this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2025
29 points (96.8% liked)

United States | News & Politics

3487 readers
673 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No memes/pics of text

Post news related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Prosecutors said Friday that Luigi Mangione’s death penalty case in the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson should carry on unimpeded, urging a judge to reject a defense push to dismiss charges and rule out capital punishment over Attorney General Pam Bondi’s public statements suggesting Mangione deserves execution.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan also asked U.S. District Judge Margaret Garnett to deny the defense’s bid to suppress certain evidence collected during the arrest last year, including a 9 mm handgun, a notebook in which authorities say Mangione described his intent to “wack” an insurance executive and statements he made to police.

“Pretrial publicity, even when intense, is not itself a constitutional defect,” prosecutors wrote in a 121-page court filing, citing prior rulings from the Supreme Court and the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

As for the evidence, which Mangione’s lawyers contend was collected without a warrant and without him being read his rights, prosecutors said police officers were justified in searching the suspect’s backpack to make sure there were no dangerous items. His statements to officers, they said, were made voluntarily and before he was taken into police custody.

Rather than dismissing the case outright or barring the government from seeking the death penalty, prosecutors argued, the defense’s concerns can best be alleviated by carefully questioning prospective jurors about their knowledge of the case and ensuring Mangione’s rights are respected at trial.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] idiomaddict@lemmy.world 16 points 12 hours ago

I’m sorry, but the choice of “wack” is the least believable piece of evidence that the police have claimed.

You’re telling me that a 26 year old with a political agenda used a misspelled 90s/2000s quasi-mobster-coded slang word in his manifesto to describe killing someone instead of all of the words that don’t have that connotation?

Sure, Jan. It’s definitely not a 45 year old NYC cop with a chip on their shoulder

[–] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 7 points 13 hours ago (2 children)

Seriously, who reads these 121 Page Court filings?

I realize they are like triple spaced and thick margin but for fucks sake

[–] stray@pawb.social 7 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Based on having seen quite a lot of lawyer-themed dramedies, I'm going to guess interns. Though I imagine LLMs are getting used lately.

[–] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 6 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

I’m sure LLM‘s do come into play at a certain point. But… The legal Document software industry is huge…

Obviously neither you or I would have any need for it. But there is software that will scour court rulings and documents and transcriptions and etc. and generate Templated documents that require only a small amount of editing.

For example, I am currently suing a major corporation for permanently damaging my spine due to Employee Incompetence. Part of this means that I deal with insurance companies. We are at the discovery period, So I get a list of extremely dry questions that seem to repeat themselves in various different ways. I can’t help but thinking that all of this is generated somehow based on Successful situations in the past

[–] nwtreeoctopus@sh.itjust.works 4 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Read it? Imagine writing it.

[–] tornavish@lemmy.cafe 8 points 13 hours ago

Actually, I think a lot of these documents are generated by software. I don’t mean artificial intelligence or anything I just mean that legal documents are assembled using in different software applications. You basically check bunches of boxes and it provides a template for you and you type a few lines describing the situation and it fills the whole thing out for you.

I say this as I went through a legal Discovery document where everything was very clearly a generated document. It was probably 50 pages