Luigi Mangione is accused of stalking United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson and shooting him to death on Dec. 4, 2024.
“He who saves his country commits no crime “
Watch out, fascists love that motto
That kid didn’t do it. They are railroading him too hard and committing too many procedural violations for it to be anything but a setup.
Any normal case a judge would throw everything out for how prejudicial the state has behaved.
The face they don’t care how blatantly prejudicial they are shows they don’t care if he did it or not.
He didn’t do it.
The CEOs wife had hmm killed for meeting his side piece there.
The assassin was from El Salvador or something.
All the photos look exactly like him tho… I mean is there is substantial evidence he didn’t do it? I fully support him, but I think it’s a stretch to say he was framed and the photos look nothing alike
Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
The misuse of evidence and the lead detective and mayor sharing evidence his lawyer hasn’t seen in a media campaign to impugn the man.
There’s reasonable doubt in their earnest attempt at seeking justice here. They seem hellbent on violating his constitutional rights.
I doubt they have the right guy. Reasonably
Dude has a familiar face. There are tons of people that look “just like” those fuzzy videos and pics
Could those photos be ai generated?
The only way we can be reasonably sure they are not is if we believe the prosecution is honoring their commitment to the constitution and acting in good faith.
I do not believe they are acting in good faith.
This means I have reasonable doubt on their entire effort.
Justice is dead.
There shouldn’t need to be evidence of his innocence, there should need to be an overwhelming amount of evidence proving he’s guilty. That’s part of the foundation for justice that courts are meant to uphold.
Edit: mistype for spelling
Luigi is a hero. But not because he killed a CEO, or anyone. Because he was framed by the government, dragged through the mud, humiliated publicly, and held his head high standing 10 feet tall. Not guilty plea is nothing less than I expected. We should all take note of his example. They can’t beat us all if we resist.
Well, that settles it then. Better release him for the sake of Government Efficiency and all that.
Solidarity aside, whenever you are arraigned, any lawyer worth their salt will advise you to plead not guilty, because entering a guilty plea means it’s over, move on to sentencing, where you have no leverage at all.
You can always change a not guilty plea to a guilty plea later, if a plea deal offered by the prosecution is acceptable to you. This is especially relevant in a case where the death penalty is on the table, but also applies to the possibility of reduced charges or penalties in any case.
I’ll also add that this case could well end up with an Alford plea. In short, where the defendant asserts innocence, does not admit to the criminal act, but accepts the sentence because they believe that a jury would find them guilty based on the evidence. Again, this is definitely related to a case where the death penalty is on the table.
I’d be very disappointed in any jury who found him guilty
Having been on a jury,
People are dumb and have no empathy
Having been on a juryPeople are dumb and have no empathy
also heard the smart ones get out of jury duty. i had a former colleague in an old job said she was chosen because she wouldnt speak for herself.
People might not have empathy, but even less people are going to want to side with an insurance company
Ideally, a jury’s responsibility is to weigh the evidence and find whether the evidence supports a guilty verdict beyond a reasonable doubt.
There has been no jury selection yet, let alone presentation of evidence. I would guess that any jury nullification would depend on a defense tactic of “Yes, my client committed this act, and his motive was to prevent UHC from directly causing the deaths of their customers by refusing to honor legitimate claims or by delaying payment of claims.” There might be something there, especially since UHC changed its stance on something (I forget exactly what right now) in the wake of their CEO being killed.
But that would be a really difficult defense to mount. You’d basically be admitting to the act and hoping that at least one person on the jury would A) agree with your defense, and B) be willing to hold out over it, and C) not be replaced by an alternate for “failure to follow jury instructions” or some such thing.
Again, since a jury has not even been selected, I won’t speculate on what evidence gets presented and what evidence (if any) ends up being excluded. By extension, I cannot agree with your above comment.
Please note that I am also not saying “He’s guilty, he should hang”, because that would also entail speculating on evidence.
“The man who saves his country breaks no laws” isn’t that right DoJ?
They don’t have to say outright that the guy was scum and got what he deserved, just question why the federal charges are being brought while there’s a state case and ask questions about how many other people would have a good reason to want this health insurance executive dead. You can introduce the message without abandoning all other defense and saying it explicitly.
Having one person isn’t going to help much, even if they don’t get replaced, it’ll be a hung jury at best, unless they’re the most persuasive, charismatic person on earth.
And you generally don’t want a hung jury. It’s just delaying, and now the other side knows your entire defence strategy and can prepare on better countering it. You having information on their strategy isn’t as valuable.
They’ll find 12 angry rich white women and its over for him. You know it, I know it. Dude martyrd himself from the beginning and I bet he knew it
they will more than likely choose 12 retirees, and people that dont read the news that much plus any pushovers. thats how they choose these are the most easily manipulated juror types out there. ive been in different forums about juror duties, its almost always these people.
on reddit people speculated they will probably choose one where thier own insurance hasnt screwed them over, so it creates a bias for the prosecution.
Realistically they’ll try arrange one that will. They’re going to try secure a guilty verdict by any means necessary to make an example out of him.
That would be the worst thing for them to do, but they’re not the brightest.
In federal Court the judge has a lot more control in the composition of the jury., they even lead voir dire.
They can pick a jury of all ceos if they want.
that would show extreme bias by the courts, its like an all white female jury against a black defendant.
That would be a bold choice, and I don’t think it would work out well overall. In terms of the public response. And imagine the security, it would be locked down harder than any place in the world.
Although in all seriousness, in a normal setting they might be challenged if they chose an all-CEO jury. You can’t fill a jury with the potential target victims of the crime that is being accused. It would not be seen as fair by any stretch of the imagination.
If someone was a accused of targeting very tall men with pink hair, you couldn’t fill the jury with people matching that description. Any sane person in the legal business would call them crazy.
Why? It’s not even a question of if it was him. And it’s not even a question of whether he killed the guy.
He is a murderer whether you agree with why he did it or not.
So you believe that someone who followed this CEOs schedule to find an opportune moment to shoot him, escape to a pre-stashed escape bike, then rode through the one place in New York without CCTV and DITCHED EVIDENCE then carried the MURDER WEAPON, which he didn’t ditch, to a McDonald’s isn’t being set up? The inventory of what they “found” on him wasn’t done until AFTER a New York cop drove up there. It makes more sense to me that the gun was ditched in Central Park and the NYPD just held onto it until they found a good patsy, then drove it to Pennsylvania so they could “find” it on him.
the point from him “allegedly” shooting the ceo, to them trying to find evidence was botched from the getgo.
Because of this fact a lot of courts will just automatically enter a not guilty plea during your first appearance now.
I believe him.
He couldn’t have done it! He was having a couple beers with me at the time that CEO died
I remember that night! He was buying rounds for the whole bar, what a great guy!
I was at that bar too, great guy. I’ll testify under oath.
Yo, guy… Did you kill that CEO?
We all killed that
CEOleech, on this blessed day
If the eyebrows don’t fit, you must acquit.
World needs fewer Elons and more Luigis
The world needs no Elons at all
Without the elons there likely would be no luigis
We’d still have Luigi, he’d just be doing more QA work for Civ or going surfing instead of being dragged around for this show trial.
Good, honestly we don’t even know if he’s the person who did the crime.
Luigi Mangione is a hero of the people.
Nah he was just framed as one
True hero!
For no reason at all.
He should be acquitted specifically to make a point. A certain type of individual may or may not be safe if said person performs against the interest of their constituents.
I like how you think.
Dude was with me in Bahamas
I was in the Bahamas and witnessed him being with you.
Federal prosecutors claimed in their new filing that Mangione deserves the death penalty because of “the impact of the victim’s death upon his family, friends and co-workers” and because “he expressed intent to target an entire industry and rally political and social opposition to that industry, by engaging in an act of lethal violence.”
I just want to remind everyone of the impact of many of Thompson’s murders on their family, friend, and co-workers, all in the service of the money masters’ sheer, unadulterated, insatiable greed.
funny how none of thompsons family or friends came out supporting him? the estranged wife who is probably elated to not fight in divorce court, or Mr andrew witty dint even bat an eye he died.
Also we literally only know his thoughts on the matter because they released excerpts of his journal. If he was trying to rally political and social opposition, you’d think he would have published a manifesto himself.
That journal is fabricated.
The manufactured evidence then found a guy they could pin it on
He can’t have done it, I saw him on the day and I don’t live in the US. He’s telling the truth.
He’s the best guy around.
I was banned from reddit cause I supported him feel at home here
