Edit: I heard he plead guilty which is not the case. A lot of what I say presumes that was how he plead. Leaving up my comments for completeness of record.
I mean, he was caught on camera doing it. There’s a bunch of other evidence, which is (as i understand it) largely circumstantial. But then he plead guilty.
Like, someone definitely killed the United Health CEO. I guess I could see an argument that it wasn’t Luigi Mangione, but if it wasn’t him, then shouldn’t the rally of support be towards the actual killer? Isn’t arguing Luigi wasn’t the killer the same as arguing “we’re supporting the wrong guy”?
It seems like assuming Luigi was the killer is a safe assumption and thusly the support for him is correct. At that point, it seems the only thing to sort out is which degree of murder this counts as. Lol, unless someone is trying to argue the killing was accidental, but even then, that’s just differentiating between murder and manslaughter.
Caught on camera is not a strong argument, especially not in this day and age. Further, the outfit that the shooter was wearing is so non descript that it might as well have been background noise. You can walk the streets of NY right now and find 200 people dressed like that.
The man needs to be given a strong defence especially when it is in the interest of the prosecution to speed through to a guilty verdict just to avoid too much media coverage.
Edit: I heard he plead guilty which is not the case. A lot of what I say presumes that was how he plead. Leaving up my comments for completeness of record
Def support him getting the money for a strong defense. Justice is a process, and the prosecution needs to be held to accounts if they try to sidestep any rules / try to rush this through.
I’d buy the most of the rest of the evidence being circumstantial, but, man, the guy plead guilty.
But even if it wasn’t Luigi that shot that CEO, doesnt this change him from a Folk Hero to just some guy who was falsely accused?
Like, it feels like some people in this thread are saying “he’s a hero of the people for disposing a petty oligarch” and also “he didn’t actually kill anyone; the guy in the video could’ve been anyone”. Those two statements don’t seem to logically follow.
I don‘t think you‘re missing much, except that someone is able to want to support both the perpetrator and anyone who might be falsely accused of being him. So far we don‘t know and he did plead NOT guilty.
I‘ll try to explain my viewpoint further, I‘m against innocent people being convicted in a public court of opinion by media ahead of the trials and paraded around by police. In that case he needs the money for defense and I hope it all comes out.
I’m also against mass murder of people by for profit healthcare. I‘m not cheery about it having come to violence, it is tragic, but it seems like there is little hope for change left in broken US political system where lobbying money decides policy. Personally I don’t think hero fits, maybe antihero.
Anyway, I‘ll still hope for the best possible outcome for him in that scenario, even if he is convicted of all that at least with the donations he might afford to fight it for a while and spread some more awareness on the issue.
Edit: I heard he plead guilty which is not the case. A lot of what I say presumes that was how he plead. Leaving up my comments for completeness of record.
I mean, he was caught on camera doing it. There’s a bunch of other evidence, which is (as i understand it) largely circumstantial. But then he plead guilty.
Like, someone definitely killed the United Health CEO. I guess I could see an argument that it wasn’t Luigi Mangione, but if it wasn’t him, then shouldn’t the rally of support be towards the actual killer? Isn’t arguing Luigi wasn’t the killer the same as arguing “we’re supporting the wrong guy”?
It seems like assuming Luigi was the killer is a safe assumption and thusly the support for him is correct. At that point, it seems the only thing to sort out is which degree of murder this counts as. Lol, unless someone is trying to argue the killing was accidental, but even then, that’s just differentiating between murder and manslaughter.
Second comment I’ve seen with the guilty plea. He pleaded NOT guilty. I even just searched it to make sure I wasn’t crazy.
Caught on camera is not a strong argument, especially not in this day and age. Further, the outfit that the shooter was wearing is so non descript that it might as well have been background noise. You can walk the streets of NY right now and find 200 people dressed like that.
The man needs to be given a strong defence especially when it is in the interest of the prosecution to speed through to a guilty verdict just to avoid too much media coverage.
Edit: I heard he plead guilty which is not the case. A lot of what I say presumes that was how he plead. Leaving up my comments for completeness of record
Def support him getting the money for a strong defense. Justice is a process, and the prosecution needs to be held to accounts if they try to sidestep any rules / try to rush this through.
I’d buy the most of the rest of the evidence being circumstantial, but, man, the guy plead guilty.
But even if it wasn’t Luigi that shot that CEO, doesnt this change him from a Folk Hero to just some guy who was falsely accused?
Like, it feels like some people in this thread are saying “he’s a hero of the people for disposing a petty oligarch” and also “he didn’t actually kill anyone; the guy in the video could’ve been anyone”. Those two statements don’t seem to logically follow.
Am I missing something here?
I don‘t think you‘re missing much, except that someone is able to want to support both the perpetrator and anyone who might be falsely accused of being him. So far we don‘t know and he did plead NOT guilty.
I‘ll try to explain my viewpoint further, I‘m against innocent people being convicted in a public court of opinion by media ahead of the trials and paraded around by police. In that case he needs the money for defense and I hope it all comes out.
I’m also against mass murder of people by for profit healthcare. I‘m not cheery about it having come to violence, it is tragic, but it seems like there is little hope for change left in broken US political system where lobbying money decides policy. Personally I don’t think hero fits, maybe antihero. Anyway, I‘ll still hope for the best possible outcome for him in that scenario, even if he is convicted of all that at least with the donations he might afford to fight it for a while and spread some more awareness on the issue.
Three comments on this post say he pleaded guilty. This is false. Assuming it’s not intentional misinformation, where are people getting this from?
I saw that too… not sure since my re collection is that he pled NOT GUILTY