796
submitted 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Summary

Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was fatally shot in a premeditated attack outside the New York Hilton Midtown before speaking at an investor conference.

The gunman, still at large, fired multiple times, leaving shell casings marked with the words “deny,” “defend,” and “depose.”

Authorities suggest Thompson was targeted but remain unclear on the motive. His wife confirmed prior threats against him.

Analysts speculate a possible vendetta tied to his company. The case raises questions about executive security, as Thompson lacked personal protection despite known risks.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 30 points 1 week ago

Murder bingo, murder scavenger hunt, time traveler trying to stop the future apocalypse no lack of options....

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

Are you really suggesting that only possible realistic motive to murder him is because of his position at UHC?

I can think of so many plausible scenarios. I just gave you one, here's another: he was cheating on his wife, so she paid to have him killed, something that actually happens in the real world and doesn't involved time travelers.

I'm sure you would like this to be a just world where bad people get killed for good reasons, but that's not how the world works. Hitler's generals tried to assassinate him and it wasn't because they thought he was being too mean to the Jews.

[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 28 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Are you really suggesting

nope, just toying around with the concept, figured it would be about 3/5 on the joke scale.

edit: Though if you really wanted to get into it, the words scribed on the casings might direct you to a likely solution. *

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Or the words on the casings are intended to direct you to the wrong solution. Because, again in the real world, people who commit premeditated crimes throw police off the scent intentionally.

[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 week ago

Ehh, I think Occam would have the better of that here.

In any case. (no pun intended) Maybe they'll spend a few minutes reflecting on the own mortality while they're ripping us off thinking there's no recourse.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Ehh, I think Occam would have the better of that here.

Would you say the same about this?

https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2024/10/free-gaza-messages-found-on-devices-at-burned-ballot-boxes-new-york-times-reports.html

People commit crimes and then pin the blame on someone else literally every day. It's like the easiest way to try to get away with a crime.

[-] rumba@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 week ago

The concept of the Razor is that it's a guide to likelyhood. You cannot prove it right or wrong and you certainly can't disprove it with even a substantial list of unrelated cases of false flags.

We're both speaking firmly from conjecture, and neither of us has any substantial evidence.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

We’re both speaking firmly from conjecture, and neither of us has any substantial evidence.

Yes, that was my point.

[-] sepi@piefed.social 12 points 1 week ago

Ah yes. "The murderer must be playing 5d chess to fool people" angle. It's an angle, but not a reasonable one. How much Scooby Doo have you watched?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It takes "5D chess" to write vague words on bullet casings?

[-] sepi@piefed.social 2 points 1 week ago

You did not answer my Scooby Doo question

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Correct. I decided not to report you for trolling. Should I have?

[-] sepi@piefed.social 1 points 1 week ago
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

So that's a yes. Done.

[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Possible vs Probable.

Lots of things are possible, sure, but his position and impact on people due to his position does make one very probable.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

I am guessing you do not know enough about him personally to know what is the most probable. Maybe he very openly cheats on his wife. That would make his wife hiring a hit man very probable. Maybe he's swindled someone out of a ton of money on a personal level rather than via UHC. Again, that would make a good motive to kill him.

We do not have enough information here and pretending we do is not very wise.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

He MAYBE fucked around on his one wife causing embarrassment.

He CERTAINLY fucked around with THOUSANDS of people causing DEATH.

It's worthwhile to consider alternatives but it's unwise to paint all scenarios as equally likely.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's also unwise to come to a conclusion when the person who did it hasn't even been identified.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I don't think most people have strictly concluded anything, they've just acknowledged the a significant probability.

You're on a semantic crusade.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

People are sure acting like they have strictly concluded it.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

I'm entirely empathetic to your position.

Internet conversation is intrinsically imperfect. The contract of semantics isn't sufficient.

I think in so many senses of the word, you're right. Technically right. But not practically responding to the practical intention of the communication.

[-] Lightor@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

True, it's possible he has numerous enemies.

But what I can say is the average person doesn't have people wanting to kill them. If all things are equal, and given the message written on the casings, there seems to be one that is currently the most probable.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Obviously there are many plausible scenarios, but one of them scales significantly differently than the others.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

If there are many plausible scenarios, even if one is the most plausible, it's silly to assume that's the one.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's only silly if one misunderstands an assumption to be established fact.

If I hear hoofbeats, I will assume horses, not zebras.

If I see Zebras, I'll say my assumption was wrong. No shame in it. I'm wrong all the fucking time, being right isn't part of my identity.

But until then, if someone says "what do figure those hoofbeats are?" I'm not going to say "50/50 horses or zebras"

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Assumptions are claimed to be established facts. That's what an assumption is. You're making a claim of fact without having the evidence.

[-] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition.

This means it's being regarded as true for the purposes of a context. "Hypothetical" is another term which would be useful here. But you're being probably needlessly pedantic about this. I think everyone can agree that there are millions of people his company has harmed who thus have motive to do this, and at the same time other motives are quite possible. Maybe he broke up with the guy who shot him. Maybe he was part of an international zebra smuggling ring. Maybe it was just completely random, but fate just happened to land on someone who really deserved it. Maybe the total lack of accountability in our justice system finally drove someone over the edge.

[-] catloaf@lemm.ee 1 points 1 week ago

Don't feed the troll.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

No, that's not what it means. You are redefining it. Hypothetical would be fine though.

[-] Warl0k3@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

But... thats the literal copy-pasted dictionary definition. I'm so confused here.

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

Established facts do come with proof. That's how they are established to be fact. You'll notice a suspicious avoidance of the word "fact" in the definition you posted.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Sorry, are you under the bizarre impression that 'true' and 'fact' are different things?

[-] Windex007@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No.

But if you preface them with qualifiers that means something, no? Are those words meaningless embellishment or are they intended to provide additional meaning, and if so, what?

this post was submitted on 05 Dec 2024
796 points (100.0% liked)

News

23600 readers
3145 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS