Luigi Mangione: Who is the suspect in the shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson?
www.bbc.com
The 26-year-old was allegedly detained with a gun, bullets, fake IDs, cash and a handwritten "manifesto".
  • BeMoreCareful@lemmy.worldEnglish
    3·
    19 hours ago

    Problem solving. Maybe we shouldn’t have pushed STEM so hard to the underpaid, unemployed, underinsured masses.

    -Somebody with the wherewithal probably

  • GreenKnight23@lemmy.worldEnglish
    572·
    2 days ago

    I love how transparent the billionaire media is now. everything I’ve heard about this guy is a character assassination or speculative at best.

    they even mobbed the highschool he graduated from…EIGHT YEARS AGO. All to get some clips they can piece together to fit the narrative that he’s “a bad crazy man with a gun”.

    this shooting has certainly scared the fucking shit out of the aristocracy though. you can tell how scared they are by how hard the media is pushing the story of his capture.

    • TriflingToad@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      24·
      2 days ago

      Like he’s literally a comp sci nerd who reads books. Literally how can they make him into a bad guy?! everything I learn about him makes me even more down diabolical

  • Tregetour@lemdro.idEnglish
    101·
    1 day ago

    No, Mr Mangione! A Fortune 500 executive is a living, enterprising creature!

    I don’t care…heheheh <ebike swerves onto sidewalk>

  • Mikina@programming.devEnglish
    662·
    2 days ago

    I admit I’m kinda disappointed. He pulled out almost perfect assassination that looked well thought out, managed to get away with only a few hickups in his plan as far as his face is considered, and then walks around with a murder weapon and a manifesto in his bag? Shame, really. All he needed was to lay low for a while, grow a beard and he’d probably be OK.

    • WamGams@lemmy.caEnglish
      11·
      1 day ago

      You don’t understand.

      The fact that he wrote a manifesto meant he wanted to get caught. The taking the murder weapon and the manifesto to the McDonald’s was his way of saying he had gotten bored waiting for the cops to catch him. He pretty much turned himself in.

    • DrFistington@lemmings.worldEnglish
      453·
      2 days ago

      Don’t be disappointed. I guessed he was going to do this, and for good reason. His options were to either, live a life in fear, worrying that one day he would be caught, or, to basically give him self up, and elect for a Jury trial. Jury nullification is one os the most powerful tools available to the average, non-rich american. If he goes through the trial and gets acquited (which only takes 1 juror), then hes a free man, a folk hero, and he sets the precident that killing rich murderers isn’t an automatic crime.

      What he’s doing is the smartest available option, please donate to his legal defense fund.

    • Pyr_Pressure@lemmy.caEnglish
      30·
      2 days ago

      I almost want to believe this guy saw how similar he was to the photos and how famous the shooter was getting and decided to take the fall by wandering around in public with some incriminating circumstantial evidence until someone reported him so he could take the credit.

    • jagged_circle@feddit.nlEnglish
      22·
      2 days ago

      You’re supposed to grow the beard before and shave it off after. Its much faster to shave it off than grow it back

  • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    3581·
    3 days ago

    He also had a three-page handwritten manifesto that included grievances with the US healthcare system, a document that spoke to the suspect’s “motivation and mindset”, officials said.

    Publish it then.

  • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    2442·
    3 days ago

    Reported by a worker at McD. Wtf, they’re the group that would benefit the most from a change in the healthcare system. Idiot.

    • squid_slime@lemm.eeEnglish
      591·
      2 days ago

      Simply a lack of class consciousness. America has worked hard since the rise of the USSR to topple workers power through union busting and destruction of community.

      Basically we are built by our material conditions.

    • FrostyTheDoo@lemmy.worldEnglish
      281·
      2 days ago

      $50k is 1-2 years pay for the person who reported him. For them, that short term relief was worth more than the highly improbable outcome where this man’s actions actually impact their life in a positive way in the next few months. Money wins almost every time

    • maplebar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      29·
      3 days ago

      One doesn’t have to go far to find a boot-licking class traitor who thinks if they run the rat race well enough they’ll get a piece of cheese.

      But to be fair to the McDonalds worker, the cash reward is designed to do just that.

    • Sludgeyy@lemmy.worldEnglish
      172·
      2 days ago

      We can’t tell you who squealed, but it was one of the dozen employees at this McDonald’s. Probably the one that’s going to change jobs soon…

      I’d be pissed and scared if I was an employee at that McDonald’s

    • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
      211·
      3 days ago

      Idiot yes but we can’t be too harsh on the pedon… so much education needs to be done, and these recent events is a good time for outreach and education.

      Unity is the message. Luigi did the hard work, least the plebs can do it show some solidarity.

        • Anti-Face Weapon@lemmy.worldEnglish
          25·
          3 days ago

          Tell that to the social Democrats that build labor rights brick by brick a century ago. A lot of times they litterally starved on strike.

          • thefartographer@lemm.eeEnglish
            8·
            3 days ago

            You’re right. But they would have literally starved or been mangled by a machine if they had done nothing. Back then, the greatest weapons the top 1% had were hired guns.

            A century ago, your choices were to die today on strike, or die tomorrow from starvation or work conditions, even if you play by the rules. Now, the greatest weapon the 1% has is complacency. You can die today on strike or you can play by the rules and the corporate overlords will feed you just enough until you become too expensive to feed.

            How do you ask someone to starve when they have a legitimate alternative? Complacency is a killer.

            • Telorand@reddthat.comEnglish
              71·
              2 days ago

              How do you ask someone to starve when they have a legitimate alternative?

              I know this was more of a rhetorical question, but for anyone who is legitimately asking this question: you show them that it’s not actually a binary choice. There’s options like communism and unionization that can both protect them and feed them.

              • thefartographer@lemm.eeEnglish
                2·
                2 days ago

                The best part of long-term solutions is that they’re actually solutions. The worst part about immediate satisfaction is that it’s only immediately satisfying. If someone has an immediate problem, it’s hard to get them to look at long-term solutions.

                Sorry, I’ve been a major downer today…

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          52·
          3 days ago

          in practice it do seem like that…

          But the Adjuster was from well off family, and not all of us dirt poor… i don’t blame the snitch here.

          I do expect most people to be able to do their part tho… if wage slaves can’t rally around this, we gonna have another generation of the fuckening.

          make no mistake, the owner class will punish us hard for this.

          • thefartographer@lemm.eeEnglish
            62·
            3 days ago

            I don’t blame the worker either. I don’t know their story, but if someone told me that I could either keep my mouth shut or feed and care for my family, I’d probably get chatty too. $60K isn’t enough to feed you for life, but it’s enough to get reliable transportation, clear a little debt, and buy a little time and cloth to interview for a job that pays better than McDonald’s.

            What I’m saying is that it’s really hard to live by high standards when getting fired from your shitty-ass job could destroy, yet it doesn’t pay enough for you to escape. Once again, class solidarity is for those who can afford it.

            • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
              62·
              3 days ago

              Once again, class solidarity is for those who can afford it.

              Ok, where are you going with this?

              middle 60% of america can’t afford to not be a bootlicker?

              • thefartographer@lemm.eeEnglish
                9·
                3 days ago

                The middle class income ranges from $17k per person up to $90k per person. I hope you don’t think that I’m trying to belittle anyone. Someone making 90K can definitely afford to not be a bootlicker; a family of four averaging nearly $17K per family member is gonna have a much harder time.

                The year that I lost my shit-paying job only to find an even worse-paying job with more hours was really fucking tough. If you’d offered me $60K legally when I was making $12K and scrambling for rent, I’d’ve had a really hard fucking time saying no to that. Back then, I was living alone and had very little to live for. Drop me into my current living arrangement and sub that situation: I’m saying yes to the money 80% of the time.

                I wish I could say that I’m better than that, but struggling in a capitalist society makes you sick, scared, and desperate really fast. I’m not saying that people with lower income deserve lower expectations or should live by lower standards. I’m just saying to reserve your judgement before shitting on someone and labeling them a snitch before you know whether they could have afforded anything else.

                For those of us who can afford class solidarity against the top 1%, we need to remember that the most vulnerable need to be helped up, not stepped on. Instinctually blaming this McDonald’s worker helps the billionaires class far more than many of us may realize.

                Maybe I’m off-base, but ultimately, this act of betrayal is unlikely to have an effect on the momentum of this potential movement. Whoever killed Thompson is unlikely to act again, their message was unlikely to be heard while they were in hiding, and if they are the hero everyone believes they also likely would forgive someone who was trying to de-shittify their life a little bit.

                If you want this to move forward, pull those below you up so they can join us, not attack them for being on a lower level. Class solidarity is for those who can afford it. It sounds like you and I can afford it, so help someone else be able to afford it. Don’t shun people who are too scared of starving to fight. Feed them.

    • intensely_human@lemm.eeEnglish
      29·
      2 days ago

      Some of us aren’t brainwashed into bloodlust by marxist bullshit, even though we’re poor.

    • rasakaf679@lemmy.mlEnglish
      14·
      2 days ago

      Because they rely on “tips” , as the corporation is unable to pay a wage that is sufficient to support a basic standard of living. If only capitalist weren’t so greedy they wouldn’t be relying on the tips to survive.

        • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          2·
          2 days ago

          Also worked there. There is no McDonald’s that has ever allowed tips. It’s against their corporate rules. I even saw an employee get written up for accepting a tip, once.

  • Nanite@reddthat.comEnglish
    231·
    2 days ago

    Does the police media briefing affect his right to a fair trial? They mentioned his motivation and mindset and a note. Apparently he implied money had been planted in the charge hearing.

      • GHiLA@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        91·
        2 days ago

        Him… Him, that guy, him, that dude, me, this guy, that guy over there, the dude next to him, the guy by the bathrooms, and the line beside it, the lady by the punchbowl, I don’t know the pronoun of the dj, but I heard them agree as well.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.worldEnglish
        342·
        3 days ago

        And here’s your 12 jury members…

        Oh, it’s Mark Cuban, Mark Zuckerburg, Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Rupert Murdoch,

        …I could keep this joke going if I used google, but is it sad that I could name 6 people by memory just by using the parameters “Rich asshole who would have no empathy for the general public, and would absolutely convict”?

        • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
          12·
          3 days ago

          it would have to be 12 CEOs but they deff aint got to be proper owner oligarch… just scrape some middling f500 roaster with some “nonames”

          but yes valid point… but defense can generally strike some of these.

          this guy going to need proper counsel, I am assuming fun raising won’t be an issue. he deserves the best.

          coupled with proper PR campaign on socials since TV will try to destroy him.

          this jury must not convict because the glove don’t fit hehe

          • Norin@lemmy.worldEnglish
            11·
            3 days ago

            Plenty of lawyers, at least some of them talented, will offer to defend him for free.

            It could make their career.

            • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
              10·
              3 days ago

              defense of this scale will require several million dollars, nobody will do that for free.

              also, defending this guy will make you enemy of the owner class. top talent will opt out.

            • 14th_cylon@lemm.eeEnglish
              11·
              2 days ago

              I am not going to watch 70 minutes movie, but according to brief skimming through the discussion it’s about business practice of the Microsoft from times of windows 3.11

              I am talking about his today’s undeniable philantropic work and the fact is he is really far from the rest of the people on your list.

              People are allowed to evolve and if every billionaire in the world would evolve I’m the same direction he did, world would be better place.

              • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
                21·
                2 days ago

                It’s a podcast and you can listen while doing other things. 70 minutes isn’t very long.

                You can deny his recent philanthropic work because his libertarian mentality corrupts it. He helped fund covid 19 vaccine research, but also demanded that the patents not be released, so profit could be made. This is in direct contrast to the lead scientist of the poli vaccine opening it up for anyone to make, comparing the ownership of a vaccine to trying to own sunlight.

                While there’s evidence that Gates did not participate in Epstein’s parties, he did know about and choose to stay silent.

                Gates is a full blown elite larping as a humanitarian when the role of his foundation should be occupied by a tax funded gov org.

      • TheFogan@programming.devEnglish
        10·
        2 days ago

        Fortunately in criminal trials if the Jury can return a not guilty verdict, that’s game over for the states case. Double jeopardy they can’t retry.

        Now if one guy on the Jury opposes a guilty verdict, and no verdict is reached, then the state can retry.

        • Laurel Raven@lemmy.zipEnglish
          1·
          1 day ago

          They could also go after him with Thompson’s family in civil suit to destroy him financially, which it turns out is not double jeopardy

        • NewNewAccount@lemmy.worldEnglish
          41·
          2 days ago

          I mean… it does seem pretty fair? If the jury is hung it’s up to the state to retry. If the jury comes back not guilty then that’s the end of it.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
        613·
        3 days ago

        I like that, but there is a major problem with it, and it’s around 2:49 in the video:

        Do you have any beliefs that might prevent you from making a decision based strictly on the law?

        Grey suggests that saying “No” with intent to nullify is lying, and therefore perjury. He is wrong. Where legislated law and constitutional law come into conflict (and they do in all cases of nullification), it is your duty to strictly follow constitutional law. You must judge the case as a layperson. You are constitutionally obligated to follow your own sense of rationality. That means if legislated law provides an undesirable outcome, you are obligated to “strictly follow [constitutional] law”, and refuse to convict under a lower law.

        I can honestly claim to have no beliefs that would prevent me from making a decision based strictly on the law. The 6th Amendment is part of the law, and the 6th amendment requires and empowers me (as a juror) to make whatever decision I determine is appropriate.

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
            20·
            2 days ago

            We aren’t talking about the decision. We are talking about voir dire. You certainly can be charged and convicted of perjury if you lie during voir dire.

            But again: it is not a lie to remember that the 6th Amendment right to a trial by jury of peers (as opposed to professional jurists) is constitutional law. It supersedes any legislated law, or any directive provided by any court. I hold no beliefs that might prevent me from making a decision strictly in accordance with the law.

            • AtariDump@lemmy.worldEnglish
              21·
              2 days ago

              We are talking about voir dire.

              Wait, that isn’t just a term from “My Cousin Vinny”‽

          • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
            61·
            3 days ago

            And they would respond “You are excused, with our thanks”.

            Don’t get creative. The only correct answer is “no”.

            • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
              6·
              3 days ago

              I had half a day to think about it when they were selecting jury for a DUI case. I’d rather speak my mind freely for the jurors they’ve already selected, who are present during the full selection process. Normally one might think context doesn’t matter but DUI laws can also apply to a bicycle, which is a perfect candidate for being nullified by the jury.

    • turtle [he/him]@lemm.eeEnglish
      275·
      3 days ago

      Careful, in case you haven’t heard, discussing jury nullification is apparently against the rules of lemmy.world. SMH (at lemmy.world admins).

      • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.worldEnglish
        221·
        2 days ago

        The pinned post on lemmy.world right now clarifies that discussing jury nullification for crimes that have already happened, such as this, is perfectly acceptable. It’s only discussing it with respect to crimes which have not yet been committed which is against the TOS.

        • PapaStevesy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          231·
          2 days ago

          Wait, we got a Future Crimes Division? I didn’t know .world was run by a bunch of milky precogs…

          • SreudianFlip@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            10·
            2 days ago

            If you plan some violence and include jury nullification as some viable part of the plan, and publish that shit online, not only is it kind of useless and lousy opsec, but it will attract heat that is unwanted and unnecessary. It’s literally a conspiracy to undermine nullification at that point, like a false flag. So no, don’t do that, and I back the mods on this.

        • turtle [he/him]@lemm.eeEnglish
          4·
          2 days ago

          If you trust them after having enforced an unwritten policy and still not allowing discussion of something that’s perfectly legal.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.worldEnglish
        61·
        2 days ago

        I’m not sure that’s true. I’ve had plenty of comments stay up. My guess is either the mod team got their shit together or those comments were deleted for other reasons.

      • Rivalarrival@lemmy.todayEnglish
        31·
        2 days ago

        They are certainly empowered to do that, just as I am empowered to block any instance I don’t want to participate in. If they are not tolerant and respectful of my beliefs (even if they don’t share them) then I don’t want to contribute to their community either.

        Layperson juries are a fundamental component of criminal justice. The law exists to serve the people, not the lawyers, not the government. Rejecting jurors for understanding the purpose of having a layperson jury fundamentally violates the rights of the accused in particular, and society in general.