The CEO killer watching from his hidey hole as authorities try to pin everything on some random dude named Luigi : memes

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 40 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (2 children)

Seriously a manifesto that starts off by praising the feds is about as suspicious as a cop going "Yeah, the suspect died in my custody, but before you think about giving me suspending me from the force with pay. He wrote this confession letter in his own blood confirming he killed himself and three whole paragraphs affirming that my massive cock is indeed large and super not-small."

[–] sudo@programming.dev 4 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

The "manifesto" isn't a manifesto at all. Its basically just a written confession. And reads like a forced one at that. To me, the theory that they used illegal means to catch him and are just planting evidence so they have a case makes way more sense. They probably lost him and had to tap into some NSA data to ID him. He probably wasn't a fucking moron and ditched the gun with the bag central park.

[–] HawlSera@lemm.ee 2 points 1 hour ago

That would explain that part that says

PS: "Oh yeah that Agent Smith guy who called in this arrest, he needs to be promoted and his co-workers need to stop complaining about his body odor, because it's quite pleasant actually. Prefer it to an air freshener."

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 7 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Between that, the discrepancy of the eyebrows, and the discrepancy of the backpack thing, so much of this doesn't add up. Not guilty.

[–] Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee 27 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I really hope that Luigi does get acquitted. I mean if it is factual that he didn't do it and the real killer is out there... well then, I guess Luigi still got lots of fame, but at the same time we will also be happy that the real guy is not only free, but the mystery of who he is will make him cooler.

[–] averyminya@beehaw.org 1 points 22 minutes ago

It's like DB Cooper!

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 10 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

Maybe it's a staged event. The latest consensus-splitter / distraction.

Look how it has split us. Reddit deleting posts. Unironic discussion of guillotines.

[–] sudo@programming.dev 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

WTF are you smoking? The ruling class is deliberately splitting us against the ruling class?

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space 1 points 2 hours ago

Splitting the obedient underclass from the disobedient underclass.

[–] Sl00k@programming.dev 18 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

This event has brought a lot more class consciousness to the masses than anything else imo.

[–] AnyOldName3@lemmy.world 5 points 6 hours ago

It doesn't have to have been effective. They might just have overestimated how many people would think killing health insurance CEOs was unacceptable.

[–] MinekPo1@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

yeah no . sorry but the guy was not as well prepared as it seems , he left a lot of tracks and made a lot of mistakes .

[–] Colonel_Panic_@lemm.ee 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

So you think he kept a backpack full of all the exact items involved and was just hanging around 3 days later in a McDonald's by mistake?

So like, he slept, showered, did all the usual daily things and just kept carrying around the incriminating evidence out in public? Seems weird to me. I'd assume most people would go bury the gun and clothes or something, not go carrying it all around.

[–] MinekPo1@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 7 hours ago

his opsec was trash . he left tons of DNA evidence and he was wearing a very specific backpack making it easy for cops to track him , once he ditched it he had enough cameras behind him that he appeared on that he could have been tracked further plus the showing his face while flirting with a receptionist . see this video by The Hated One (youtube.com , use your preferred privacy friendly front end)

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Genuine question, but supposing we were to consider this theory, why would there also, one, be complaints about the cops parading him around as a victory, and two, people saying Luigi was a hero?

Whether you love or hate cops, they are not stupid. I'm sure if there was even an ounce of suggestion that they got the wrong guy, the cops would quietly decide not to be so smug about it.

And to those who side with him, he's either a hero/idol or he didn't do anything. Pick one. I myself pick the third choice.

Also, of note, it's quite a coincidence they found the guy, then found out his name, and then found out his wealthy upbringing, evidenced by the fact he was trying to be as low profile as possible at the time, which would've curbed the ability to do all of that in reverse order. If he wasn't the killer, that's like firing a bullseye in the dark.

[–] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

He's just this guy who has a big chance of being a murderer. He is capable of deliberately planning to kill a person outside of immediate self-defence. However evil CEO A or B may be, the moral calculus isn't hard: society as a whole comes first. Unless we're sure he is innocent, it's not clear he's someone who can be left free safely. He's a flight risk for starters.

Police parade him and his manifesto so that they have an excuse to hold him, they look competent, and they get to keep him behind bars until we know for sure one way or another, or until they can't hold him any longer. In which case we may never know for sure until the statue of limitations had passed and if he wants to confess.

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The scary part is, supposing he wasn't the murderer and the actual one is out there, under normal circumstances, people could post wanted signs to see if someone might find this "actual" killer, but we aren't under normal circumstances right now, with our circumstances being ones where the turnout for finds would be low in a world where wanted signs of random billionaires hang in random places in New York, with Brian Thompson actually not being a big opponent of society, having come from poor, rural Iowa and wanting to reform the business but lagging due to hoops (only to, then, be killed by someone he had not had under his insurance to begin with).

[–] ynthrepic@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

A scary possibility indeed!

[–] big_fat_fluffy@leminal.space -5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

Luigi is probably working for them. His job is to do all the "right" things, to further the preferred narrative and such. He's a paid actor.

The real infidel will disappear quietly.

[–] feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 46 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

Don't chew your food with your mouth open, holy shit Michael where are your manners

[–] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca -3 points 8 hours ago

His manners are somewhere up a small boys anus.

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 193 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't get me wrong. After all of this high drama, it would be extremely funny if Luigi Mangione can prove he was in Rochester on the day of the shooting.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I think that's exactly where it's going. Get convicted, real killer confesses and the state can't pursue a crime they've convicted someone for.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 12 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

Why not? The double jeopardy clause is about prosecuting a single person twice; it says nothing about prosecuting a second person for the same crime. Heck, convicting a second person wouldn't even automatically invalidate the first conviction. (SCOTUS has ruled that innocence is not a sufficient reason to overturn a conviction.)

Remember, we have a judicial system. Calling it a "justice system" is inaccurate.

[–] vaionko@sopuli.xyz 14 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

innocence is not a sufficient reason to overturn a conviction

WHAT

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 6 points 7 hours ago

Here's an in-depth article from Slate.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

They can once they release that conviction but it goes to show ineptitude and malfeasance which casts doubt on any further attempt to convict someone. And yes it would, shadow of a doubt is a high standard and a second conviction is a huge amount of doubt.

Factual innocence is different, it's a positive defense for literally any criminal charge.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

There's no mechanism to release a conviction. Usually, if prosecutors have convicted somebody for murder, they won't pursue a case against a second person only for reason of not wanting to admit that they may have got it wrong. But there's no legal barrier, and it has happened for other crimes. The Ninth Circuit even ruled that it's legal.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Reversed, released, overturned are all the same thing and happen literally daily. Where did you get your information that a conviction can't be changed?

Ed: reading your source it hinged on the crime technically being capable of being committed by multiple people and this one clearly can't be.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, a conviction can be overturned, but what I'm pointing out here is that it doesn't have to be in order to convict somebody else for the same crime.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Sure. But you said there isn't a mechanism for it, there clearly is.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

And there isn't. If prosecutors file a new case against a second person for the same crime, and get a conviction, there's no mechanism by which that second conviction overturns the previous conviction. Depending on the circumstances, the first person convicted may not even have grounds to have their case brought before a court to be re-examined.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Automatically? No, almost nothing but enhancements are automatic.

What I hear you saying it is not just possible but probable.

[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

Then I don't know what I can say more clearly. If they convict Mangione, and the real killer confesses, they can convict the real killer, too. They wouldn't even have to free Mangione to do it.

[–] Madison420@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

They can't in this case.

In your example they essentially used the same basis as felony murder (which I don't agree with but whatever) in that they do not know who did pulled the trigger and made the enhancements threat but there's no argument both were there.

In this case there's only one person there during the shooting and that's on video, it physically and logically could not be two people and therefore two convictions are unlikely to hold.

[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 244 points 1 day ago (22 children)

There's a part of me hoping dudes going along with it to aid in the others escape, solidarity style, and he's got some iron clad alibi his lawyer plans to deliver in the courtroom that means they can't convict him.

[–] Mac@mander.xyz 12 points 9 hours ago

As if they would care. There will be no justice here.

load more comments (21 replies)

Memes

Rules: