Luigi Mangione

Sounds like fake ass bullshit to me.

Free Luigi yall ain't got shit no video footage nothing.

"He has read 300 books!!!!!" Is all i see from clowns supporting this regime.

Luigi is innocent. He did not kill Brian Thompson. He is a hero by the simple virtue that he is an innocent young man who was dragged through hell over something he didn't do and is having his life put on the line.

As for who actually did it. I hope he lives a long, quiet life.

An incompetent pinjob

Plot twist: good guy policewoman deliberately makes it impossible to prosecute Luigi.

Wow. That is just unbelievably sketch.

Goes to show how much this isn't about Luigi, or even Brian Thompson. It's about the elite sending a message to the other 99%. Think, even if their case against Luigi is rocky at best, all that matters is they can get him to pay for Brian, regardless of whether he did it or not, or where the evidence points.

All that matters is that we the "peasants" get the underlying message:

• If you kill/harm an elite they'll chase you and make you pay with the full weight of their resources (and emphasis on "resources", not necessarily "law").
• If you did not kill or harm an elite you're still at risk, because then they'll choose a "peasant" scapegoat to pay anyway.

All that matters is that they get to take their pound of flesh, and that the "peasantry" gets discouraged to fight for their rights as the elite takes, and takes and takes.

Which is why it's so important that regardless of Luigi having done it or not, he should walk free unless there's solid, undeniable evidence of him doing it, like an actual and verified non-deepfake video of the assassination with his clear face on it. And even then he must only face the consequences the law demands, and what others would face in his place for killing the everyday average Joe. The fact that the life lost was an elite should have no bearing on the consequences.

French style revolution is the only solution

Luigi was framed.

It seems more and more everyday that vigilante justice is the only justice against this corrupt corporate tyranny. I think we all wish this wasn’t the case but as my dad used to say you can wish in one hand and 💩 in the other and see what hand fills up first

So they not only have to find 12 people who haven’t been fucked personally or had friends family fucked by their health insurance, now those 12 people have to be blind Pig supporters?

Anything other than a not guilty (or some insanely strong evidence with a perfect chain of custody) verdict for this guy and the fix is in.

If they convict Luigi get the fuck out while you still can, cause the alternative is guerilla warfare against the Gilead states of orange stupidity.

At this point the funniest thing would be if the real assassin was to take down another healthcare CEO.

When I picked up bodies for the Medical Examiner's Office, we had very strict chain of custody rules we had to follow. If the decedent had any valuables on their person (purse, wallet, jewelry, etc), or any medication, we had to write detailed descriptions of every item found (a gold ring is not a gold ring, it's a gold colored ring), then package it all up with the ranking police officer on the scene as a witness who then signs the sealed bag. Even the slightest deviation from this would get us immediately fired, and even prosecuted if surviving family members made any accusations about theft.

In a capital murder case where an alleged murderer/terrorist can potentially walk free because the chain of custody rules weren't followed, how the fuck does this cop still have a job? How is she not being charged with tampering with evidence and obstruction of justice?

Don't get me wrong, I am all for letting Luigi go free, but this is a fuck-up of monumental proportions.

Jokes aside, I honestly don't know if he's the guy.

What I do know, is if this part is true, that should be enough to put doubt into the "beyond a reasonable doubt" part in the jury.

It's never made sense to me, TBH. I've just assumed he's being railroaded. In his case the cops just planted a gun instead of drugs like they do to every other person they want to lock up without cause.

Normal US cop behavior

Hooooooleeeeeeee fuck that is a comically blatant frame job

But also: corroborating articles? I’m not finding anything from AP or similar that back this up. How fresh is this?

Well that sure is weird.

No jury Nullification needed. It looks like it really was a frame job. Can't wait to see this case unfold.

Wow, imagine being the cop that fucked this up this hard.

She also found a napkin with a drawn map of Deeley Plaza with lines of fire, and a Polaroid of Shergar cuffed to a radiator.

Something that needs to be considered is the possibility of parallel construction in the arrest and alleged evidence

Getting arrested in Pennsyltucky by imbreds was a genius move.

Because no one else has yet commented this:

Fuck The Police.

Now is a good time to remind people to never ever agree to a police search. They're gonna phrase things weird and take advantage of your good nature. Never agree to any sort of search.

Hell, even if they have a warrant I'm tempted to explicitly say I don't consent. I'm not going to resist but I'm gonna make it clear I'm not consenting. Because how the hell do I even verify a warrant is real? I have no idea, and I certainly wouldn't be able to find out if they're at my door.

Be aware though, in Georgia there is "implied consent" with regards to roadside breathalyzer tests. If you get in that situation, remember I'm just a random lemming and not a lawyer. Other states might have similar things.

Let's say that Mangione committed the crime.

My understanding is that he gave cops a fake ID when they questioned him on reasonable suspicion (the basis of which was a tip from an employee). That is something that yes, he can be arrested for. And he can be personally searched after that arrest. But at that point, he can no longer get a gun out of his bag, and cops have control of it, so he can't destroy evidence/get a weapon from it; so searching the bag should be out at that time. So, my understanding, based on case law, is that they would have needed a warrant to search it at that time, as the contents of the bag aren't related to the reason he's been arrested. You aren't supposed to be able to use a pretextural arrest to search a person's car or belongings (e.g., arrest you for suspicion of drunk driving, then search your car to find evidence of burglaries).

In theory, without the warrant, the search and everything from the search should be out. Even if he committed the crime, and kept all the evidence conveniently in his backpack, it should be completely excluded from the case. I'm sure that the DA is going to argue that there's some exception that allows a warrantless search, but I can't say what that argument will be. If the evidence is allowed in, his defense attorney is going to have to object every single time that prosecutors refer to it, for any reason, in order to preserve the option to claim that evidence was improperly admitted in an appeal. (Which they should absolutely do, if it goes that far!)

Federal rules of evidence is pretty complicated stuff. But goddamn, does it look like someone fucked up bad on a really high profile case.