this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2024
1167 points (98.5% liked)

News

23627 readers
2726 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. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Nah, he's guilty, but I wouldn't convict him.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Don't know what you're talking about. They clearly have the wrong guy.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

That's what I said as soon as they nabbed Luigi. Does not look like the original shooters profile.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Just some other random guy with weapons and a manifesto admitting to killing a health exec

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

He's pleading not guilty, claiming that the cops planted that shit.

And the cops routinely lie and plant evidence, so it's not out of the question.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

If the cops did indeed plant evidence then happy days for the defence since it should be easy to disprove. e.g. by simple handwriting analysis or other such means. But this is fantasy wishful thinking since he did write the words. So stick to the reality here. He shot the guy and confessed to it. Lord knows what else he said during interviews with the cops but probably lots. His defense team will attempt to disqualify evidence and diminish his culpability while transforming the trial into one about private health care. They only need one not guilty and that's what they'll do their best to achieve.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago

If the cops did indeed plant evidence then happy days for the defence since it should be easy to disprove. e.g. by simple handwriting analysis or other such means. But this is fantasy wishful thinking since he did write the words. So stick to the reality here

Handwriting analysis is hardly objective.

He shot the guy and confessed to it.

He's pleaded not guilty, and unless you have more up to date information, he's made no confession outside of the alleged note.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago

Know what?

I'm thinking you might be right. Walking that confidently? The show of police presence? The assuredness of the police? The publicly shared evidence? A guy that kinda fits the profile?

He's also a smart dude. He sees this for what it is. He also probably understands that regardless of what happens, the public will probably obtain justice.

We're all furious with the state of things. We're furious over the lack of police accountability, the laws for the poor and not the elite. We're furious that they can look at what health insurance can do to make profit, and let it be completely legal to let people die.

It doesn't matter if he did or did not do the crime at this point. The elite showed their hand too early, the public is calling it. He's probably scared shitless, but he knows. He knows that regardless of what the outcome is, the people have rallied to him. He knows they can't risk making him a martyr, and an acquittal would be devastating. The entire Spirit of the Constitution (regardless of it's interpretation by the Supreme Court) and the people is behind him.

He knows justice is coming.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Sounds like anyone's Monday to me..

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Guilty of what? Caring too much?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Murder is murder no matter how much the victim had it coming.

Edit: as others have told me murder is only applicable after conviction. My post here is wrong and dumb.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The word murder has a specific meaning in law: The killing of another person without justification or excuse, especially the crime of killing a person with malice aforethought or with recklessness manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Given that the whole point of the act was that the CEO and his company were indifferent to human life, one could argue that the shooter valued the life and dignity of his fellow beings far more than his target. Furthermore, the tens of thousands of deaths attributed to the vile strategies of this company in particular would seem to offer a very significant justification and excuse. Of course, malice aforethought is inherent to an assassination, so I guess they have him there.

In the end, though, the jury will be under no legal obligation to follow the law and could choose to find him not guilty if they agree with his reasons for acting.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 hours ago

I agree, its entirely possible that a jury may find his act of killing justified.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago

Ah, thanks. I will edit my post.