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.
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.
Also the whole reason there is a jury?
To counteract the system that one person is the deciding factor. People are imperfect, bribable, blackmailable, make mistakes and have biases.
I have biases, i know some of them and others i am blissfully unaware of, but they are there.
And i bet there are a LOT of things about how the system works that lawyers and judges know, but us regular people dont so if we do have an advantage they dont know about then i dont see why we arent allowed to use that tool at our disposal.
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.
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.
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.
Exactly. I think jury nullification is perfectly fair. If they ask if I can apply the law without prejudice, yes I can. Jury nullification is part of the law.
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.