695

In December, Luigi Mangione was arrested for shooting health insurance executive Brian Thompson. Last week, Trump’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, announced that she was seeking the death penalty. It’s a highly unusual announcement, since Mangione hasn’t even been indicted yet on a federal level. (He has been indicted in Manhattan.) By intervening in this high-profile case, the Trump administration has made clear that it believes that CEOs are especially important people whose deaths need to be swiftly and mercilessly avenged.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ComradeRachel@lemmy.blahaj.zone 128 points 1 year ago

I think the death penalty being on the table would increase the likelihood of the jury finding a reasonable doubt or jury nullification. It would only hurt the prosecution imo.

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 94 points 1 year ago

OR it's going to prejudice the jury against him, like it usually does.

When capital punishment is on the table, only people who are in favor of it are selected for the jury, and people who are in favor of state murder are MUCH more likely to return a guilty verdict than people who aren't.

That's one of hundreds of reasons why civilized legal systems don't murder prisoners anymore.

[-] LeninsOvaries@lemmy.cafe 27 points 1 year ago

Why the fuck does the prosecution have the ability to put punishments on the table that are known to bias jury selection?

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 39 points 1 year ago

Because the system itself is rigged in favor of the prosecution by design.

[-] cheese_greater@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Doesn't the defense have just as much say in terms of who gets selected out and which signals are used to parse that

[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Not really, no.

AFAIK, the defense and the prosecution get the same number of "just because it's bad for my side" exclusions, but not being inclined to render a guilty verdict if there's a possibility of the death penalty is an automatic exclusion that doesn't count towards the prosecution's "freebies".

So yeah, the moment death penalty is on the table, the jury will be biased AND the defense will be much more likely to consider a plea deal for a lesser punishment, further stacking the deck in favor of the prosecution winning one way or the other regardless of actual guilt.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 1 year ago

I kind of agree, if I were in the jury, it would make me think twice about finding them guilty since I would feel like I have someone’s death on my hands.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why does it feel like the trump administration would use Mangione's acquittal by jury as a reason to try to attack and do away with the 6th Amendment (trial by jury amendment)?

[-] EmptySlime@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 year ago

Luckily it would be really hard for them to actually get rid of it. I wouldn't put it past them to try to start doing summary executions or just illegally trying to detain people without trial or whatever but there's 0 chance they get the support to actually remove that amendment.

[-] whostosay@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

They're just going to skip the courts altogether like they've been doing.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Chozo@fedia.io 19 points 1 year ago

Yep, if you set the bar extraordinarily high, then you have to jump extraordinarily high. Bondi's likely doing more harm than good for her cause.

[-] Quill7513@slrpnk.net 46 points 1 year ago

Assuming his trial is carried out normally and isn't a sham

[-] char_stats@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

This ☝️

[-] takeda@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago

My worry is that trump is thinking of sending him to CECOT.

[-] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Trump always starts with the “worst” criminals as he knows it’s hard for Democrats or others to object since they don’t want to be “on the side of criminals,” but it won’t end there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SulaymanF@lemmy.world 109 points 1 year ago

The bullets Mangione used to kill Thomson had “deny,” “delay,” and “depose” inscribed on them.

Allegedly. The reporter forgot to be professional for a moment.

[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] LeninsOvaries@lemmy.cafe 95 points 1 year ago

I'm glad they're seeking the death penalty.

Because it makes it much easier for the defence team to argue that the prosecution is trying to turn the law into a spectacle, and that Luigi should be acquitted of all charges.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

The federal system gives the judge a lot more power, they can basically pick the jury and evidence themselves, and appeals really, really suck.

[-] Freshparsnip@lemm.ee 58 points 1 year ago
[-] LordCrom@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Well, we have a convicted felon and rapist as president already.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 42 points 1 year ago

None of this, of course, is to say that what Mangione did was justifiable or wise.

Um, fuck you? He hasn't been convicted and the author's assumption here, that Mangione is guilty of what he has been accused of, is part of the fucking problem.

[-] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Damn, when did Jacobin get soft?

[-] Gudl@feddit.org 38 points 1 year ago
[-] imetators@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

Californians would die of heart attack after eating all of them

[-] whiskeytango@lemm.ee 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

At least then they could afford to have a heart attack. Heck, have two

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] loomy@lemy.lol 12 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

ok but killing a millionaire is defensible

[-] samus12345@lemm.ee 37 points 1 year ago

Not because they're a millionaire. Because they're a CEO whose policies directly resulted in unnecessary suffering and death.

[-] Banana@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago

Billionaires do deserve to die for being billionaires though.

You can't amass that type of wealth without being responsible for human suffering en masse. It's impossible.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Wilco@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Agreed, its a bit like self defense or defending others.

If you are armed and see a murder about to happen you CAN legally intervene with a firearm. You do not have to standby and let someone get killed.

UHC was killing thousands and apparently the government was/is fine with it. Thus ... it was a defensive killing.

This discussion would get me banned off of Reddit (again).

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Lolseas@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

So what are the odds of jury nullification on this case?

[-] smokingpistol@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

He’s a real true America hero and a patriot! Que Viva Luigi!

[-] bitjunkie@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

We live in a post-defensibility society.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 16 Apr 2025
695 points (98.9% liked)

News

37444 readers
162 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


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. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


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