Attorneys for Luigi Mangione asked a judge to stop federal prosecutors from seeking the death penalty against their client, saying the U.S. government “intends to kill Mr. Mangione as a political stunt.”
The motion filed Friday in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District said U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered the death penalty to “carry out President Trump’s agenda to stop violent crime and Make America Safe Again.”
Mangione, 26, who faces state murder and terrorism charges in New York, along with federal murder and stalking charges, is accused of murdering United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson last year in New York City.
Remember, if you’re selected for jury duty and you know what Jury Nullification is, NO, YOU DO NOT.
Off topic, so sorry about that… but is there a list of people maintained somewhere that will absolutely never be called for jury duty? If so, I suspected that I’m on it. I thought that by now (age 41), I’d have at least gotten a summons or something to show up at least once. I’ve never even been asked to show up.
i know some dont, basically leos, family of LEO, lawyers,paralegals are the least likely to get called into jury service, due to thier knowledge of the courts, which might make hard to convince one side over the other. secondly PHDs, MDs are least likely to be selected due to thier professional training at overanalyzing things. these are the people least likely to be chosen, but not 100%. ever since i started voting ever election, ive gotten once a year, sometimes multiple times a year for summons. They look at your voter registration, dmv records.
i once showed for the first time when i was in CC, only because i had school and couldnt have a later date, i was lucky they had no cases that day. ive been mostly dismissed every other time. (one time i forgot).
I don’t think so. It’s up to the defense and prosecution to veto a possible juror. Not the court itself.
Jury Nullification? I’ve never heard of it, never once, not even in that popular CPG Grey video.
Isn’t it illegal to lie as a jury member?
There is the right answer, and there is the correct answer. Give the correct answer. Please don’t fall for this shit that the people in places of power are playing by the rules. They most certainly are not. Is the judge unbiased? In Reno we had a judge stop an approved home construction because he didn’t like that materials were shipped to the lot in sea cans. He lived on the same street. Judges have repeatedly around the country told jurys they are to find the defendant guilty. Police will intentionally tell you things they believe no one else knows about a crime screen, then ask you about it, then when you discuss it on record they ‘‘forget’’ that they told you that off record.
Give the correct answer. And if they say ‘‘oh really well… God’s watching!!’’ Go ahead and say you’re sure the correct answer is correct. And if they say ‘‘here’s proof you have heard of it’’ remember that ‘‘I don’t recall’’ and no other information has kept a lot of very clearly guilty people out of jail for hundreds of years.
They won’t ask you directly about that. What they’ll ask you directly about is whether or not you have any preconceived notions or opinions that would prevent you from deciding fairly. They don’t tell you what fairness means, they expect you to use your own definition.
I’m the current administration, what is even legal?
That’s a huge point of fascism, they like vague and unclear laws, then you can start justifying harm to anyone.
Remember, if you’re selected for jury duty for a case against a former juror who lied about knowing what Jury Nullification is and you’re asked if you know what Jury Nullification is, NO, YOU DO NOT.
How would they know you lied about it?
Where did you hear the phrase “jury nullification”?
If the principal is used but not the words then it can be denied.
State murder. Federal murder. Stalking lol. Why not slap him with jaywalking fine for good measure.
Christ this dude is going to get railroaded so hard.
Arson, murder and jaywalking
Wouldn’t double jeopardy apply here?
Not if the charges are brought by separate entities. State prosecutors are entirely separate from federal prosecutors, which means you can be hit with charges from both.
Double jeopardy only applies on same jurisdiction (state and federal are separate) and upon acquittal in same jurisdiction. State can’t try twice, and federal can’t try twice.
That certainly violates the spirit of the law.
Feels like this case is less about justice and more about setting an example—whether that’s political or public theater. Death penalty or not, the timing and narrative definitely feel curated.
Absolutely. This will be a show trial that will eclipse even the OJ trial, and will lead to a lot of civil unrest, whether he’s found guilty or not.
it was apparent it was more political, and example the moment the witchhunt began. especially with the clown adams escorting his perpwalk.
The first time i saw that perp walk photo, it had a caption like “Jesus walking to appear before Pilate, accompanied by the Roman Praetorian Guard.” And that was EXACTLY what it looked like.
I love it when their clumsy propaganda gets stolen by the Resistance.
We the people should just nullify any jury and break our boy out. Fuck the police. They would kill anyone given the opportunity.
Nah, then he’s a fugitive forever.
All that is required is for one juror to say that they cant identify him from the shooting video, so they have reasonable doubt, and stand on the courage of their convictions (a poor word choice in this context, but all i could think of).
They would have to also reject the supposed corroborating “evidence” as well, like DNA they found at the scene, but there is a high likelihood that was planted, certainly high enough that there is reasonable doubt there as well. Nobody trusts NYC cops, or the Sociopathic Oligarchs who are demnding justice for one of their own, who is a Corporate Serial Killer for Profit, responsible for the deaths and suffering of thousands of people who purchased his fraudulent service/ product. They will pay anything to send a message to the poors to stay in line, and do what they are told.
If i was a juror, i could easily find him not guilty, and it wouldn’t even be jury nullification. Its just an incredibly weak case, built on propaganda.
You’re out of your mind if you think they’ll let that happen.
State court there’s some room, but federal court is entirely different, the judge has far more power to steer the trial and can kick jurors out because he feels like it.
Most likely he’ll have an ‘accident’ in prison, get epsteined, this is a horrifying precedent for them and they have the power to send a message.
Yeah, I’m thinking they’ll do the “he attempted to escape/kill one of his guards in transit, we had to shoot him” thing - I feel like the entire entourage of armed guards will provide cover for the news networks to go “well he was incredibly violent, anyone could’ve seen this coming”.
Not that I think you’re wrong, but having him wear a bulletproof vest, handcuffs, and shackles on his ankles any time he’s transported/shown off in public is gonna make that story real hard to buy
The case against him is so phony. None of the “evidence” is admissible. There’s a ton of prejudicial statements from the investigators and the prosecutors.
This trial is a sham.
The charges should be dismissed with prejudice.
It is so railroaded by no longer believe Luigi did it.
They’re just pinning it on him as a show to the elites that they are putting on a show for the poors : if you kill one of us we’ll kill you right back.
Wouldn’t be surprised if the police planted evidence on Luigi to show all the rich fucks they’re open for business. Can only imagine how much bribery came out of this.
If he is acquitted, expect the MAGA Nazis to raise the stakes, and go with the classic Nazi strategy - you kill one of us, and we choose 10 random innocent people from the community and publicly execute them.
Half of MAGA like him
The only good Nazi is dead.
Ok, I’ll take that deal. One of us for one of them. They’ll run out faster. I can volunteer first if You let me take out Musk.
In the end, well build a beautiful monument to honor the 1% who died to destroy the Sociopathic Oligarchs. The SOs wont be on that monument, let them build their own, and we can vansalize it routinely.
Oh, yeah, they can’t build their own if they’re all dead and their fortunes confiscated
Blue skies and green lights my friend
They wanted to act quick to nip it because people got so happy when that cunt got his comeuppance. It’s gonna backfire
thats why there have been superfluous amount of charges, hopefully they can convince at elast 1 jury group to convict on something. by the way, witty dint even bat an eye he got killed, the head CEO of UHG, neither did hemsley BOD. the wife is estranged from him, and , we discussed on reddit since they are seperate she wont have to fight him on Divorce battle in court.
I was with you for the first sentence, but you lost me at “witty dint.”
The wife. The CEO wife is behind it.
He’s at a hotel early with no security
He got shot dead
His wife has him killed.
It’s not Luigi fighting for the people.
It’s typical rich people shit.
There’s a guy who killed 23 people in a Walmart in El Passo in 2022. Got charged with hate crimes on account of…he’s openly racist and said that’s why he did it.
That guy just got a plea deal to avoid the death penalty.
Nobody should identify the criminal justice system in America as anything else but a mechanism for protecting the rich.
The death penalty is ethically wrong to me because you can’t trust the system 100%, even in the best case. Death row inmates have been exonerated with additional evidence, or just better processing of existing evidence, or other reasons. Unless the judicial system is 100% accurate (which, spoiler, it neither is nor possibly can be), you introduce the possibility of executing innocent people, which should be abhorrent to everyone.
Executing the guilty should be abhorrent to everyone.
I am against the death penalty too. I absolutely agree with your reasoning, but it’s not my primary motivating factor. For me, as callous as it may be, I’d rather that taxpayers not foot the bill for the legal process involved with trying to put someone on death row, and then the subsequent legal process of flipping the switch, pulling the trigger, injecting the needle… whatever. The expense to the taxpayers is of a greater cost than lifetime incarceration.
The death penalty is hypocritical too. I cannot get on board with the lack of logic surrounding, “Killing someone is a crime, and you did that so now we’re going to kill you.”
Your last point hinges on a false equivalency. Imprisonment is also a crime, but we let the government imprison dangerous people for public safety. It’s different when the government does it.
Obviously the death penalty is a different situation, but your logic doesn’t hold up in either case.
To be clear, I don’t support the death penalty. But people on the Internet seem to hate it when I play devil’s advocate to sharpen an argument.
For my book report I did in the mid 1990s I remember citing at least two recent examples and a number of less recent examples.
I think it’s unethical to force someone to be locked up in prison for the rest of their life without 100% certainty also.
Sure, but at least if they’re wrongly incarcerated you can free them and pay damages. You can’t undo death.
I don’t disagree with you, I just don’t think the line for life in prison and death should exist under 100% certain, which is incredibly rare. I’m not sure of a practical solution but I’ve had rough 5-10 year stretches in my life and they are traumatic. No amount of ‘damages’ fixes that or makes someone whole. Sometimes I wonder if people really know what it’s like to be locked up for 5-10+ years when they go off about a sentence being too short. Life without parole is a death sentence just the same as the chair is.
No system is perfect, any attempt at justice will either end with dangerous, guilty people walking free or innocent people incarcerated. The Justice system needs reform but there’s no easy solution.
I almost agree, but there are always those people who have earned their death penalty.
I think we use it way too often, and often for terrible reasons, like to pump up the law & order cred for some scummy DA with ambitions for higher office. But sometimes there is a crime so bad, that the only appropriate response is to remove them from ALL society. Even prisoners shouldnt have to abide their presence among them.
So i want to preseve it for only the most heinous forms of murder, like serial or mass murder, torture murders, and definitely the deliberate murder of children, but only when the evidence is so overwhelming that there is no doubt of guilt. They must be caught in the act, confess everything, with lots of corroborating evidence and testimony, etc. It should NEVER be applied for anything other than murder. Not for rape, treason, etc.
Even with all of that, it should only be used a handful of times in a decade, and only after a full review of the evidence and the case.
But just some cop testifying that he claims he saw one guy kill another? Nuh-uh. People shouldn’t be getting death penalties based on stuff like police or jail-house snitch testimony, or “circumstantial” evidence. Or any police testimony, for that matter. They are proven, enthusiastic liars.
Given what we know about the murder of this CSKfP (Corporate Serial Killer for Profit), Luigi and Death Penalty shouldn’t be used in the same sentence
only when the evidence is so overwhelming that there is no doubt of guilt.
That’s already the exact bar to clear for every guilty conviction.
Circumstantial evidence can clear the bar, I’m talking about standard that is higher than that. That has to be necessary if were going to take a life.
I wonder what would clear the bar for sanctioned killing, then.
Witnesses can be enemies of the accused (especially if they’re police), witness memory is notoriously unreliable, photo and video evidence can be faked, DNA only proves someone was present at the crime scene, not what they did, and confessions can be forced.
There is literally no way to prove someone’s guilt 100% unless the jury was present during the murder.Several years back, there was a case of two knuckleheads who were in prison together, and when they got out, they planned a home invasion.
They broke in, beat the crap out of the husband/father, and chained him to a pole in the basement. Then they tied up the mom and two teenage daughters. They terrorized them all night, raped the younger daughter. In the morning, one asshole took the mother to the bank, and forced her to withdraw a bunch of money from the teller. The mother tried to attract the teller’s attention with her eyes and facial expressions, but the teller didn’t pick up on it.
He took her home, and tied her up again. Then they poured gasoline around the house, including pouring it across one of the girls, tied to her bed. Then they set it on fire.
The husband, smelling the smoke, finally broke loose, crawled out a window and ran next door to call the police. The cops got there quick (really nice neighborhood), and arrived just as the two idiots burst out the front door of the burning house. They were apprehended on the front lawn, smelling like gasoline, and immediately started blaming the entire debacle on each other, as if it made a difference.
The mother and two daughters died in the fire. At least one of the girls had broken loose, but died of smoke inhalation before reaching the steps to downstairs. The husband survived his injuries, and positively identified both dickheads. There was absolutely no doubt that these guys were 1000% guilty. There was no way that some slick defense lawyer was going to be able to make any kind of case for another suspect, a coerced confession, a sketchy identification, poor police procedure, etc.
This happened in Connecticut, which didn’t have the death penalty. At the time, I spoke with numerous Connecticut residents who were ALL willing to make an exception for these two scumbags.
This is the kind of evidence I’m talking about. Sure, many crimes have some ambiguity, and wouldn’t be eligible for the death penalty under my suggested protocols, but that wasnt the case with these guys. They were caught on the scene, and immediately confessed to the crime, as their victims were dying in the fire, and then were identified by the one surviving victim. This wasn’t just beyond reasonable doubt, this was beyond ANY sort of doubt. These guys earned their death penalties, and it’s a shame they can’t be carried out.
You’re pointing out all the reasons where a prosecution could go wrong and potentially condemn an innocent person, and I agree with ALL of them. But occasionally there is the combination of a particularly heinous murder AND the lack of any possible doubt at all, and these are the crimes I’m suggesting should be eligible for the death penalty. They are very rare, and like I first said, would probably only happen a handful of times in an entire decade.
In that case, the prosecutor was approached by the victims families. They did not want to the death penalty, because it would have meant having a trial until at least 2028.
I’ve seen this case mentioned a few times but isn’t this standard practice? Don’t they always use the threat of the death penalty to encourage people to take a plea deal?
Yes, they convince people not to get their whole trial(s) by threatening to kill them.
Average Joe is threatened with over the top judicial punishment, meanwhile Trump doesn’t even have to show up to court most of the time.
What was Luigi’s plea offer? I don’t think he was offered one.
thier trying to setup the stage, to poison the jury against him. its a classic tactic when they dont have enough evidence against him.
Unproven accusatory public statements by AG Bondi against currently completely innocent Luigi Mangione (in a normal world) should undermine the case against him.
I’m no legal expert but to reasonable court this should be worthy of a miss trial. How can you hold an impartial trial under the circumstances?
Is this even the guy who did it? There is an enormous potential for scapegoating in this case.
I don’t think the judge will agree with you on this, although of course it remains to be seen. Police and prosecutors often make some statements, but the reality is that many potential jurors aren’t watching the news. For example, I didn’t know about this particular statement until I read this article.
Of course almost everyone knows about Luigi himself. That’s not what I’m saying. But if the claim is that a third party government statement has jeopardized the possibility of him getting a fair trial on a death penalty case, that seems to be factually dependent on who’s on the jury and what they saw.
They want to silence him, but I don’t think they will be able to.
trying to make it intimidating by having officer standing extremely close to him, like smelling his hairl.
They may succeed in silencing him, but they will never silence his supporters, which grow by the day. He is already a martyr.
As far as I’m concerned he’s an American hero. A real patriot that took injustice and tyranny into his own hands.
I have a different persepective. ⁰He’s a paradox - An American hero who is totally innocent of the crime of which he is accused.
Thats my story and Im sticking with it.
Either it’s make america great or safe again, the “america” is never the citizens, it’s always the 1%, notice that?
Definitely. Things politicians say make a lot more sense when you realize that code speak.
It kind of always has been this way. “The people,” “Americans,” “White people,” etc have always been defined arbitrarily, and always in American history have referred to wealthy landowners who adhered to a puritan work ethic and a supposed “Anglo-Saxon” culture.
It’s so sad seeing the poor and lower middle class thinking that it is about them.
even worst that poc, and lgbtq+ think they are one of them too, unless your evil and thiel"rich" you are not one of thier ingroups.
America was safest under Clinton with budget surpluses to boot.
it was instantly trash by GWB jr, setting off the 08 crisis, which some industry dint recover even now, or with diminished returns.
I want absolutely fucking everyone to stop calling it an assassination.
Words have meaning.
This was a murder. Let’s not elevate CEOs to the status of the House.
An alleged murder!
Oh, no.
Dude was murdered.
We just don’t know who did it. :)
Not til proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by a jury of their (also healthcare deprived) peers.
No way was that guy murdered, i saw the video, he just collapsed after someone pointed at him.
I’m guessing he had a pre-existing allergy to lead.
Yeah but he was an asshole which was a pre-existing condition, so we’re going to have to deny murder coverage here.
But luigi didn’t do it. He was with me playing video games in altiona
he was in canada at the time.
Who said Luigi???
Not me!
By definition, it was an assassination.
Assassination is the willful killing, by a sudden, secret, or planned attack, of a person—especially if prominent or important. It may be prompted by political, ideological, religious, personal, financial, or military motives.
Yeah you’re doing the thing where you elevate a CEO to that of a person of prominence and imprtantce.
That’s oligarchy shit.
Homeboy was a rich fuck with a job and kids, and he got murdered. Seemingly in cold blood.
Not assassinated.
Yeah. You’re doing the thing where you change the definition of a thing to that of something that better matches your personal opinion of it.
Assassination is the willful killing, by a sudden, secret, or planned attack, of a person—especially if prominent or important. It may be prompted by political, ideological, religious, personal, financial, or military motives.
I highlighted the words that are synonymous with a CEO of one of the largest insurance companies to ever exist.
Yeah. He was not important.
Not an assassination.
An overpaid guy with a job.
Murdered.
Yeah. You’re doing the thing where you change the definition of a thing to that of something that better matches your personal opinion of it again.
Removed by mod
Now you’re doing the thing where you resort to personal attacks against people who disagree with your off-hand way of defining things to suit your narrative.
Not prominent or important because he was a CEO, because he was responsible for so many deaths. Prominent in complicity.
deleted by creator
Not before he was able to purposefully take thousands of innocent people with him so he could still have the dollas.
How was it not an assassination?
It was retaliatory. It was the price the CEO paid for underhanded practices that killed thousands. By denying those people healthcare that could have been life saving; he, the CEO, invited what happened. If something that would be considered illegal is done in protection of others it shouldn’t be a crime.
and witty was brazen to double down too.
first of it itsnt, political, or a public figure. hes a low-level CEo, you wouldnt know existed.
The CEO of UHC is both a public and a political figure
Because an assassination specifically involves the killing of someone holding political power or public office… like an elected official, diplomat, or head of state. CEOs may have economic influence or lobby politicians, but they’re not government officials or elected representatives. Calling it an assassination falsely equates corporate influence with legitimate political authority, elevating economic power to the same status as democratic representation. It’s a murder, not an assassination. Words matter, and precision here is crucial.
I feel like acknowledging that corporate interests DO have extreme political power is kind of the whole point.
If he gets sentenced to dearh, this country absoluteIy will not be “safe again”.
I’m not trying to instigale anything. Just making a logical prediction in minecraft.
He’s so dreamy, my Luigi could do no wrong
Don’t most prosecutors go for the throat assuming the defense will attempt to plea-down?
This could just be them just trying to get them to settle for a life-sentencing?
What you said is true some of the time. In this particular situation I don’t think it’s accurate. I think the prosecution really does want to execute the guy, because they don’t like the example set. They don’t like the notion of random white American men taking out CEOs. The prosecution wants to protect their rich friends.
Also, prosecutors have an ethical responsibility to not bring charges or punishments that they don’t think fit. In other words, if they want to try to get the death penalty, they have to actually believe that the evidence justifies asking for it. Ethically they are not allowed to throw every charge at the defendant and see what sticks. In reality, prosecutors ignore the ethical rules that they are sworn to uphold on a regular basis, and only rarely to judges regulate them for it.
if they botched the arrest, which they did, it wont be in his best interest, especially it became political too.
[ OFF TOPIC - SECURITY WARNING ]
When opening this lemmy post, it attempts to download content to the user’s device. This is consistent behavior. This is not an accusation of malware, but is a tactic often used in drive-by attacks.
It is recommended to check your download folder for strange files, and perform a general security check.
- A misconfigured server can download a file instead of executing it. A common result of failing PHP is to download the page. If you open it with a text editor, you’ll see the PHP code that was supposed to be rendered. It’s a decentralized community. Perhaps the server you’re browsing is having an issue. This very likely to be the real reason.
- It can be a symptom of a Local MITM attack. As in your device or browser is compromised.
There is a reason I said this was consistent.
I checked on four different servers (feddit.nl, lemmy.ml, lemmy.world, and sh.itjust.works) and all of them reproduced the automatic download for only this post. Of course, this can be due to an error with lemmy’s source itself - which is why I said it isn’t necessarily malware.
Secondly, I did a non-trivial check of my network for MITM when the error first occurred - and there was no evidence of MITM. I also highly doubt that the browser itself is compromised, as it is up-to-date and is focused on both privacy and security.
I posted it as a warning for those to check their machines if the browser (or other mechanisms) didn’t catch it. I am also not above reproach; it is okay to criticize my claims - but they were not made without reasonable cause.
P.S. The files were blocked from downloading (and I will not be downloading them) so I am unaware of their contents. If it is just PHP, then lemmy itself likely has a edge-case bug triggered by this post (which is bad). But I do doubt it is PHP, considering all other posts do not display this behavior.
He’s clearly pro-death penalty himself so quite hypocritical of him to now all of a sudden be against it.
🎵
LICKIN’ BOOTS!
GOT EM LICK EM ALLLLL!
I’ll lick you clean
then you’ll step on me
LICKIN’ BOOTS
GOTTA LICK EM ALL!🎵
Why is that clear to you?
He murdered a person he thought deserved to die. Isn’t that what death penalty is?
That’s a big claim to make
All the evidence points that way. Feel free to explain why you think I’m wrong.
Because there has yet to be a trial
Well if it turns out that he in-fact didn’t kill Brian, then I’m more than willing to admit I was wrong. I just wouldn’t hold my breath on that one.
