• NoiseColor @lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    212
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    Bizzare. Americans are seriously crazy. It’s a monarchy really, it’s so in your face, like a bad comedy.

      • GreyAlien@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        12 days ago

        Way to downplay what’s at stake, it’s sadistic, psychopathic and cruel.

    • Ilandar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      12 days ago

      It’s a monarchy really

      Yes, this is actually a much more helpful way to think about Trump’s approach to presidency. Here is Dr David Smith from the United States Studies Centre explaining this in a recent episode of PEP (excellent in-depth American politics podcast from Australia).

    • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      No, it’s just that the south hates everything about the rest of America, and have done since we took their slaves away

      They support anything that hurts everyone else, or as they call it: ‘Owning the libs’.

    • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      12 days ago

      Start the campaign now for President in 2256. Wouldn’t want the judges to look politically biased, they’ll have to hold off on sentencing until after the election.

    • Kyrgizion@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      12 days ago

      You know they’ll disqualify anyone who might even hint at knowledge of jury nullification from the jury pool. They’ll be selected on their ability to convict solely.

        • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          12 days ago

          Now you’re asking them to commit perjury - which is also bad. (In case anyone reads this and decides to try their best poker face)

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            12 days ago

            Now you’re asking them to commit perjury - which is also bad.

            Only if they get caught and punished for it. Laws exist to discourage bad behavior, which lying in service of justice isn’t, so in this case breaking the law is the morally correct thing to do.

            Like shooting a billionaire or the CEO of a predatory corporation.

            • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 days ago

              Sure, whatever, but lying under oath during the jury selection process is a crime called perjury. Morale correctness aside, I’m just trying to keep folks out of jail my dude.

          • null@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            12 days ago

            Now your asking them to commit perjury

            Only if they specifically ask “do you know about jury nullification?”

            • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              12 days ago

              No, they usually ask something like “Do you have any personal beliefs that would prevent you from returning a guilty verdict involved with this type of crime?” - seriously yall, this shit isn’t hard to look up and is usually posted right alongside explanations for what jury nullification is. Frankly, I doubt anyone reading this is rich enough to pull the “you didn’t specifically ask about jury nullification therefore I technically did not commit perjury”-card.

              • null@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                11 days ago

                Well at least now I know it’s effectively illegal for me to be on a jury for the rest of my life. So that’s cool.

            • DaleGribble88@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              No, you swear an oath to answer honestly during the jury selection process. The lawyers will ask if you have any moral or ethical concerns that would prevent you from convicting the accused - ie you would be willing to engage in jury nullification. If you say no, but you actually do intend to nullify, then you lied under oath and could be found guilty of perjury at that point.

    • RainbowHedgehog@50501.chat
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      44
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      12 days ago

      Luigi Mangione has been the only thing uniting the left and right in the US. This is one of the few things that has managed to break through Fox News propaganda. Killing a legendary hero isn’t the win the GOP thinks it is.

    • Podunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      12 days ago

      Have you seen how long it takes someone to get through death row? If convicted, he will sit for 20 years. Far far beyond the current political discourse.

      If he gets convicted, that will be a stink for a while. But by the time they kill him, he will be a distant memory.

      Martyrs die when the timing is optimal. If it isnt the right time, they are just a name on a gravestone. And we have plenty of those.

    • GreyAlien@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      nah we already have sanders and aoc it’s enough, we still want to conserve decorum /s

    • AJ1@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      12 days ago

      You want martyrs??

      I mean, yeah that’d be cool. What else do we have at this point

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    12 days ago

    This administration is too stupid to realize they’re sitting on a powder keg? By all means light the match……let’s see what happens

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      My current tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory is that’s exactly what they’re banking on. They’ll draw the trial out until right before the midterm election… Then Trump will use the resulting riots to declare martial law and cancel the upcoming midterms, so he doesn’t lose control of congress. After he has cancelled the election, he’ll make a final push to clean house, and will start ousting liberal congress members by accusing them of being riot conspirators.

      The Mangione Riots will be Trump’s Reichstag Fire.

      • Formfiller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        They’re not smart people. This would require the ability to critically think and reason with facts. They’re brainwashed by the billionaire backed right wing propaganda machine. Women/brown people=bad. Billionaires/White Men =good

  • Ksin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    12 days ago

    That’s seems pretty damn ballsy of them since unless they are extremely confident in the jury selection it’s practically guaranteed to result in a hung jury if they know that finding him guilty will result in the most severe verdict.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      12 days ago

      Yeah there’s no better reason to use jury nullification than when government wants to kill a guy for political reasons.

    • InvertedParallax@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      12 days ago

      Federal juries are way, way easier to tilt towards the prosecution, and the judge has far more power, even assuming he isn’t a Trump appointee.

  • Tomtits@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    12 days ago

    Even if the actual killer stuck again, hitting another CEO and then confessed on live TV for both murders, people would still think (and I can say the name here) that Luigi is guilty.

    Y’all are mental across the pond

      • wolfinthewoods@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        12 days ago

        Wow. There’s a huge disparity between the brows on those two. No matter how blurry the first pics are, the thickness of Luigi’s brows would be noticeable. The person in that camera footage definitely doesn’t have thick eyebrows like Luigi :/

          • Ilandar@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 days ago

            Ah yes, the “different nose” which is mostly obscured in the top photos and has a giant red circle covering it in the bottom photo.

              • Ilandar@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 days ago

                Ah, so the monobrow photo is after the security cam photos. How interesting that you tried to avoid telling me this the first time around.

                • Sanctus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 days ago

                  So sorry, I hadn’t realized you have oxygen deprivation from breathing through your anus.

  • Cid Vicious@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    15
    ·
    12 days ago

    Not at all surprising and it wouldn’t have been any different under the last administration. From the whole “rule of law” perspective you can’t really not go after somebody who committed premeditated murder on film just because his target was someone that people didn’t like. What the jurors decide to do is a whole different can of worms (although if you ask me to make a prediction, I think they most likely find him guilty).

    • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      12 days ago

      The previous administration probably wouldn’t take on a random murder case just because the victim was rich.

      • Cid Vicious@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        12 days ago

        This was a high profile case that was all over the news for weeks. And frankly it looks like a slam dunk for the prosecution. The Biden Justice Department absolutely would’ve brought federal charges.

    • .Donuts@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 days ago

      Can you imagine Merrick Garland saying this?

      Luigi Mangione’s murder of Brian Thompson — an innocent man and father of two young children — was a premeditated, cold-blooded assassination that shocked America,"

      “After careful consideration, I have directed federal prosecutors to seek the death penalty in this case as we carry out President Trump’s agenda to stop violent crime and Make America Safe Again.”