Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

aljazeera.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 56 posts

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#31

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dagmx wrote: post #15
almosthere wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think it's so bad in our country right now that if someone showed up at the court and snuck a gun in and shot Luigi in the back and killed him ... THAT guy would definitely get the death penalty. (he should, but so should Luigi) It's all political at this point.

Why should either of them get the death penalty?

> Why should either of them get the death penalty?

Pardons. If he's pardoned there is a good chance he'll kill again. (And inspire copycats.)

We need to eliminate pardons across our system of justice. Between Biden pardoning his son and Trump pardoning the J6'ers, there should be a bipartisan case for closing this.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#32

Post by wakawaka28 »

rahimnathwani wrote: post #7

The article doesn't explain clearly why, even though no one seems to be disputing the murder, the murder charge is being dismissed. It's because of jurisdiction. Normally, only states have jurisdiction over murders. The feds can charge murder if and only if the murder is connected to some other federal "crime of violence" (e.g. killing a federal official, murder-for-hire across state lines). Here, the federal 'hook'…

How about premeditated murder? Stalking is part of the premeditation, presumably. I think this technical argument/decision reeks of politics. Nearly all US murders take place in some state or another so they need to have federal prosecution potential.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#33

Post by wakawaka28 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #14
rahimnathwani wrote: post #7

The article doesn't explain clearly why, even though no one seems to be disputing the murder, the murder charge is being dismissed. It's because of jurisdiction. Normally, only states have jurisdiction over murders. The feds can charge murder if and only if the murder is connected to some other federal "crime of violence" (e.g. killing a federal official, murder-for-hire across state lines). Here, the federal 'hook'…

> The article doesn't explain clearly why, even though no one seems to be disputing the murder, the murder charge is being dismissed. I mean, its literally being dismissed because the defendant successfully disputed the murder (as even a valid charge under the prosecutors own allegations.) He also, in the parallel state case which does not rely on the much narrower federal murder statute used in the federal case, is…

Does ANYONE doubt that this was a cold blooded and premeditated murder?

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#34

Post by JumpCrisscross »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #26
brandonmenc wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep dreaming. I'm not sure why so many people believe that what - jury nullification? - is going to happen.

$1.4M defense fund (so far), exceptional legal team, jury nullification, lots of paths to success. His case is going well so far, and appeals are always an option. “Proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is the bar. How confident are you there isn’t at least one juror who hasn’t been harmed by their health insurance, financially or medically? Only takes one.

> How confident are you there isn’t at least one juror who hasn’t been harmed by their health insurance, financially or medically?

Who doesn't perjor themselves during voir dire, thereby triggering a mistrial? Pretty confident. Maybe he gets lucky in federal court because Bondi is an idiot. But the state charges are solid, and New York isn't Reddit.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#35

Post by JumpCrisscross »

rayiner wrote: post #21
defrost wrote: post #12

Attorney General Pam Bondi ordered Manhattan federal prosecutors last April to seek the death penalty against Mangione. ... Judge Margaret Garnett dismissed a federal murder charge that had enabled prosecutors to seek capital punishment, finding it technically flawed. ~ https://apnews.com/article/mangione-unitedhealthcare-death-p... How many gross errors of basic law and procedure has the current AG made and overseen…

You don’t seem to understand the legal issues here if you’re saying this was an “error of basic law.” What happened is that the feds took an aggressive but plausible legal position, and the district court disagreed. There are concurrent federal and state prosecutions. Ordinarily, murder is a state law charge. Some nexus to the federal government is required to elevate it to a federal crime. Here, New York doesn’t hav…

> and the district court disagreed

Which, once Mangione is convicted, will almost certainly be reviewed at the appellate level.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#36

Post by torstenvl »

dragonwriter wrote: post #14
rahimnathwani wrote: post #7

The article doesn't explain clearly why, even though no one seems to be disputing the murder, the murder charge is being dismissed. It's because of jurisdiction. Normally, only states have jurisdiction over murders. The feds can charge murder if and only if the murder is connected to some other federal "crime of violence" (e.g. killing a federal official, murder-for-hire across state lines). Here, the federal 'hook'…

> The article doesn't explain clearly why, even though no one seems to be disputing the murder, the murder charge is being dismissed. I mean, its literally being dismissed because the defendant successfully disputed the murder (as even a valid charge under the prosecutors own allegations.) He also, in the parallel state case which does not rely on the much narrower federal murder statute used in the federal case, is…

This is not accurate with respect to the federal ruling. The judge is not disputing the murder.*

"Murder" refers to an offense under any number of legal provisions, most of them at the state level. Nearly everyone is at least passingly familiar with at least first-, second-, and—since Chauvin—third-degree murder. Many are also familiar with the concept of felony murder.

Nobody is disputing that the premeditated killing alleged in this case legally constitutes murder under New York State law.

Instead, it does not constitute murder for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(5)(B)(i) because the underlying federal offense—stalking—is not a crime of violence within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3).

That statute defines a crime of violence as one that "has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another" or "that by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense" (emphasis added).

Physical force is not an element of stalking, nor is there a substantial risk that physical force will be used in the course of stalking, even though it's not altogether uncommon for stalking to lead to acts of violence.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#37

Post by JumpCrisscross »

brandonmenc wrote: post #17
toomuchtodo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s going to walk.

Keep dreaming. I'm not sure why so many people believe that what - jury nullification? - is going to happen.

> not sure why so many people believe that what - jury nullification? - is going to happen

Eh, if I thought Mangione was justified or effective it would be an easy way to feel good for a while with zero real-world consequences apart from my moral integrity. (Which, to be clear, is mine and mine alone. I have friends–good people whom I love and respect–who would nullify Mangione. They're just never getting seated on his jury without perjuring themselves.)

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#38

Post by dagmx »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31
dagmx wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should either of them get the death penalty?

> Why should either of them get the death penalty? Pardons. If he's pardoned there is a good chance he'll kill again. (And inspire copycats.) We need to eliminate pardons across our system of justice. Between Biden pardoning his son and Trump pardoning the J6'ers, there should be a bipartisan case for closing this.

Why would he need to be pardoned to inspire copycats? Why wouldn’t his death cause him to become a martyr and inspire others?

Why would he be pardoned by the governor at all? Why do you believe Hunter Biden being pardoned is on the same level as J6 being pardoned, when the reasoning (accurately) was to protect him from a perversion of the law in turn?

Your entire argument is essentially “kill them before they can prove they’re not still a threat”.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#39

Post by DANmode »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31
dagmx wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should either of them get the death penalty?

> Why should either of them get the death penalty? Pardons. If he's pardoned there is a good chance he'll kill again. (And inspire copycats.) We need to eliminate pardons across our system of justice. Between Biden pardoning his son and Trump pardoning the J6'ers, there should be a bipartisan case for closing this.

or…if we’re at the point we need to neuter the power of the elected office,

just randomly appoint people, and stop pretending what we’re doing is working.

Re: US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case

#40

Post by torstenvl »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #35
rayiner wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don’t seem to understand the legal issues here if you’re saying this was an “error of basic law.” What happened is that the feds took an aggressive but plausible legal position, and the district court disagreed. There are concurrent federal and state prosecutions. Ordinarily, murder is a state law charge. Some nexus to the federal government is required to elevate it to a federal crime. Here, New York doesn’t hav…

> and the district court disagreed Which, once Mangione is convicted, will almost certainly be reviewed at the appellate level.

I don't have any experience in Article III criminal litigation but normally that wouldn't be possible.

The appellate court cannot review something that isn't before it, and a conviction on other offenses does not bring counts 3 and 4 of the indictment before the appellate court.

Normally, I would expect there to be a process for an interlocutory appeal when a ruling is fatal to a charged offense. However, again, I'm not familiar enough with title 28 to say if that is in fact the case here.

Post reply on HN