US judge rules Luigi Mangione won't face death penalty in CEO killing case • Hacker News Board

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

#51

Post by JumpCrisscross » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 6:20 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #47

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I’ll bet you a bottle of a beverage you enjoy. Let me know. Laws are just loose rules we sometimes collectively adhere to, people are mostly emotion driven. Sometimes the law matters, but sometimes not.

> I’ll bet you a bottle of a beverage you enjoy. Let me know

I’ll take it! If he’s found not guilty on all counts in his state and federal trials, I owe you.

> people are mostly emotion driven

Sure. A prosecutor’s (and judge’s) job is to remove these people from a jury pool.

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

#52

Post by em-bee » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 7:49 AM UTC

fhdkweig wrote: post #19

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'…

While I can't name any specific case, I seem to recall a true crime involving two separate trials, one for federal charges and one for state charges. The person was acquitted of one and was then tried for the other. Somehow, this doesn't count as double jeopardy. It felt morally wrong to do so, but apparently legal. It is called "dual sovereignty doctrine".

it's not double jeopardy because they are being tried for different crimes at each court. splitting up trials is not uncommon. not just because of jurisdiction.

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

#53

Post by wakawaka28 » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 8:00 AM UTC

snypher wrote: post #45

tekla wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at various tech and hacker chats/social media and adjacent? 100% yes. I find it disgusting

I have big doubts it's this guy but that's what the trial is for.

That is what a trial is for but you doubt that a person picked up for looking like the shooter on video, who also had a beef with the company the victim worked for, AND had a relevant manifesto in his possession, is the guy? Come on... There is an unusually high amount of evidence for this one.

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

#54

Post by toomuchtodo » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 6:56 PM UTC

burnt-resistor wrote: post #50

toomuchtodo wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s going to walk.

Only if he has $2M and mentions how much he loves red hats.

Do you think it's unlikely he couldn't raise $2M for a pardon bribe? We are in unconventional times after all.

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

#55

Post by wakawaka28 » Sat, Jan 31, 2026, 10:22 PM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #41

wakawaka28 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Nearly all US murders take place in some state or another so they need to have federal prosecution potential. What do you mean here? They usually get prosecuted by the state. Because NY state law doesn't allow for the death penalty, and the federal government wanted the death penalty, they intentionally moved it to a federal jurisdiction. There's a Twitter thread[0] that seems like a reasonable explanation. [0] htt…

>What do you mean here? They usually get prosecuted by the state.

I know. But clearly they can be federally prosecuted and nearly all US crimes take place in an actual state (as opposed to other territories). Just saying that a state can do it is not sufficient to dismiss federal authority over the case. Since the guy conspired to kill a high-profile executive in another state, there seems to be federal standing for that reason (in my non-lawyer opinion). Even if he didn't cross state lines or assassinate such an individual, I think there are many ways the feds can take interest.

The same jurisdictional thing happens with state and local authorities as well, I think. You could be breaking local, state, and federal law at the same time and have 3 levels of authorities and many agencies that could all take you in, resulting in different prosecution. At least that is what I've been led to believe.

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

#56

Post by ben_w » Sun, Feb 01, 2026, 11:10 AM UTC

dagmx wrote: post #38

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 pro…

> 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?

Not to speak for JumpCrisscross, but IMO this could be construed not as "Hunter Biden being pardoned is on the same level as J6 being pardoned" but rather "Republicans will support the end of presidential pardoning because of Hunter Biden being pardoned, while Democrats will support the end of presidential pardoning because of J6 being pardoned".