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.

An incompetent pinjob

French style revolution is the only solution

Luigi was framed.

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

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.

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.

Because no one else has yet commented this:

Fuck The Police.

Getting arrested in Pennsyltucky by imbreds was a genius move.

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.

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.

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

I love the smell of "Reasonable Doubt" in the morning