894
Luigi Mangione lawyer says arrest flaws invalidate evidence – but will it work?
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
894 points (99.1% liked)
News
27975 readers
4553 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. 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
view the rest of the comments
Without the obviously planted evidence, all they have is a video that doesn't show his face. If i was on the jury, that's enough reasonable doubt for me.
And the eyebrows arent even close to similar
If the Brow doesn't fit, we shall acquit.
If the arrest was filthy, he’s not guilty.
Precisely.
I mean, he'd need a functional alibi. So far, nobody seems to want to explain where he was when Thompson got got.
No he doesn't, that burden is on the state.
He was vacationing alone in NYC, so nobody knew or noticed him. No different than being home asleep.
Not really; without the items that were seized, they don't really have much of anything that would link him to the location, aside from some bad security camera footage that, IMO, doesn't really look like him. Insisting that he needs an alibi is reversing the burden of proof; it's saying that, unless he can prove he was elsewhere, then their claim must be correct. But they have so little without the evidence seized at the arrest that the case would be very thin.
Look, if you asked me where I was when The Asshole Brian Thompson was shot, I'd have no fucking idea unless it was something that was a big enough deal that I noted it in my calendar. I don't even remember where I was when 11 Sept. happened.
We'll see if a jury agrees. Maybe he gets off OJ style on the back of a corrupt incompetent PD and gloves that don't fit.
I could tell you I wasn't in Lower Manhattan easily enough. Especially if I was picked up in a different state.
I'd have more confidence in the "he's a patsy" attitude if he'd gotten Jack Ruby'd during the perp walk. But even setting aside the fact that they traced a suspect several hundred miles and picked him up on associated charges (the gun and fake IDs), none of his legal team releases are saying "My client was wrongly identified and the killer is still out there".
Everything is being kept strictly procedural, which is weird if you've got a real CEO Killer still on the loose.
Literally was with me that night. I can describe his very private birthmark if needed.
I expect they have more than that and will present it at trial.
What else could they have? They have a video of the crime, and the evidence they claim they found in his backpack when he was arrested, and a couple pieces of evidence they claim they found at the scene that contain his DNA.
Much of the backpack evidence is likely to be thrown out, and the video evidence is highly debateable, and easily refutable. That leaves the DNA items they claim were found at the scene, which could easily have been picked up at his hostel, and planted.
Any other evidence would be far before the crime, or far removed from it, and would be weak at best.
To speculate, they might have additional video evidence linking him to the killing. For example, if they have video of the killer getting on the bus, and Luigi getting off that bus, it's a pretty small pool of suspects.
They tracked him for 10 days, and he only revealed his face a single time - when he quickly flashed a smile with a girl flirting with him, and that was days before the hit.
Their evidence is extremely thin, and they know it.
That's what we know of. They always have more that they don't disclose to the public.
In doubt it, if they had hard evidence that would make all of his supporters shut up, they'd show it, but we'll find out in the trial.
Frankly, I don't care about evidence at all. That CEO was nothing more than a Corporate Serial Killer, who was living fat and happy and entitled on an income of blood money, and whoever did it, did America a favor. If I was on the jury, I would NEVER find him guilty, no matter what the evidence showed.
I doubt that they would show their hand publicly; they don't want to poison a jury pool.
On the other hand, if they had better video of the shooter, I'm sure they would have released it, because they were trying to get people to ID the killer. One shitty video of half of a face doesn't really help a lot.
Um, of they didn't want to poison the jury, why did they get on HBO and help give state evidence that the defense hasn't seen to help them make a documentary?
That's fair. But that also means you'd be first to go during jury selection.
Nah, I'd just tell them that I could absolutely render a judgement based on the evidence, which is true. I wouldn't share that I think Luigi saved thousands of potential victims from an unrepentant Corporate Serial Killer, which is Defense of Others, not murder.
Lol they are going to have an EXTREMELY tough time finding an actually unbiased jury.
Not before they share it with the defense ... which is something the prosecution has not fully completed yet.
Even if so, I believe that still doesn't inherently mean it would be accessible by the public.
Personally I don't care if the public sees it or not, because the public is neither judge or jury.
It matters big time that the defense has full fucking access to the prosecution's evidence, in a timely manner, so they can develop their strategy.
I'm not disagreeing with that, I think you're missing the point being made. The point is that we may not know that there might be more to it. That is all.