splatter analysis, bullet marking analysis, hair-matching microscopy, etc are literally all nonsense with no backing by peer reviewed science.
It's wild how many innocent people have died in prison because fake scientists were willing to swear an oath that their bullshit was real.
It's blood spatter.
-Dexter Morgan
One: not proven
Two: don't give a shit. If he did shoot that CEO, he deserves praise. At most maybe a littering charge for leaving that pile of human shaped trash on the sidewalk.
I thought the law was "innocent until proven guilty", prove he actually killed that guy
The man's a folk hero. He allegedly shot a CEO who ripped off millions of people for billions of dollars by denying them healthcare. The world is a better place without him in it.
Why shouldn't we kill unrepentent killers who are above the law because they wrote it indeed
Hate to be cynic, but Trump will likely deport him to South America.
Where he'd continue to thrive and gather more followers.
ππ€¬
There's only so much sardonism I can tolerate. Wishing death on innocent folks is not one of them.
I totally agree with you! These people deserve better than having their life-saving treatments denied.
That's how it's supposed to work.
Innocent until proven guilty means the government has to prove that guilt. If they can't make the case, he's free to go.