It's a pretty bedrock part of every nation with trials by jury that the accusers don't get to unilaterally select the jury. "Finding 12 people that will have him killed" would as you said, be easy. So would finding 12 people that would not. That's why the prosecution and the defense are given equal powers to appoint and reject jurors, in a process that sometimes goes on longer than the actual trial.
It’s interesting to me to note the differences in jury selection between the US and Australia: here in Aus (at least in my state of NSW) both sides get to strike jurors, but there isn’t a round of questioning - it’s purely based on physical appearance - and each side only gets three challenges (per accused person). That means for most trials, those with only one defendant, at least six of the original randomly selected jurors will end up serving.
I’ve done jury service twice - once I was part of the original 12 and wasn’t challenged, and the other time I replaced the last challenged juror but each side only ended up challenging two.
I feel like not being able to question jurors and having limited strikes makes the system far more random and, therefore, more just in terms of the jury being a random selection of citizens.
That is really interesting the differences there. I think the intended goal of the US system is to make sure that you get 12 people capable of being objective about the subject at hand, rather than 12 random people. For example, it usually takes all 12 jurors to make a conviction, so if you get just one person who won't convict no matter what because of religious reasons or pre-existing biases or whatever, then automatically you have a hung jury that can't be swayed by evidence. So the US system tries to insure we get 12 people who are willing to put aside their biases and be objective (enough) to render a verdict based on the facts before them either way the facts lead. So it's a long process, but in our system anyway we try to weed out anybody who might believe, for example, that all Mexicans are criminals if it's a Mexican on trial, or someone who doesn't believe that rape should be a crime in a rape case. And the big one of course, people who are already so convinced by media they've consumed that the person is guilty that they can't act as a fair juror.
Yeah, it seems clear that the goals are different and so the methods of selection have to be different in order to try to achieve those goals. I wonder if there are any statistics available to determine what approach results in more accurate results in terms of convictions! Personally I see the merit in both approaches, and potentially in other approaches to the jury selection process.
I recieved both a ban and a death threat from a .ml mod.
My opinion was that Harris would have been better than Trump. I even included that I didn't even like her or the democrats. I just view them as, unfortunately, the better option right now.
They told me I should be executed and thrown in a pit with the rest of the garbage (ie the other people they view as undesirable) and promptly banned. It was a crazy escalation
I've had the opposite experience. I was mobbed and then site-banned by .ml for mildly criticizing communism in China and defending my opinion. But the hateful, rule-breaking comments, the derision, the incivility--all of that stayed up right where it was.
I agree, although I feel like that's across the board for Lemmy. Mods aren't all joining together and discussing the rules they will enforce. Every community has its own idea of how moderation works, and we all do what we see fit or please. I've seen some stupid shit on the modlogs everywhere, often using the ban and remove content feature that essentially scrubs the user's history, which imo should be fixed.
I do feel like .ml takes that to an extreme, though. Like, what do you mean you can't criticize Russia or China without being banned by an admin? Dessalines is especially guilty of this, and the other admins deflect and defend his behavior.
didn't he save thousands of people? as in the aftermath of the event insurance companies started approving claims they were meant to approve until shareholders sued them to stop
The fact he was "found" in the most nonchalant way at McDonald's with the evidence on him is very suspicious. And then he just walked around with it for 2 days? Dude, I'm ditching and burning everything in the first hour. I know criminals are supposed to be dumb. But come on, this guy doesn't look dumb.
Especially given the shooter printed parts of the weapon and had no cellphone on them when they shot Brian McEvilCEO or whatever his name was. And then hopped on a scooter and left the island without a trace. So much planning went into the prep and, ahem, execution of the plan that holding into blatant evidence like a signed confession 2 days after the fact doesn't make any sense. It screams planted evidence on a person who vaguely looked like the only screenshot I've ever seen of the ahooter smiling.
At the very least I have very reasonable doubts and would not be selected for the jury.
Another thing that gets me is that Mangione seems like just the kind of guy you would try to pin something like this on. He was a queer kid, estranged from his family (or at least out of contact for a prolonged period), and living in a hostel. Isn't that the oldest police trick in the book when they want to "solve" a case, blame it on some drifter from out of town?
Obviously we can't know for sure, but there was a lot of stuff about the incident and especially his arrest that point toward him bring used as a useful patsy to try to control the narrative in light of the near universal approval of the death of a health insurance CEO.
I get rooting for him, it just always felt like all the comments about him not doing it were mostly memes (see the "he was with me" comments under my original comment), but lately I got the feeling people seriously think he's innocent.
Here's the thing: the default position is not believing something either way. They have to get enough evidence to make me believe. So far, it doesn't seem to be there. There's some evidence, but there's also plenty of reason to be skeptical of it. My position currently is that it's possible, but I don't believe he did it.
Yes. Some people think the original picture released doesn't match Luigi and therefore it can't be the same person, for example.
There's also some people who suspect it probably was him, but believe that illegal means were used to find him and they can't use such evidence in-court because it would require admitting to having a secret mass surveillance network. I assume for such people, a belief in a secret CIA/FBI mass surveillance network came first, so of course they could find the guy using it.
When I was a little kid, my older sister used to bite me sometimes. My mom once told her in front of me when I was about 4, that if she did it again, my mother would bite her back. As soon as my mom was elsewhere, I bit the outside of my forearm hard enough to leave a mark that looked like someone else had done it (I know, younger siblings, but she was ten years old biting a preschooler, so I support it). My mom did bite her, but probably not really very hard and my sister stopped biting me after that. I’m not sure how I feel about that parenting, but I’m not a parent, so I’ll withhold judgement. Plus it worked.
Well, he was physically with you there in Europe. Me and him were astral projecting our minds to a distant world around Tau Ceti at the time of the killing.
personally i don't care either way if he did or didn't, in this case a terrible human is dead...maybe other terrible humans will have moment of introspection and change their ways if one of their own is murdered and the (alledged) killer gets away with it.
therefor the result with most net-good is a not-guilty verdict
I like aviator sunglasses and I still don’t think I’ve ever thought a cop looked inherently cool (I can imagine a bomb defuser looking cool in the moment, but that’s just because of what they’re doing)
She only looks cool because she looks like she's part of a rag-tag team of underdogs who infiltrated the courtroom to bust him out. She probably has telekinetic powers.
About that. The CEO he shot was actually in hot water with Blackrock, who were functionally his bosses, for not doing enough to screw over people. Blackrock owns many insurance companies. So that was like 1% progress on solving a problem. Until you get your IRA/401k divested from Blackrock and stop shopping at Blackrock owned companies (good luck), you can shoot all the CEOs you want. Blackrock will still instruct their employee to screw you over.
I think we should make owning the conservative fascists a point. They have always been accusing anyone opposed to them of doing this shit even if we didn't. Why not give them a well earned fuck you?
there are people who can afford to do it and people who cannot. minorities know this very well. mamdani represents multiple minorities whether he wants to or not. he cannot do this.
Nothing in particular. Note that I am not the person you replied to originally. I found that your message did not offer an alternative after shutting off the presumption (that Mamdani had that kind of power), so I am encouraging you to suggest one
No matter what happens, what ruling, what transpires, they can't bring that piece of shit he (supposedly) shot back from the dead. He's got a lot to smile about.
Aren't they obligated to see to his medical needs so long as he is being detained?
As in, maybe he's smiling because (ironically) the medical care he was being denied by insurance companies while not incarcerated now has to be provided for by the state?
There's lots of red tape and forgetting, not to mention simply not responding to them as if a nurse was walking by a hospital room with the call light on, that can be done. There are numerous articles out there about diabetics going into comas because they were denied the insulin their family had for them in the prison lobby, individuals who were seizing being ignored, people with broken bones being thrown into general pop, etc. etc.
I wouldn't count on getting better care. You might, but you might not.
Look at that face! That is not the face of a cold blooded murderer! That is the face of caring person who sees the injustices and wanted to protect the country when other avenues have failed.
Luigi shouldn't be in jail. The insurance racket should be the one facing possible death penalties.
I thought we had "innocent until proven guilty". But instead we have a convicted felon for president who's a pedophile friend, and a guy named Luigi Mangione in jail while we don't even know who really did it.
When asked if people would rather have some innocent people get jailed, or some guilty people set free (in court).
The majority said they'd rather have some innocent people get jailed. Which to me seems like the worst of both worlds. An innocent person behind bars. And the real criminal is free.
I don't have a source. Something I remember seeing maybe 10 years ago but it stuck with me. Feel free to ask those you know the question, see what they answer.
I’m not entirely sure all cops are anti-Luigi. I work at a health insurance company and it’s sort of an open secret there is a sizable number of us on his side.
Healthcare is complicated. Private health care does not solve a single goddamn problem. But there are degrees to how bad it has to be and fuck if United didn’t go out of their way to make it worse.
It's concerning how quiet the media is about him. And there's been a lot of confusion about the evidence in that case. The guy supposedly changing his outfit, the rifle supposedly being assembled and disassembled, there was a note that "got lost", the trans girlfriend that has "disappeared" it's conspiracy theory level of shady.
I don't think that's true. I made the prediction, after that healthcare CEO got shot, that Stochastic Political Assassinations would be the hip new thing, and I think this past year has proven me right.
He did do jack shit, he allegedly shot and killed a CEO. I understand that you are disappointed this didn't lead to further slayings, but as I said, at least he did something. If you are dissatisfied that there hasn't been more things done, I would encourage you to be the change you want to see in the world, rather than just crying about it on the Internet.
I'm so glad we have actual freedom of speech on Lemmy
No fucking auto-mods to ban us for mentioning a person's name because it hurts advertising revenue
Also I don't think there's a jury in the entire United States that would actually convict Luigi
I mean, have you kinda ignored the whole of US politics? Finding 12 people that will have him killed is easy.
Yeah exactly. I’m not as optimistic. But hopefully his lawyer doesn’t let the prosecution stack the jury.
Didn’t his legal defense fund pass $1 mil? I’d think it wouldn’t be that hard to avoid letting that happen in NYC.
I don’t know enough about high profile cases like this to know if one mill is a lot or not though. I feel like it’s not but I have no idea.
you could probably find 12 people to execute him just because he's Italian.
Good thing we thought of that already (250 years ago or so) and don't let the prosecution just pick whoever they want to be on the jury.
Here, have a read: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/jury-selection-criminal-cases.html
I'm mistaken, then, sounda as well thought out as the rest of the US system, like the winner-takes-all "democracy."
Man, those guys 250 years ago were so smart! Like so smart you should never ever do anything differently than they'd do it.
It's a pretty bedrock part of every nation with trials by jury that the accusers don't get to unilaterally select the jury. "Finding 12 people that will have him killed" would as you said, be easy. So would finding 12 people that would not. That's why the prosecution and the defense are given equal powers to appoint and reject jurors, in a process that sometimes goes on longer than the actual trial.
It’s interesting to me to note the differences in jury selection between the US and Australia: here in Aus (at least in my state of NSW) both sides get to strike jurors, but there isn’t a round of questioning - it’s purely based on physical appearance - and each side only gets three challenges (per accused person). That means for most trials, those with only one defendant, at least six of the original randomly selected jurors will end up serving.
I’ve done jury service twice - once I was part of the original 12 and wasn’t challenged, and the other time I replaced the last challenged juror but each side only ended up challenging two.
I feel like not being able to question jurors and having limited strikes makes the system far more random and, therefore, more just in terms of the jury being a random selection of citizens.
That is really interesting the differences there. I think the intended goal of the US system is to make sure that you get 12 people capable of being objective about the subject at hand, rather than 12 random people. For example, it usually takes all 12 jurors to make a conviction, so if you get just one person who won't convict no matter what because of religious reasons or pre-existing biases or whatever, then automatically you have a hung jury that can't be swayed by evidence. So the US system tries to insure we get 12 people who are willing to put aside their biases and be objective (enough) to render a verdict based on the facts before them either way the facts lead. So it's a long process, but in our system anyway we try to weed out anybody who might believe, for example, that all Mexicans are criminals if it's a Mexican on trial, or someone who doesn't believe that rape should be a crime in a rape case. And the big one of course, people who are already so convinced by media they've consumed that the person is guilty that they can't act as a fair juror.
Yeah, it seems clear that the goals are different and so the methods of selection have to be different in order to try to achieve those goals. I wonder if there are any statistics available to determine what approach results in more accurate results in terms of convictions! Personally I see the merit in both approaches, and potentially in other approaches to the jury selection process.
lemmy.ml joined the chat
Never been banned by an .ml mod. Now .world? Some real psychos there.
I recieved both a ban and a death threat from a .ml mod.
My opinion was that Harris would have been better than Trump. I even included that I didn't even like her or the democrats. I just view them as, unfortunately, the better option right now.
They told me I should be executed and thrown in a pit with the rest of the garbage (ie the other people they view as undesirable) and promptly banned. It was a crazy escalation
.ml is a shit hole and bans more than any other instances.
I even remember seeing evidence how the admins have altered modlogs before to hide what they do.
If you say someone bad specifically about russia or china, .ml mods are likely remove your comments.
You talk about healthcare ceos or nazis and you risk getting moderated here.
I've had the opposite experience. I was mobbed and then site-banned by .ml for mildly criticizing communism in China and defending my opinion. But the hateful, rule-breaking comments, the derision, the incivility--all of that stayed up right where it was.
Neither did I. I went ahead and banned their instance before they ban me. 😉😉
lol lemmy.ml wouldn’t ban someone for posting about Luigi, are you being for real right now?
Maybe not Luigi specifically, but freedom of speech on ml is... questionable.
I agree, although I feel like that's across the board for Lemmy. Mods aren't all joining together and discussing the rules they will enforce. Every community has its own idea of how moderation works, and we all do what we see fit or please. I've seen some stupid shit on the modlogs everywhere, often using the ban and remove content feature that essentially scrubs the user's history, which imo should be fixed.
I do feel like .ml takes that to an extreme, though. Like, what do you mean you can't criticize Russia or China without being banned by an admin? Dessalines is especially guilty of this, and the other admins deflect and defend his behavior.
Have they banned you yet for being obsessed? They should.
Thanks for proving their point.
What are you talking about?
User was banned for this comment
A ban from .ml is a badge of honor.
Idk man. We got about 1/3rd of the country gleefully supporting actual child rapist Donald Trump
Is he that good looking?
Eh....
Have to go to .ml to properly comment about american imperialism and other things that jordan doesn't like.
Have to go anywhere but .ml (except slurping up more of that .world slop) to properly criticize china, russia, or north korea.
Have to go to hexbear to see my pig shit on pig balls.
Have to go to tiny, one user communities to see insane harry potter fan fics....
What is this world coming to? Why can't I have it all? Free speech? 6/10, provides a minimum, but could be better. Would use again.
Wow look at how torn up he looks from the guilt of his actions.
Poor guy, he must be devastated for what he didn't do.
His actions have no guilt. We were playing cards together in Oregon. Nothing wrong with that.
Alleged actions.
Allegedly.
Exactly. He's probably torn up about taking your money.
He can beat me in poker any day. And every day!
The fuck he was! He was balls-deep in my wife in Seattle at the time of the murder.
He couldnt have been, I was gleefully sucking his dick at the time your honor. I swallowed too.
Well depending on what your into both can be possible ....
Is that where we were? Idk all of us were having such a good time I guess I lost track.
didn't he save thousands of people? as in the aftermath of the event insurance companies started approving claims they were meant to approve until shareholders sued them to stop
Indeed he did. Too bad collective memory is shit and they just hired extra security and carried on after the hype died
Honest question, does anyone actually think he didn't do it?
The fact he was "found" in the most nonchalant way at McDonald's with the evidence on him is very suspicious. And then he just walked around with it for 2 days? Dude, I'm ditching and burning everything in the first hour. I know criminals are supposed to be dumb. But come on, this guy doesn't look dumb.
Especially given the shooter printed parts of the weapon and had no cellphone on them when they shot Brian McEvilCEO or whatever his name was. And then hopped on a scooter and left the island without a trace. So much planning went into the prep and, ahem, execution of the plan that holding into blatant evidence like a signed confession 2 days after the fact doesn't make any sense. It screams planted evidence on a person who vaguely looked like the only screenshot I've ever seen of the ahooter smiling.
At the very least I have very reasonable doubts and would not be selected for the jury.
Another thing that gets me is that Mangione seems like just the kind of guy you would try to pin something like this on. He was a queer kid, estranged from his family (or at least out of contact for a prolonged period), and living in a hostel. Isn't that the oldest police trick in the book when they want to "solve" a case, blame it on some drifter from out of town?
Obviously we can't know for sure, but there was a lot of stuff about the incident and especially his arrest that point toward him bring used as a useful patsy to try to control the narrative in light of the near universal approval of the death of a health insurance CEO.
I get rooting for him, it just always felt like all the comments about him not doing it were mostly memes (see the "he was with me" comments under my original comment), but lately I got the feeling people seriously think he's innocent.
That's not a new thing.
I didn't say it is.
I agree with the comments that things aren't exactly clear cut and there's definitely room for doubt. Besides, he is innocent unless proven guilty.
My Dad doesn't. He's very opposed to the killing ideologically and thinks Luigi is taking the fall for someone. My dad's weird.
I'd buy your dad a beer.
I'll pass that along 👍
Here's the thing: the default position is not believing something either way. They have to get enough evidence to make me believe. So far, it doesn't seem to be there. There's some evidence, but there's also plenty of reason to be skeptical of it. My position currently is that it's possible, but I don't believe he did it.
Yes. Some people think the original picture released doesn't match Luigi and therefore it can't be the same person, for example.
There's also some people who suspect it probably was him, but believe that illegal means were used to find him and they can't use such evidence in-court because it would require admitting to having a secret mass surveillance network. I assume for such people, a belief in a secret CIA/FBI mass surveillance network came first, so of course they could find the guy using it.
What came first, actual parallel evidence construction or people believing such a thing was possible?
When I was a little kid, my older sister used to bite me sometimes. My mom once told her in front of me when I was about 4, that if she did it again, my mother would bite her back. As soon as my mom was elsewhere, I bit the outside of my forearm hard enough to leave a mark that looked like someone else had done it (I know, younger siblings, but she was ten years old biting a preschooler, so I support it). My mom did bite her, but probably not really very hard and my sister stopped biting me after that. I’m not sure how I feel about that parenting, but I’m not a parent, so I’ll withhold judgement. Plus it worked.
I’m pretty sure they’ve both been around forever
Maybe your sister stopped because she realized you were at the "I'll do anything" stage. She didn't want to know what you'd do next.
All jokes aside, I'm less sure every day
Considering he was visiting me in Europe for the entire month, I'd say he didn't do it.
Well, he was physically with you there in Europe. Me and him were astral projecting our minds to a distant world around Tau Ceti at the time of the killing.
personally i don't care either way if he did or didn't, in this case a terrible human is dead...maybe other terrible humans will have moment of introspection and change their ways if one of their own is murdered and the (alledged) killer gets away with it.
therefor the result with most net-good is a not-guilty verdict
My ancestors are smiling at me, imperials, can you say the same?
What's this from?
Skyrim
The place or the game?
Yes
You're never gonna believe this...
Damn even the cop is cute. Is this a TV production or something?
Not only cute, but she looks cool.
I like aviator sunglasses and I still don’t think I’ve ever thought a cop looked inherently cool (I can imagine a bomb defuser looking cool in the moment, but that’s just because of what they’re doing)
She only looks cool because she looks like she's part of a rag-tag team of underdogs who infiltrated the courtroom to bust him out. She probably has telekinetic powers.
Except for the last part, this could totally read as an A-Team bit
She does look like she'd get cast as B.A. Baracus in the inevitable all-female reboot
I'd watch that show.
ACAB
Bastards can sometimes be attractive, unfortunately.
All cops are beautiful?
Every time I see a picture of him I'm reminded of this
https://youtu.be/yretxDwOgVA
I know a girl in Huntington, PA who has the same skill. Just ridiculously photogenic.
Well genic is in the adjective itself, so I’m gonna guess it’s got to do with genes
I'm not into tattoos but something about her arm kind of gets me going. Might by it's proximity to Luigi.
That's cute to you? 🤮
He's thinking about the millions of lives he improved.
Allegedly. Idk how he could have done it without any of our 180 friends we've been hanging out with noticing.
181
He also shielded the actual guy who shot Thompson. I hope the actual assassin lives a long, comfortable, and quiet life.
If that past tense is accurate, then it's a no for long.
Sorry, it was a typo. It is present tense now. Maybe in 2080 it might be lived...
Typo. Corrected.
About that. The CEO he shot was actually in hot water with Blackrock, who were functionally his bosses, for not doing enough to screw over people. Blackrock owns many insurance companies. So that was like 1% progress on solving a problem. Until you get your IRA/401k divested from Blackrock and stop shopping at Blackrock owned companies (good luck), you can shoot all the CEOs you want. Blackrock will still instruct their employee to screw you over.
Luigi is innocent! Right now they're still only alleging* that he shot someone. Quit assuming he's guilty until it's been proven.
If it drip you must acquit
That officer is a named character. Her importance will be revealed during the big twist of this arc.
Why does this look like a porn parody of itself?
bow chicka wow wow
Nespresso ad parody of itself.
Mangione might be the richest person Lemmy loves.
It's either him or Taylor Swift.
He's also a Musk fanboy and rails about the "woke mind virus".
Which is interesting, if Luigi is conservative, does he oppose universal healthcare?
any citations for that? or......?
We get it, no one is pure enough for you.
You're on the wrong website buddy.
He violently opposes getting screwed over by somebody. You know, like, I don't know... somebody in the mafia might.
I dont care what his political beliefs are, hes a comrade of mine.
Why did you stop at Musk. Why not Hitler?
Does ACAB include butterfly baddie in the background?
Yes, she too. Stay strong brother.
I'm weak, comrade
weren't we all, laying eyes on that picture
But, that hair 😍
The thirst of the weak must be filled by the workers alone
I mean there's more than one way to interpret "fuck the police"... You do you, buddy.
Can't be unhappy when you already achieved the goal of doing good for humanity.
Death and prison is not a fear when you are truly fighting the good fight.
They can't prove Luigi did anything. He was with me in California that day.
I was afraid to upvote and get banned, but then I remembered that I'm not on Reddit ;)
Live, Love, Luigi
Obvious troll is obvious.
I hope he gets off cos I'm about to 😩
His trial is still ongoing but you're guilty and going to horny jail
lmao
Someone should run for the governor of NY on a platform of offering Mangione a full pardon.
They would win in a landslide.
He should run then call the trial a political which hunt
Mamdani won already, but Mamdani needs to also just pardon Luigi as a gesture of fuck you to private insurance.
He's a mayor. Mayors can't do that.
Then I stand corrected. But if and when (and I am really hoping here) Luigi goes free I want Mamdani to at least shake his hand.
yeah because we don't have enough islamophobia
I think we should make owning the conservative fascists a point. They have always been accusing anyone opposed to them of doing this shit even if we didn't. Why not give them a well earned fuck you?
there are people who can afford to do it and people who cannot. minorities know this very well. mamdani represents multiple minorities whether he wants to or not. he cannot do this.
That isn't how government works.
If government 'worked' then nothing Trump has done would have been done. It turns out you can just do stuff.
That's not how this works. A mayor can't pardon someone for state crimes.
How does government work ?
What makes you think a mayor can pardon state level charges?
Nothing in particular. Note that I am not the person you replied to originally. I found that your message did not offer an alternative after shutting off the presumption (that Mamdani had that kind of power), so I am encouraging you to suggest one
There's providing importance context, and then there's wasting the reader's time. Informing people that a mayor is not a governor is the latter.
Mamdani won the mayoral election. Kathy Hochul is the governor.
I somehow doubt that. I understand people think the healthcare companies were shite, but most people don't believe vigilante murder is fine
When justice no longer serves the people, the people must serve justice.
That's what the news kept reporting.
It's not the reaction I was seeing, in person or online.
I know Luigi is just the third Franco brother I just can't prove it
He looks like the love child of Dave Franco and Baker Mayfield
This reminds me that we need a c/MemeEconomy because this image is going to the moon.
💎 🙌🏻
We Like the Stock
No matter what happens, what ruling, what transpires, they can't bring that piece of shit he (supposedly) shot back from the dead. He's got a lot to smile about.
Aren't they obligated to see to his medical needs so long as he is being detained?
As in, maybe he's smiling because (ironically) the medical care he was being denied by insurance companies while not incarcerated now has to be provided for by the state?
I've heard loads of stories of people denied healthcare help while incarcerated. But I believe they are obligated
There's lots of red tape and forgetting, not to mention simply not responding to them as if a nurse was walking by a hospital room with the call light on, that can be done. There are numerous articles out there about diabetics going into comas because they were denied the insulin their family had for them in the prison lobby, individuals who were seizing being ignored, people with broken bones being thrown into general pop, etc. etc.
I wouldn't count on getting better care. You might, but you might not.
what a fucking chad
There's the law and then there's justice. I know which one I'm on the side of.
Side of bacon loaded fries, brother!
I can fix him. And if I can't, I can fix his sink, his tires, his shirt stains, anything he wants.
Can't fix what's not broken
I'm about to break something, then 👀
Look at that face! That is not the face of a cold blooded murderer! That is the face of caring person who sees the injustices and wanted to protect the country when other avenues have failed.
Luigi shouldn't be in jail. The insurance racket should be the one facing possible death penalties.
Acquit him already!
If they can acquit OJ Simpson, they can acquit Luigi Mangione.
And OJ actually did it! I legit don't believe that Luigi did.
He is looking like Dave Franco with that haircut and smile
I thought we had "innocent until proven guilty". But instead we have a convicted felon for president who's a pedophile friend, and a guy named Luigi Mangione in jail while we don't even know who really did it.
When asked if people would rather have some innocent people get jailed, or some guilty people set free (in court).
The majority said they'd rather have some innocent people get jailed. Which to me seems like the worst of both worlds. An innocent person behind bars. And the real criminal is free.
I don't have a source. Something I remember seeing maybe 10 years ago but it stuck with me. Feel free to ask those you know the question, see what they answer.
Jeez....I know ACAB, but in this case, I'll allow myself to be stopped and frisked all day long.
I’m not entirely sure all cops are anti-Luigi. I work at a health insurance company and it’s sort of an open secret there is a sizable number of us on his side.
Healthcare is complicated. Private health care does not solve a single goddamn problem. But there are degrees to how bad it has to be and fuck if United didn’t go out of their way to make it worse.
We need some posts about Charlie’s dispatcher, too, they were doing every bit of god’s work.
It's concerning how quiet the media is about him. And there's been a lot of confusion about the evidence in that case. The guy supposedly changing his outfit, the rifle supposedly being assembled and disassembled, there was a note that "got lost", the trans girlfriend that has "disappeared" it's conspiracy theory level of shady.
Kash solved the shit out of that case, like Scooby Doo. Don't worry about it
ruh roh
😍
ITT
Kind of looks like Dave Franco here
I was gonna say, Dave Franco can play the part when it inevitably becomes a series
Luigi is handsome enough, he can just play himself in the movie
I’d like to see the tattoos she’s rocking
I didn't notice them until you mentioned it! Good catch! Looks like a butterfly and birdies. I like it.
Doesn’t this photo disprove the “see he is innocent, that shit of the guy on cctv has no unibrow!”
People don’t realize those fine hairs hide in light
Everyone's favorite conservative rich kid that only did something when he was personally affected.
At least he did something other than virtue signaling online
He didn't do jack shit. Nothing has changed. There has been no wave of CEO assassinations.
I don't think that's true. I made the prediction, after that healthcare CEO got shot, that Stochastic Political Assassinations would be the hip new thing, and I think this past year has proven me right.
Charlie Kirk, multiple Trump attempts, the Pennsylvania Governor's mansion got firebombed.
Those legislators in Minnesota getting assassinated
Some smaller CEOs had attempts on their lives also, Like the Michigan company president who got stabbed
So, no more healthcare CEOs didn't get got, but people across the political spectrum have.
He did do jack shit, he allegedly shot and killed a CEO. I understand that you are disappointed this didn't lead to further slayings, but as I said, at least he did something. If you are dissatisfied that there hasn't been more things done, I would encourage you to be the change you want to see in the world, rather than just crying about it on the Internet.
He killed a scapegoat. He did NOTHING aside from take a father from teenage children.
I don't want to see a wave of assassinations, anyone who thinks they're going to "scare" corporations into doing the right thing is fucking stupid.
Meanwhile, we let Republicans take, who offer zero chance of any reform.
Well he, allegedly, did a good thing.
Considering there has been no consequence, he just murdered a dude.
He didn't even have a United health care policy