What the fuck. How did journalism get this utterly fucked?
Experts point to a phenomenon called jury nullification, which occurs when a jury votes to acquit a defendant even though they may believe they committed a crime.
No, there is no “may”! It is jury nullification when the jury believes the defendant committed a crime. There is no “may” about it.
Fucking so afraid to actually write something they will insert this uncertain language everywhere to the point it doesn’t even make sense.
What is the point in reading your article, when even you don’t seem to believe what you are writing?!
He should just get nominated to become presisent. Every penalty, accisation and conviction will go away - just like magic.
Only if he runs for the GOP
Imagine if they had held a trial for the people who cut off the heads of the royalty and the court in France.
Technically, yes, it’s murder. But it was the only way out for the vast population to earn their feeedom from their oppressors. Because this is a response and legitimate defence against the institutionalized violence that the population had been facing.
They weave and dodge all accountability, demonstrating how untouchable they are by anything other than outright violence.
Every major decision in this country seems to end up going the way the wealthy want.
They definitely want this to have maximum punishment to deter copycats.
This will never happen. You won’t find a jury in the country that will unanimously give a not guilty verdict. Best case is a hung jury twice in a row leading to a mistrial. Worst case they find one of the loopholes that lets the judge decide or they unanimously declare him guilty.
They don’t worry about all the school shootings because their kids go to private school which is a big reason why nothing is done (24 private school shootings vs 392 public school shootings for the past 25 years or so.) The working class families are the victims, so nobody in power really cares beyond lip service.
Hey. That 24 vs 392 number, what’s the percentages? Like how many private schools VS public are we talking about?
Cause that number without context seems extremely misleading. Not trying to start shit. I just don’t know where you got those numbers or where I’d get the totals to compare.
Boy, this, “Jury Nullification,” thing sure sounds like it would give everyday Americans a dangerous amount of power of our judicial system! I hope the media writes a lot more articles about it so that more people are aware of this terrible, terrible thing that they should never, ever do.
I know if I ever got on the jury I would go for innocent.
No! You mustn’t! It’s your duty as a juror to uphold the law! Even if you don’t agree with it an there are no enforceable penalties for voting with your conscience instead of the law!
Which is very likely why you would never get on jury for a case like this.
Just saying, that is how it works in the real world
I was on one about 7 years ago with a guy who didn’t believe in prison. He was never going to vote guilty. Where I was you only needed 10 out of 12, which is very rare. And since then they changed to needing 12 out of 12, so quiet jury notification has already started…
Seems highly unlikely but we’ll see.
We need to release him so he can work on Elon next.
Removed by mod
If Kyle Rittenhouse can walk free, so can Luigi. FREE LUIGI!
Technically Kyles gun was properly documented if not legally obtained, so Luigi’s homemade firearm is still a harder case to win.
Kyle also crossed state lines with said firearm explicitly looking for trouble.
Wasn’t he also a minor with a gun which is also illegal?
Unfortunately we weren’t able to prove that, his defence stated his friend kept it for him.
Don’t get me wrong, Kyle should be in prison, but the two cases aren’t very similar.
Removed by mod
The fuck is wrong with you
It’s completely legal to make your own firearms. I have a few guns made from 80% lowers.
But you didn’t 3D print your lower like Luigi did. As I understand the lower is legally “the gun”.
I milled the lower out of a block of aluminum. It’s 100% legal to make your own firearms in this country. Stop talking out of your ass about things you know nothing about.
Nope. I’m not who you replied to, but you’re misunderstanding.
When people talk about “80 percent” in this context, they mean the firearm. For an AR, it is the lower receiver. Whether it was 3D printed has no legal bearing, federally. I could carve one out of wood or styrofoam, or fashion one from modeling clay, it doesn’t change the law.
Federally, and in most states, it is legal (for anyone who is otherwise allowed to own guns) to manufacture a firearm. Period. No paperwork, no serial number, no background check. Nada. This is how the law currently works.
The media likes to refer to these as “ghost guns” because it sounds spooky.
In California and Connecticut, it needs a serial number permanently marked on it even as an 80% lower. 13 other States also have laws which touch on this.
It is my understanding that Mangione employed an 80% pistol, so it was likely a Glock-compatible copycat.
Luigi’s issue is the non NFA registered suppressor plus all those NY gun laws he broke (in addition to the homicide).
He says that most of us despise insurance companies and have had bad experiences with them, but that doesn’t mean we think people should be going around killing insurance executives in the street.
Don’t be so sure.
Violence is only acceptable against the poors.
I remain genuinely surprised nobody tried anything at the inauguration.
I think people are dissuaded by a few factors.
The first is obviously it’s very difficult.
The second is you’re almost certainly going to be caught. All the resources in the country will be spent finding you.
Also, and I think this is potentially the most important, is the result isn’t worth it. It’s not a “cut off the head of the snake” situation. Trump isn’t the end of this. Hell, Vance might be even worse. If Trump is murdered he becomes a martyr. That’s not what you want to happen.
It’s not going to improve anything, so why throw your life away attempting to do something nearly impossible?
I think the only option for killing Trump that has a good outcome is someone in his cabinet or in a senior position in the military does it to stop him from doing something. Anything else probably strengthens his base.
Oh, I was thinking less about Trump specifically and more about Musk, Bezos, and Zuckerberg all in the same place at one time. Also, Cook and Pichai though I think those two are less generally loathed.
The moment it went indoors any chance went to 0%
Thats because the people who actually go around killing people are mostly on his side.
And whomever killed the CEO, or people like them, clearly planned it out well enough to succeed. They would take one look at the inauguration and realize that’s an impossible task.
A President has lots of security. You can’t just jump him on the street and sneak away.
There’s an entire industrial complex for preventing it.
Theoretically low level officers would make better targets as it would drastically increase security costs to try and protect them.
Inside the Capitol? Would not have been feasible.
Yeah that place is impenetrable.
Every time someone posits “outcome might not be terrible” hypotheticals about the US “justice” system, I turn into Hawkeye, and not the Alan Alda one…
What’s up with these news sources from India? They keep turning up in my Google News feed and they’re often obvious bullshit
Pakistan: “First time?”
There’s always somebody winning at SEO and gaming the algorithm, and there are few tactics more effective than “Exciting and Wrong”
Defense of others. He acted to prevent the deaths of millions at the hands of a monster.
He stopped a mass murderer
He didn’t though. UHC is still in operation along with the rest of the for-profit healthcare system. If anything, UHC has gotten even worse based on recent stories.
I wish he had done that, I do. I sympathize with why he did it.
But no matter how much people want this to be the case, you cannot assassinate your way out of capitalism. You simply can’t.
This is such a silly take… This is like saying killing a Nazi officer in World War 2 does zero good.
Sure, the Nazi’s could use the death of their officer to spin up propaganda, and do terrible things. But a dead Nazi is a dead Nazi.
In this case, a previously untouchable, evil elite was cut down on the public stage. He was an evil man that hid behind success at all costs as a vehicle to praise and validation… And some random nobody stood up and said “no, I don’t respect your success, you’re evil.” and shot him.
This isn’t how capitalism ends, it’s how justice and the end of invulnerable elites begins. This is how we end one of the most destructive societal values America still holds. Not with bullets, but with open, brutal contempt for those that reap rewards off the suffering of others.
I need you to take a step back and realise in that comment you’re calling for open warfare in the USA against Republicans and independents.
If the Healthcare CEO is a nazi officer then the federal government is high command and the voters are the grunts.
You’re saving 0 lives with a civil war. Thats just begging for the start of World War 3.
look at you lefty, calling everyone you don’t like a Nazi again. don’t you know this is why people become Nazis? just because he was filling the trains to the death camps doesn’t make him a bad person, in fact he most likely grew up on a farm, so he’s actually a working class hero.
Poe’s Law, some people actually believe what you’re saying.
/s exists for a reason on the internet, where toneless text reigns supreme.
Yes he did. He stopped ONE mass murderer. On to the next….
No. He did not. He stopped someone helping to facilitate that murder who was easily replaced and the murder continued unabated, if not gotten worse.
Yet again, I sympathize with him. I wish this was anywhere near enough. People seem to think this will be the end of capitalist medicine and they will be waiting for that end to happen for a very long time under Trump.
Why people have the idea that Republicans are going to be like, “oh, you’re killing CEOs? We better give everyone free healthcare!” I don’t know. That does not jibe with the entire history of them and their policies. What they do is circle the wagons and double down. That should be obvious by now.
Not with that attitude.
If you’re attempting to know what Mangione’s intention was, the actual result is irrelevant. And what’s the probability that Mangione’s goal was the complete eradication of the capitalist system, or even causing UHC to shut down? Using propaganda of the deed to raise awareness that might lead to public pressure and/or regulatory chance, maybe.
Didn’t their stock value drop by tens of billions? I would say that’s something, awareness at the very least. But it’s just a beginning. Certainly his Intent was to prevent mass murder.
If their stocks drop they can still use the difference in buy and sale values to deduct taxable income, meaning it will always be worth roughly 37% to the CEOs even if it becomes near worthless.
Plus they can just buy it back and wait for a rebound if they want to. It doesnt affect their normal operation.
They probably loaned their own stocks out to short sell and made profits.
I agree. I think that was his intent. I just don’t think it was successful. Even if UHC loses value (and the value it lost was actually negligible compared to its revenue even though it sounds like a lot), how many other insurance companies are out there making money hand over fist?
I’m just wondering if, in a few years when insurance companies are still raising premiums and still denying dying people care that people are still going to act like this is all it takes.
I’m not attempting to know anything about him. The person I talked to said that he stopped a mass murderer. He didn’t because the mass murderer is UHC. He cut the toenail off a mass murderer and UHC is still around and doing exactly what they had been doing.
“Maybe possibly the serial killer will be stopped if we just make people aware they exist” is nonsense.
And I have no idea how people can live in a capitalist system all of their lives and not understand that everyone in a corporation is expendable, from top to bottom.
This has nothing to do with his motivations and everything to do with all the people thinking that somehow if enough CEOs are murdered, the Republican-dominated government will embrace socialism. It’s ridiculous.
Except nothing stopped so thats a pretty shit defence.
idk it stopped a few of them from implementing some even worse shit for a few months
If you’re talking about Anthem’s anesthesia coverage, that reversal was announced before the assassination.
Sounds like something a health care exec would say
He should go free because he did nothing wrong
Not guilty
Mistrial on the grounds of fuck all this stupid bullshit
Which is still true if they can prove he did it.
I mean I’m pretty sure the evidence for his arrest was flimsy as fuck. As long as he has a competent lawyer (which he should have) he should be able to get the judge to throw out the case. I think.
Edit: Turns out I’m wrong, see this.
I mean I’m pretty sure the evidence for his arrest was flimsy as fuck.
What makes you say that?
I mean he was arrested based on low-quality security camera pictures that barely, if at all, looked like him. And the evidence seemed too obvious unless he intended to be arrested. The officers who arrested him also said something like “I saw him and just knew it was him”, which does not inspire confidence. There’s a not insignificant chance the evidence they did “find” on him was planted.
By those standards, most convictions are based on evidence that’s “flimsy as fuck”.
They really are.
It’s kind of scary.I mean most convictions (I’d hope) are based on evidence that makes sense. I guess what I’m saying is: If we discount the possibility of intentional martyrdom, then it doesn’t make sense that someone would walk around with that much incriminating evidence right after committing a crime that would get the whole nation hot on their tail. Not saying he definitively didn’t do it, but I won’t discount the possibility of the contents of his bag being planted.
it doesn’t make sense that someone would walk around with that much incriminating evidence right after committing a crime
You vastly overestimate the intelligence of most people.
And they’re underestimating the laziness of investigators and prosecutors.
What if that is true though? What if it’s even virtually guaranteed to be true, given the effort and time required to reasonably prove something like that combined with the limited resources given (and which we can afford to give) to the justice system to do so, and the sheer number of crimes to deal with?
Honestly, the more I hear about the number of cases of people being convicted falsely, or where it’s hard to tell if they truly were guilty, due to evidence being poor, or misconstrued, or based on faulty foresic science or known unreliable sources like eyewitness testimony, the more I worry that if called to serve on a jury I’d be effectively unable to do so, because I have come to doubt if the justice system is even capable of proving something beyond what I would consider to be a reasonable doubt.
The public does not know the evidence against him, yet. The prosecution has that under lock and key. We only know the relatively small handful of photos that surfaced in the media, and we don’t even know if the prosecution will use those.
Watching carefully here, and I have my own personal opinion and hope for the trial outcome will be, but let’s not hyperbolically jump to “we know what the evidence is” (or isn’t)
Wasn’t the evidence the things they found in his bag? The gun and manifesto?
I hope Luigi gets the jury nullification and walks free. But let’s not pretend that he’s falsly accused or was illegally detained/arrested.
The police can completely detain someone based only on a passing resemblance to a grainy security cam image of a suspect. They can detain someone off even a vague description or sketch. They only need reasonable suspicion to detain someone, and that is a very low bar.
In order to arrest, they need the higher standard of probable cause. They have to have some sort of evidence that leads them to believe that you have, are, or were about to commit a crime, or observe you in said commission of a crime. I don’t have all the details from the arrest, but it sounds like he was identified visually, yes, but also that he provided them the same fake id which was also used to check into the hostel in Manhattan where the security cam footage came from. That is enough to connect him to the crime and gain probable cause for the arrest. Actually, even independent of the shooting, providing false identification to the police during there investigation is itself an arrestable crime in Pennsylvania, too.
And even if you think that the evidence that was on his person at the McDonald’s in Pittsburgh was wholly or partially planted, it is not the only evidence they have. For example, they have a water bottle and protein bar wrapper found near the shooting that the shooter left behind. Both have Luigi’s fingerprints on them.
Luigi did it. That much seems apparent. Now whether that makes him “guilty”… that’s another question.
To be clear, we have no idea what evidence they have, except for what has been sworn to under oath. And that evidence may or may not be reliable.
Don’t assume any press release contained any facts.
There is some flat-earther level of denial going on with Luigi supporters.
Do you have a source for your claim about the fingerprints? I recall that there was a bottle and a wrapper near the scene of the shooting that may have been left by the shooter, but this is the first I’m hearing about fingerprints.
I also don’t understand how tying someone to the hostel would tie them to the crime. We saw the hostel security images during the manhunt, but those images didn’t look like an obvious match to the security footage of the shooting. The eyebrows looked different and we really couldn’t see much of the shooters face for comparison. Maybe the police have evidence that establishes a string connection between flirty hostel checkin guy and the shooter, but i have not seen it.
I’m not saying that it wasn’t him. But I have not seen enough evidence to say that Luigi did it…
I guess I was wrong then. Gotta thank Cunningham’s law.
There are a surprising number of people who are absolutely convinced that he’s not the killer through some sort of police coverup or something. It really doesn’t make sense to me. Fuck the police, but if he isn’t the real killer, the real killer could just repeat what they did and the whole thing would be exposed.
I mean, they caught Timothy McVeigh because of a missing license plate. It’s not unusual to get caught over something that’d have been otherwise insignificant.
I mean, they caught Timothy McVeigh because of a missing license plate
Or there may have been some parallel construction going on.
With McVeigh? Doubtful, read up on that whole situation, he was definitely not innocent.
If I remember right, his lawyer is primo. She is one of the best.
The judge won’t throw it out. Career suicide. We’re looking at a jury trial unless he gets killed first.
Another health insurance CEO gets murdered?
Wouldn’t solve anything.
Haha! Don’t tease ;)
I saw graffiti while driving in Seattle: KILL 3, WIN A PRIZE!
They seem to think setting him free would be a bad thing.
?
