Defense attorneys for alleged CEO killer Luigi Mangione said Thursday in a new court filing that the murder indictment a state grand jury returned against him should be dismissed due to double jeopardy and other alleged violations.
The indictment should be dismissed “because concurrent state and federal prosecutions violate the Double Jeopardy Clause, the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause and Mr. Mangione’s constitutional rights against self-incrimination, to meaningfully defend himself, to a fair and impartial jury and to the effective assistance of counsel,” defense attorneys wrote.
Defense attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo said in the filing that “prosecutorial one-upmanship” resulted in Mangione facing state and federal charges in New York and separate charges in Pennsylvania.
Free Luigi. Sofar, we dont even know if he actually did it.
we dont even know if he actually did it.
That’s kind of the point of the trial. Of course I don’t trust he’ll be given a fair one. The USA isn’t really keen on that when they really want to punish someone for something.
Under the Double Sovereignty doctrine, the Double Jeopardy clause doesn’t apply in this case tho. Hence, you can be charged for the same offense twice in both stage and federal court.
You know, I thought that too at one point, but if the defendant’s lawyer is trying to use double jeopardy to get this incredibly high profile, publicly scrutinized case thrown out, we should just sit down, shut up, and listen to the professionals
It’s likely just a tactic to set him up for an appeal later. The only reason you can appeal a case is if you can show that you weren’t given a fair trial.
So this is his lawyers going “you’re probably going to be railroaded and found guilty, so let’s at least ensure you have as many avenues for appeal as possible. If we force the courts to officially put it into record that you have to defend both trials at the same time, you can argue that your attorneys weren’t able to effectively do so, and therefore your constitutional right to an attorney was violated.”
Right, sure. At which point, pointing out that “double jeopardy doesn’t apply” is kind of just needless pedantry.
I mean, it doesn’t apply. That is already pretty firmly established by precedent. But again, this is simply getting the courts to officially acknowledge that the prosecutors are pushing ahead even though they know the lawyers are stretched thin.
I’m not saying I agree with the doctrine; in fact I think it’s unjust and would prefer it being tossed, though I seriously doubt he has any chance of succeeding on this claim, especially with the current SCOTUS. And I doubt the state’s lawyers are that incompetent as to ignore it.
I read that, and then I read that it’s more complicated than we might assume it is, so that’s not always true. Obviously, the defense feels the same.
Has be considered running for office? Then they can’t convict him for fear of looking politically biased. That’s how that works, right?
Yore onto something, it’s a strategy that’s never failed in America
Well only if he ran as Republican, but they would rather suck CEO cock.
But they convicted trump……
But didn’t punish him so it was meaningless
Probably should have said that instead then, rather than talking about not convicting.
Bit picky aren’t you. I mean yes you’re correct but no need to get on your high horse about it. Have a great day.
I responded to exactly what you wrote. It’s not my job to read your mind and know that you actually meant something else. Cheers :)
To be picky, they never finished trying him for the important crimes of Jan 6th or all the classified documents he likely sold. They just dropped them as soon as he won the election.
Not your job to see who you’re responding to either obviously. Why you so angry ? Chill.
I see no meaningful distinction
Well he was convicted, so saying that they wouldn’t convict someone who is running is wrong.
Technically but that’s being extremely pedantic. The clear point was its a way to avoid consequences
Free Luigi. Also compensate him for wrongful prosecution.
Plus there’s a documentary and a musical about it. That alone jeopardizes the public opinion of him.
Not to mention every other aid on podcasts is about this case and the way they are edited it’s literally “Hes guilty. Why even hold the trial?”
You guys have been getting podcast ads about it? That’s wild, I haven’t got any at all. But I’m in California, maybe they’re only being played closer to NYC?
Its fucking nuts. Sometimes there will be 3 in a row. It’s fucking obvious they are poisoning the well out here.
Sneak in some Jury nullification ads. Watch as they suddenly get yeeted
What are the ads for? Who’s paying for them? Is NY and fed buying these ads? Or a PAC? Or someone selling insurance?
Its always an ad for a podcast about the case. But the ad is edited in a way to immediately dismiss any notion of innocence.
I’ve found the Brave internet browser to be extremely effective at blocking ads.
Librewolf on desktop, Ironfox on mobile
IIRC, “delay, decline, depose” were in memos from UHC. Does that mean UHC is liable for the same charges for any paying customers who died, while being delayed, denied and deposed? Corporations are people as well, after all.
Of course not! A corporations first responsibly is profit for shareholders. Little things like peoples lives and obeying laws is secondary.
/s isn’t really accurate here. Because although im joking. Our legal system seems seems to agree…
They’ve also pointed to passages of Mangione’s writings, which described Mangione’s deepening fixation on UnitedHealthcare and an increasing malice over the corporation’s purported greed.
Purported greed? Does any grown-ass adult sincerely doubt that corporations are greedy? Are we so far gone that the media can’t even say that without hedging? What are they going to do, sue? Good luck proving that they’re not greedy since public companies have a legal obligation to make as much money as possible.
It’s an extremely weak case, nearly impossible to win, and they all know it. So they’re going to make it the biggest legal circus since the OJ trial.
They’ll do what they did in the OJ and Casey Anthony trials - keep them in prison while they drag the entire out as long as possible, and that way when they finally get set free in a couple of years, at least they served some time. Casey Anthony served over 3 years in jail, which is probably what she would have served for accidental manslaughter/ negligent homicide, which is probably what she was actually guilty of.
They do that to pretty much everyone so that they can give a plea deal years later saying “just pleas no contest and you can go home today!” and most people take it. The vicious cycle starts there and prosecutors do not care if there is no evidence where they’d drop the charges anyway not do they usually care if their is evidence of innocence.
“Attorney does what attorneys are paid to do”
Articles like this don’t even need to exist.
Your name seems ironic then. News is the rough draft of history, the documentation of the state’s injustice is important to exist.
My name was randomly generated. Also “injustice” isn’t really applicable here, at least not yet.
Double jeopardy doesn’t work like this. Nothing is stopping him defending himself. The jury issue is real, but in his favour thanks to the left trying to make a murder it to be a hero.
Which “left”?? You mean politicians? The wealthy? The hate for him crosses party lines with few exceptions.
Regular people though? That’s a different story. Not sure it is mostly people leaning left though. It wouldn’t be the first time GOP supporters licked the boots as they press against their necks, so it wouldn’t surprise me.
Isn’t the party motto like “Pls tread on me sirs!” or something?
deleted by creator
I mean I don’t think the defending attorney would seek a continuance.
