1151

Luigi Mangione is accused of stalking United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson and shooting him to death on Dec. 4, 2024.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Nougat@fedia.io 218 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe 137 points 3 months ago

I'd be very disappointed in any jury who found him guilty

[-] jjagaimo@sh.itjust.works 118 points 3 months ago

Having been on a jury,

People are dumb and have no empathy

[-] BakerBagel@midwest.social 20 points 3 months ago

People might not have empathy, but even less people are going to want to side with an insurance company

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 10 points 3 months ago

I was on a grand jury some years ago in NYC. It really did a number on my faith in people and the legal system.

Now, a grand jury is different than a regular (petit) jury in a few key ways. First, you only need simple majority to move forward with an indictment. You can't 12-angry-men hang a grand jury. Second, as I learned later, even if you do convince a majority to not indict, the prosecutor can just try again. So all those times the police didn't get indicted for murder and the prosecutor just gave up? They could have tried again. They didn't, because they didn't want to.

All of that said, the cases were largely about drugs. People selling weed and heroin and the like. No violence. I suggested to the jury that we maybe just say no, and don't ruin people's lives over marijuana. You don't have to show your work. You can just say whatever. The whole rest of the jury was like "are you insane?" Some of them were just anti-drug, full stop no context. Some of them were like "We have to do what they tell us" very obedient. Some of them just wanted to go home, and thought an indictment would be the fastest way.

They all voted to indict on every charge. The guy who was sleeping, and the lawyers and cops laughed at him snoring, also voted to indict.

I asked the little old white lady sitting behind me a hypothetical. I asked if she was on a jury in the 60s, and the charge was a black man eating at an all white's diner, if she would indict. She was like, "Hmmm maybe."

I tried. One of the cases the cops said they found a gun in the man's house, so they charged him with intent to use it in a violent crime, or something. I was like, they didn't even try to prove it was his or that he was going to use it. Everyone voted to indict. I'm just like, why do you have to make it easier for the police?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Nougat@fedia.io 31 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 20 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] Alaik@lemmy.zip 15 points 3 months ago

"The man who saves his country breaks no laws" isn't that right DoJ?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Charlxmagne@lemmy.world 28 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] ZoopZeZoop@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

That would be the worst thing for them to do, but they're not the brightest.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 127 points 3 months ago
[-] BakerBagel@midwest.social 77 points 3 months ago

He couldn't have done it! He was having a couple beers with me at the time that CEO died

[-] Glytch@lemmy.world 27 points 3 months ago

I remember that night! He was buying rounds for the whole bar, what a great guy!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 127 points 3 months ago

He's guilty of stealing my heart tho

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 61 points 3 months ago

Why, is he made of cheese?

[-] Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 52 points 3 months ago

whatever he's made of id eat the shit out of him.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] PunkRockSportsFan@fanaticus.social 72 points 3 months ago

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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] PurpleSkull@lemm.ee 71 points 3 months ago

Who's that guy? Doesn't look like the guy they were searching for. At all.

[-] misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com 67 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] Allonzee@lemmy.world 60 points 3 months ago

I told you he didn't do it!

[-] masterofn001@lemmy.ca 22 points 3 months ago
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] johnpmac@lemm.ee 52 points 3 months ago

“He who saves his country commits no crime “

[-] Makhno@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

Watch out, fascists love that motto

[-] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 51 points 3 months ago

If the eyebrows don't fit, you must acquit.

[-] Dojan@pawb.social 47 points 3 months ago

Yeah that tracks. He was walking my dough at the time.

[-] jaykrown@lemm.ee 42 points 3 months ago

Good, honestly we don't even know if he's the person who did the crime.

[-] merdaverse@lemmy.world 41 points 3 months ago

Well, that settles it then. Better release him for the sake of Government Efficiency and all that.

[-] Maeve@kbin.earth 41 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 11 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] GoodOleAmerika@lemmy.world 28 points 3 months ago

Dude was with me in Bahamas

[-] clashorcrashman@lemmy.zip 15 points 3 months ago

I was in the Bahamas and witnessed him being with you.

[-] Uranus_Hz@lemm.ee 27 points 3 months ago

World needs fewer Elons and more Luigis

[-] tfm@europe.pub 24 points 3 months ago

The world needs no Elons at all

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] jasonwnclife@lemm.ee 26 points 3 months ago

Does the public have any information on the evidence they have that he did it? What I have read about all sounds like a weak case with what I suspect is a mountain of inadmissible evidence gathered by methods outside of laws that would apply to the non elite class.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 25 points 3 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] anas@lemmy.world 25 points 3 months ago

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.

[-] raynethackery@lemmy.world 16 points 3 months ago

Prosecutor: Could you find defendant guilty?

Potential juror: I could.

Narrator: They couldn't.

[-] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 16 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I don't think jury nullification will be needed. I legit think that Luigi didn't do it. Meaning a simple acquittal is all what is needed.

As for the real killer? I hope he lives a long and quiet life.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Fedizen@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

Murder is where you kill an innocent person. Killing a spree killer, esp during the spree, is just defending people. Hopefully the jury is made cognizant of that.

[-] hOrni@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

Flushing a toilet isn't a crime.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2025
1151 points (100.0% liked)

News

31269 readers
2503 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. 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