Summary
The Pennsylvania attorney representing Luigi Mangione, charged with murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City, contends Mangione’s arrest in Altoona was unconstitutional.
Officers supposedly approached him without cause and failed to read his Miranda rights at a McDonald’s after a five-day manhunt.
Mangione has pleaded not guilty to murder and related state and federal charges, including potential death penalty eligibility.
Mangione’s New York lawyer likewise cites constitutional violations during arrest, raising the possibility that key evidence could be suppressed.
How are they going to find a jury who don’t know who Luigi is and what he’s accused of?
That was another thing his lawyers were arguing, actually - that since his arrest was over-publicized and spun in a particular light (for instance the widely circulated photo with him being escorted by an entire precinct worth of police) that they skewed public perception and created a presumption of guilt.
Really, though, this is important largely because of the jury is even the least bit sympathetic, points like this could go a long way towards getting them to acquit him, even if they believe he did it. “Well, I think he’s guilty, but the judge said we had to ignore all of this evidence, sooo…”
not just the precint, but MAYOR adams was in on the walk too.
Who’s this Luigi guy people keep talking about?
I dunno, I didn’t see shit, officer.
Hah. Or we could end up with that. What’s the opposite of jury nullification?
A lynching?
Judgement notwithstanding the verdict.
Injustice. Usually of racist variety
dude’s about to get tried by the amish, i guess
Wait until you hear their opinions on health insurance companies gouging.
The jury doesn’t have to be ignorant, they have to be able to take the information they are given during the trial and render a generally unbiased decision based on that information. And that decision is made by the Judge, Prosecution and Defense teams. That’s the entire reason for the Voir Dire process, it’s designed to weed out biases on both sides that can compromise the trial.
Of course the defense will bring up things like the state of US healthcare, specifically United Healthcare and their processes, etc. so jurors having a bias solely based on that won’t matter, as much because that’s going to almost surely be introduced during the trial anyway.
That being said… good luck finding 12 jurors who both sides trust can be unbiased enough, and can render a unanimous decision in the current societal climate. And if the first is a mistrial, finding a second set will be even harder.
The first will definitely be a mistrial. I don’t condone violence but even I wouldn’t find him guilty under the circumstances.
This reminds me of the sketch SNL did saying it’s impossible to find jury members for the OJ trail. The only difference is it will be impossible to find anyone willing to say Luigi is guilty
He’s basically the people’s hero. Everyone loves this guy.
and everyone was scrutinizing the evidence at the same time too.
On their payroll, duh