Before we engage in name calling for this suspect, know that yesterday was blatantly clear the system is stacked against him to the point where the courts did not Los him to go into PA for another legal procedure.
See the thing here is that they were giving evidence even to MAX for the documentary and not his legal team, who correctly called some of the evidence inadmissible in court.
So before you feel like calling him a murderer see. The facts and wait for the events to unfold.
I mean, it would be more typical to only be charged in either state or federal for crimes like trespassing, but it's also not unheard of for murder cases. For example, Michael White had charges in the state of West Virginia and was also sentenced for a murder in Federal court.
Just gonna gloss over politicians preening for HBO while denying the defense discovery material? It's obvious they're trying to railroad the guy before anyone else gets any ideas.
Mincing about "well ackshually it's technically not unheard of" is dumb and hardly the point anyone was making.
That’s 30 grand to someone who was accused of murder who should be entitled to the best possible defense for such a serious accusation in such a hot political climate.
Under our current legal system, that means they are in severe need of funding to help ensure that the result is fair and just.
Lots of people enjoy probably-Luigi playing executioner too. When you kill people for profit and you're otherwise untouchable, people are gonna figure out how to get back at you.
So if someone else goes out and shoots the new CEO that would make arresting Luigi pointless? "Looks like nothing changed, another CEO got shot anyway.'
as CEO, even if you arent the one who made the executive decision to make the denials, they still have the power to change the internal policy. It's a FAR well known issue that UHC denied a lot of coverage. He was outright complicit with it, and unlike most people, actually had the power to overturn the problem.
If that man was really responsible for those deaths then the killing would have stopped.
If Luigi was really responsible for killing that guy in New York then arresting him would have caused the killings in New York to stop. The fact that people have been killed in New York since Luigi was arrested proves his arrest was pointless.
They're saying that they find due process to be lacking and the prosecution to be political.
Do you think it's depressing that someone would donate money to the defense of someone they think is being inappropriately prosecuted?
If you think they're guilty, you should still want them to get the best defense possible, so that when they're found guilty it's airtight. Our justice system is based on an adversarial model. If the prosecution, with the resources of the state, can't successfully argue that they did it and that their arrest and all procedures were properly followed, do you really want that to still mean someone faces the death penalty?
Someone with resources gave money to aid the defense of someone they think is being treated unjustly after watching and seeing what they thought was mistreatment.
Are you just trying to aggravate people, or do you actually have a point?
I replied to someone saying it was sad someone gave money to a murderer.
I don't think it's sad someone gave money to help someone they think might not be a murderer, and even if you think they are one, it's not sad someone had the impulse to help push back against what they saw as a biased application of the Justice system.
I understand you think that's misguided in this case. Do you understand how that's kind of a nonsequitur?
The animalistic "unga bunga club problems to death" part of their brain combined with anarchist and tankie propaganda campaigns promoting insurgency and chaos, as well as just a general lack of understanding of why things are the way they are.
I'm just going to stick to the most recent contributing events
In 2009-2011 the US Senate had 58 DNC seats and 2 caucusing IND seats totaling filibuster-proof 60 votes needed to pass reforms for 72 workings days, and they attempted to pass a method of funding treatment for people who could not afford it, sometimes referred to as singlepayer or public option healthcare. Due to one of the caucusing IND votes not voting with the DNC, and every single Republican voting Nay, it did not pass.
We gave them less seats in the next two elections. Every single year since 2015 we've given that party who wanted healthcare reform less than 50 senate seats.
We've created the system that Brian Thompson profited off of, and when we killed him all we did was free up a spot for yet another out of tens of millions of terrible people to hop into and do exactly the same thing, as has always been done since health insurance was conceived and always will do because we refuse to change it. No matter how many more people die, no matter how much blood is on our hands.
And because people don't understand that they think the resistance is people like Luigi, who accomplish nothing, instead of the obvious solution right in front of us.
instead of the obvious solution right in front of us.
Sorry, what is that obvious solution?
If it's voting I'll remind you that in the last election one of the candidates directly stated they were going to be a dictator and less than a third of Americans voted against them. A third gleefully voted for the dictator, and a third didn't bother to vote at all. What is this "obvious solution" that convinces 200 million people to vote the way you want them to?
Instead of giving your money to Luigi, give it to the DNC and to Bernie Sanders. Or better yet, use that money yourself and volunteer to help the parties who support the real solution.
That "victim" worked at a "company" which still denies medical claims for a living, paying for the majority of claim holders medical via distribution of wealth.
The "reason" this is allowed is because "voters" keep choosing this system, and most recently voted to expand it by removing socialized healthcare for an addition 79 Million Americans.
And Luigi has done fuck all to even toss a wrench in.
No, you see, some people believe all murder (except in the case of genuine, immediate self-defense) is immoral. They feel this way, probably, because they think all life is precious or maybe that everyone should have the opportunity to rehabilitate. Or maybe some mix of both, or even another reason.
I think we should kill evil people, personally. I'm not saying I believe in capital punishment, though, except in the case of the most heinous, malicious crimes. But Brian Thompson definitely deserved to die a lot more than his murderer does.
Edit: oh to clarify, what I meant to say but kinda ranted off topic from, is that the other person is saying even if you killed all the other evil people, you would be evil for killing them, therefore you wouldn't have killed ALL the evil people.
No it isn't. This is how subs like r/technology got ruined, the whole thing got filled with "political post that involves technology" instead of just "technology".
Everything is politically when you have people at the top wanting to take away your rights and be able to have their followers kill you in the streets.
Technology is one of the most politically charged topics possible. Even leaving aside big tech and AI stuff, you have the ideologues behind the open source movement, or the fact that a lot of our modern tech infrastructure is built on conflict resources and manufactured by forced labor. Politics ripple through every aspect of our lives.