Feels too... Tidy really. Too much like something out of a movie. High profile murder. Killer found. Killer has clear motive and everything is found on or near the guy. Suspect makes statements that sound like something Killer would say in that position.
A line from the Running man comes to mind.
'Once again proving Might and Right are one and the same!'
In reference to a fake staged fight where State Sponsored Execution Reality TV kills a stunt double digitally made to look like the fugitive of the moment that has been making a mockery of The System. very neat. very tidy. Also, very Bullshit.
Edit: For the sake of records. I do believe he did it. I just find it too... tidy that everything was on hand to immediately bring a trial rather than months of legwork to ensure an air tight case.
We don't know that. What we know is that the police searched him and his bag at the McDonalds, without properly reading him his Miranda rights before questioning him.
There is no indication that they found the gun or journal at this point in time.
They then arrested him, packed up his bag and took it to the station, where a subsequent search found the journal and gun.
Additionally, the Mayor and police chief released discovery evidence to an HBO documentary, but apparently not to Luigi's defense lawyers... completely tainting the potential jury pool while making it clear that the prosecution is withholding evidence from the defense.
There's a whole lot here that doesn't pass the smell test. If it's a frame up, why this guy in particular? And if it's not a frame up, why the obvious attempt to hide what they have from the defense?
i think that he likely did do it, but the FBI used an illegal surveillance technique to catch him - my guess is facial recognition through hacked security cameras. Exposing this technique would be contrary to the bureau's interests. I don't see any reason why Luigi would have the gun on him, or the journal after the shooting, so I'm really questioning the validity of that evidence - I mean it's murder 101 to get rid of the weapon, and unless you want to be caught, you don't carry around written evidence on your person saying "Hey, I'm gonna shoot this guy".
So yeah, there's a whole lot here that doesn't add up.
Oh I ABSOLUTELY am of the belief that it is him. However, I find it strange that so much proof was supposedly found on him to the point that he might as well have been standing in time's square shouting that he did it. There was no need to backtrace through his history, go through his home, interview friends or family. It was all There.
That is what strikes me as ... too convenient.
They don't want to go to the trouble of having this long drawn out process. They want thier gunman handed on a silver platter both to please the corporate overlords, and to show that they are competent.
Oh for sure they fucked around and made sure to plant as much shit to make sure he doesn’t get away with it, there’s definitely corruption around his case but yeah it’s him
And if Luigi gets off on a technicality in court, the message isn't sent. Putting up a fall guy while assassinating the "real" culprit quietly is nonsensical, especially because if Luigi is a fall guy (he isn't), that increases the likelihood that he gets off and ruins the whole thing.
I just find it strange that everything to convict him was conveniently close to hand. The immediacy of it all feels like something out of a police proceedural more so than documented cases where it takes weeks or months even when it is fairly clear who did what so a case can be built.
Not that I buy the fall guy conspiracy, but getting someone, anyone quickly could stop the copycats. They're more worried about him being a trend setter then a repeat offender.
Not the rich, but politicians, police leadership, and DAs.
They don't want to talk about how murders can go unsolved and crime unpunished in the cities they manage and protect.
They want to demonstrate that when they show up in force they are able to quickly solve a crime and bring a criminal to justice. One, so they can keep getting elected and two so that others don't think they can get away with committing crimes.
The DA will want to push a conviction so that they look tough on crime for their political campaigns. Often times withholding evidence that might harm their case.
I don't know if it happened in this case, but it has happened before where police will railroad a suspect to get a conviction even if there is clear evidence they couldn't have committed the crime.
Alec Baldwin got off because of screw-ups like this. Seems like when there's a high profile case, all the big shots who normally don't do any work all want to jump in and be involved. And then make stupid mistakes because they don't have any real experience because they're normally too important to work a case.
On the flip side, if they illegally discover evidence but can prove an alternative, legal, way it could be discovered it becomes admissible. That's sometimes why they do it.
Republican judges have been itching to do away with the exclusionary rule. It's not written into the Constitution.
The 4th prohibits unlawful search and seizure but doesn't specify a remedy. The exceptions practically swallow the rule as it is now; attenuation of the taint, good faith, public safety, independent source, inevitable discovery, to name a few.
it makes complete sense to most of us, because it IS an insult to our intelligence that the cops think we will believe Luigi did it after the way this was handled.
Pretty revealing that you remember him yelling something that proved his guilt to you but you don't remember what it was.
Maybe examine your own biases and what kind of track record law enforcement has with regards to respecting individual rights and the presumption of innocence.
That sounds exactly like something an innocent person would say to me.
It (my arrest and trial for murder) is completely unjust (because I am innocent) and an insult to the intelligence of the American people (because there was is no real evidence)
I think it's wildly optimistic with regards to the intelligence of the American people, but it's a totally plausible thing to say.
Yes, because it's a sign of guilt for most of the population and it greatly diminishes the possibility of it being a set up, or at least a jury being persuaded that it was.
I think what he did was praise worthy but it's going to be very hard to get out of it and he definitely didn't do himself any favors with the outburst.
So what's happened here is you've formed a strong opinion, had some minor confirmation at some point, and projected that opinion onto everyone else as if they agree with you.
They don't.
Sure, some might, but generally people are trying to figure out if you are a troll or just stupid.
It's not entirely out of the question, but it does require considerable evidence. It's possible that he carried it so that it wouldn't be left somewhere as evidence, until he could get somewhere that he could safely destroy it.
That said, there are some pretty gaping holes with that explanation that would need to be filled first.
There's a lot of ring cameras out there and there was a manhunt going on. You gotta remember that this dude needed to not be seen. By cameras or otherwise.
I would say he should have broken the evidence apart into smaller pieces. If the gun was 3D printed, I'm assuming he knows how to disassemble it. Dispose of each peice in a different public garbage can. Once again though, this involves going out in public a lot of times during a man hunt.
Or put it all in that one backpack, find a place where you can make a burn barrel, and set it all of fire.
Or fill the bag with some cement and throw it into a body of water.
People have been disposing of evidence for years. Keeping it all on you for 5 days, having a "manifesto" that admits guilt, and then pleading Not Guilty is suspect as fuck.
As far as I know, the lawyers have not confirmed that it is him.
But in any case, that's beside the point of the "weird ass conspiracy". To spell it out a bit more clearly, the actual idea is that there is "not enough evidence" to convict - because he should not be convicted. (In a jury trial, you cannot just say "guilty, but should be unpunished"; but you can say "not guilty, due to insufficient evidence".)
I really don't care what anyone says, I will not reject the evidence of my eyes and ears. The guy who did the praxis, the guy who was smiling in that security footage, and Luigi Mangione are very clearly three different people.
BREAKING: We have an unexpected ruling from the United States Supreme Court today. In a 6-3 decision they have ruled... wait this is really it? They have ruled "Hold My Beer."
oh I absolutely believe the allegation as plausible.
They NEEDED a fall guy for this and they NEEDED it to be so cut and dry that they could quickly make an example of him.
Even if Luigi DID do it? This is railroading for the sake of trying to scare everyone else to stay in place.
Feels too... Tidy really. Too much like something out of a movie. High profile murder. Killer found. Killer has clear motive and everything is found on or near the guy. Suspect makes statements that sound like something Killer would say in that position.
A line from the Running man comes to mind.
'Once again proving Might and Right are one and the same!'
In reference to a fake staged fight where State Sponsored Execution Reality TV kills a stunt double digitally made to look like the fugitive of the moment that has been making a mockery of The System. very neat. very tidy. Also, very Bullshit.
Edit: For the sake of records. I do believe he did it. I just find it too... tidy that everything was on hand to immediately bring a trial rather than months of legwork to ensure an air tight case.
Shooting someone in the middle of new York and then getting caught shortly after is basicallly an expected outcome
No its not
Imagine if it's actually not him, and the real guy was able to get away because nobody's looking any more.
That would be hilarious if he gets convicted and the next day another shooting happens with the same guy on camera again.
Oh my God imagine if the new CEO gets executed the next day.
If that is actually the case it would be really funny.
It's entirely possible he's just not the criminal mastermind everyone thinks he is.
Certainly possible, but not proven.
I believe they call it Security Theatre
He had the gun on him
We don't know that. What we know is that the police searched him and his bag at the McDonalds, without properly reading him his Miranda rights before questioning him.
There is no indication that they found the gun or journal at this point in time.
They then arrested him, packed up his bag and took it to the station, where a subsequent search found the journal and gun.
Additionally, the Mayor and police chief released discovery evidence to an HBO documentary, but apparently not to Luigi's defense lawyers... completely tainting the potential jury pool while making it clear that the prosecution is withholding evidence from the defense.
There's a whole lot here that doesn't pass the smell test. If it's a frame up, why this guy in particular? And if it's not a frame up, why the obvious attempt to hide what they have from the defense?
i think that he likely did do it, but the FBI used an illegal surveillance technique to catch him - my guess is facial recognition through hacked security cameras. Exposing this technique would be contrary to the bureau's interests. I don't see any reason why Luigi would have the gun on him, or the journal after the shooting, so I'm really questioning the validity of that evidence - I mean it's murder 101 to get rid of the weapon, and unless you want to be caught, you don't carry around written evidence on your person saying "Hey, I'm gonna shoot this guy".
So yeah, there's a whole lot here that doesn't add up.
hE hAd tHe gUn oN hIm
How would it benefit the rich to have the real killer running lose while a random guy goes to jail??
This is the weirdest conspiracy so far.
It’s him, he did it, and praise him for doing it, he’s a legend. Neither he or his lawyers are denying it.
It’s super weird that people on the Internet are insisting it isn’t him
Oh I ABSOLUTELY am of the belief that it is him. However, I find it strange that so much proof was supposedly found on him to the point that he might as well have been standing in time's square shouting that he did it. There was no need to backtrace through his history, go through his home, interview friends or family. It was all There.
That is what strikes me as ... too convenient.
They don't want to go to the trouble of having this long drawn out process. They want thier gunman handed on a silver platter both to please the corporate overlords, and to show that they are competent.
...when they are anything but.
Oh for sure they fucked around and made sure to plant as much shit to make sure he doesn’t get away with it, there’s definitely corruption around his case but yeah it’s him
The rich could have already discovered the real culprit and assassinated him quietly, rather than risk technicalities in court.
And if Luigi gets off on a technicality in court, the message isn't sent. Putting up a fall guy while assassinating the "real" culprit quietly is nonsensical, especially because if Luigi is a fall guy (he isn't), that increases the likelihood that he gets off and ruins the whole thing.
oh I ABSOLUTELY believe Luigi did it.
I just find it strange that everything to convict him was conveniently close to hand. The immediacy of it all feels like something out of a police proceedural more so than documented cases where it takes weeks or months even when it is fairly clear who did what so a case can be built.
But that wouldn't send a message to keep the poor in line
That's why the fall guy, let's the cops save face as well
Can you hear yourself?
Not that I buy the fall guy conspiracy, but getting someone, anyone quickly could stop the copycats. They're more worried about him being a trend setter then a repeat offender.
Not the rich, but politicians, police leadership, and DAs.
They don't want to talk about how murders can go unsolved and crime unpunished in the cities they manage and protect.
They want to demonstrate that when they show up in force they are able to quickly solve a crime and bring a criminal to justice. One, so they can keep getting elected and two so that others don't think they can get away with committing crimes.
The DA will want to push a conviction so that they look tough on crime for their political campaigns. Often times withholding evidence that might harm their case.
I don't know if it happened in this case, but it has happened before where police will railroad a suspect to get a conviction even if there is clear evidence they couldn't have committed the crime.
How insane would it be if he got off due to a technicality. Not holding my breath, but here's hoping.
Not really that insane. Cops are mostly useless and fuck shit up all the time.
Mostly. Have a look at this chart to see their real impact.
10/10
Alec Baldwin got off because of screw-ups like this. Seems like when there's a high profile case, all the big shots who normally don't do any work all want to jump in and be involved. And then make stupid mistakes because they don't have any real experience because they're normally too important to work a case.
On the flip side, if they illegally discover evidence but can prove an alternative, legal, way it could be discovered it becomes admissible. That's sometimes why they do it.
It has a word too, something like Alternative Reconstruction. I used to know the term.
"parallel construction" or "evidence laundering"
"buttering the goose"
Civil rights aren't a technicality. If he 'got off' it would be a victory for everyone who enjoys not being harassed by police.
It may be a great way for the state to avoid a "not guilty" verdict.
His getting off a technicality doesn't make it clear he has support.
Really appears like they planted a backpack full of evidence on this innocent person, cops were desperate for a win
Republican judges have been itching to do away with the exclusionary rule. It's not written into the Constitution.
The 4th prohibits unlawful search and seizure but doesn't specify a remedy. The exceptions practically swallow the rule as it is now; attenuation of the taint, good faith, public safety, independent source, inevitable discovery, to name a few.
As a non lawyer reading that list of exceptions, it sounds like it will be easy for the prosecutors to get a few to apply?
Yeah, most likely.
Which was?
"Hack the planet!"
"It's completely unjust and an insult to the intelligence of the American people"? Comes up if you search Luigi Mangione shouting
it makes complete sense to most of us, because it IS an insult to our intelligence that the cops think we will believe Luigi did it after the way this was handled.
Pretty revealing that you remember him yelling something that proved his guilt to you but you don't remember what it was.
Maybe examine your own biases and what kind of track record law enforcement has with regards to respecting individual rights and the presumption of innocence.
That sounds exactly like something an innocent person would say to me.
It (my arrest and trial for murder) is completely unjust (because I am innocent) and an insult to the intelligence of the American people (because there was is no real evidence)
I think it's wildly optimistic with regards to the intelligence of the American people, but it's a totally plausible thing to say.
He is going to regret that for a long time. If he had screamed "I didn't do it" instead, he would probably be out already.
Yes, because it's a sign of guilt for most of the population and it greatly diminishes the possibility of it being a set up, or at least a jury being persuaded that it was.
I think what he did was praise worthy but it's going to be very hard to get out of it and he definitely didn't do himself any favors with the outburst.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BVvq2Znhqwk
The context where he is being accused of killing a Healthcare CEO and blurts out exactly what someone that killed a Healthcare CEO would say.
I love the guy but common, you gotta be realistic about it.
Or what you might yell if an implausibly convenient stash of evidence had been planted on you?
That isn't my takeaway, at all.
Gonna need some sources and context on that one, Ace.
So what's happened here is you've formed a strong opinion, had some minor confirmation at some point, and projected that opinion onto everyone else as if they agree with you.
They don't.
Sure, some might, but generally people are trying to figure out if you are a troll or just stupid.
I'm so confused by this he didn't say "I'm glad the CEO is dead" he said "my arrest was unjust"
What is so incriminating about that?
The IMPORTANT thing is to KEEP using RANDOM ass UPPERCASE in CLICKBAIT title SENTENCES. That is NOT at ALL irritating.
SPEAK UP BROTHER, I ONLY HEARD HALF OF WHAT YOU SAID!
WHAT?!
AYE AYE CAPTAIN!
WHAT?!
AYE AYE, CAPTAIN!
SAY "AYE AYE, CAPTAIN" AGAIN! I DARE YOU. I DOUBLE-DARE YOU! SAY "AYE AYE, CAPTAIN" ONE MORE GODDAMN TIME!
i dont speak cursive
The most important part is to use MEANINGLESS HYPERBOLE like SLAMMED and EXPLOSIVE
HuMiLiAtEDDD!!!
Oh SHIT, his lawyer EXPLODED? With all the FEDERAL CUTS to staffing I WONDER, did they still have A JANITOR to clean her GUTS OFF THE WALLS?
Aunt Sally?
Did somebody hide your Facebook icon again? Oh, I’m talking about the Internet button that has the blue F on it.
Did he, though?
This situation is not in the slightest weird and your only example of normal is tv
Hard to say tbh, we are going to be getting biased information from either side. How much is really true?
It's not entirely out of the question, but it does require considerable evidence. It's possible that he carried it so that it wouldn't be left somewhere as evidence, until he could get somewhere that he could safely destroy it.
That said, there are some pretty gaping holes with that explanation that would need to be filled first.
Any number of thousands of dumpsters between NY and PA would have worked fine.
I am pretty sure I could dispose of a gun in less than 5 days.
Just gotta throw it in a random residential garbage can on garbage pick up day and walk off without anyone suspicious seeing.
There's a lot of ring cameras out there and there was a manhunt going on. You gotta remember that this dude needed to not be seen. By cameras or otherwise.
I would say he should have broken the evidence apart into smaller pieces. If the gun was 3D printed, I'm assuming he knows how to disassemble it. Dispose of each peice in a different public garbage can. Once again though, this involves going out in public a lot of times during a man hunt.
Or put it all in that one backpack, find a place where you can make a burn barrel, and set it all of fire.
Or fill the bag with some cement and throw it into a body of water.
People have been disposing of evidence for years. Keeping it all on you for 5 days, having a "manifesto" that admits guilt, and then pleading Not Guilty is suspect as fuck.
Go hiking, bury parts in remote locations away from the path.
It's entirely possible he's that stupid.
Remember the eye brows on the photos. That is not Luigi in the photos!
This is such a weird ass conspiracy that even Luigi and his lawyers aren’t denying it’s him, yet people on Lemmy are. Wtf
As far as I know, the lawyers have not confirmed that it is him.
But in any case, that's beside the point of the "weird ass conspiracy". To spell it out a bit more clearly, the actual idea is that there is "not enough evidence" to convict - because he should not be convicted. (In a jury trial, you cannot just say "guilty, but should be unpunished"; but you can say "not guilty, due to insufficient evidence".)
I really don't care what anyone says, I will not reject the evidence of my eyes and ears. The guy who did the praxis, the guy who was smiling in that security footage, and Luigi Mangione are very clearly three different people.
Photos on the internet are not facts as seen by your eyes just fyi, no more than a picture of Gandalf proves the existence of wizards
Are you suggesting that New York Police Department doctored the photo of that guy smiling to make him not look like Luigi???
Its a different person my guy
Police misconduct allegations could unravel this case—constitutional rights aren't optional.
😺😺😺
They most definitely are
Continuing to pray for the Louisiana Supreme Court to all get lung cancer
BREAKING: We have an unexpected ruling from the United States Supreme Court today. In a 6-3 decision they have ruled... wait this is really it? They have ruled "Hold My Beer."
Please be true
Everyday police overreaching actually is a benefit for a change. Cool.
I'd almost go so far as to say I'm looking forward to the OJ Simpson-esque "If I did it" book in 10 years.