Anon invokes the fifth
Posted by Blue_Moon_Cheese@reddit | greentext | View on Reddit | 442 comments
Posted by Blue_Moon_Cheese@reddit | greentext | View on Reddit | 442 comments
cap21345@reddit
Its gonna be so fucking funny if either Jury for this dude or Marios Brother has the balls to use Nullification even when faced with overwhelming evidence. I dont care who goes free but the aftermath will be glorious
American_Crusader_15@reddit
Bro, he is in Utah. They are going to rip his balls off.
cap21345@reddit
Well if it cant be him i hope its Luigi i need one of them to go free
SipoteQuixote@reddit
I feel like whatever political side youre on, you can agree medical insurance CEOs are very low on the totem pole of likability.
chasemuss@reddit
I don't think it matters who the victim is. We can't allow people to murder others in broad daylight.
DaSeraph@reddit
Agreed. How does murdering a person in broad daylight compare to murdering thousands or millions through neglect for personal profit? Asking for a friend.
LabCoatGuy@reddit
Visibility. They actually think murder is ok. Just if they see it, it's unseemly. It's easier to think about it in the abstract.
chasemuss@reddit
Murder is a very specific term. Someone not taking an action to save someone else's life isn't murder. Neglectful? Absolutely. Morally wrong? Yes. I'm not saying the UNH ceo was a moral person. Hell, he and other people in these types of companies may deserve the death penalty or imprisonment. But we cannot, as a society, allow for random people to play judge jury and executioner, otherwise we will end up with chaos and no society. We have to bring people to justice the right way.
DaSeraph@reddit
If you make peaceful justice impossible you make vengeful justice inevitable.
chasemuss@reddit
While I agree with the sentiment, vengeance can't be justice. I'd adjust that to be "If you make justice impossible, you make vengeance inevitable"
TechDisaster@reddit
Yah as much as I hate Charlie Kirk and his people, killing them over political opinions is a slippery slope. It's only a matter a time until it happens to someone from the left
C0UNT3RP01NT@reddit
Someday isn’t a day of the week. I don’t really agree with most of the motives I see and hear for all of these politically charged killings and acts of rebellion, but if you went back to colonial times, pre-1776, I guarantee you the British Government would’ve been making the same appeals as you are concerning the American Colonies. They probably did. And if they had today’s technology, I guarantee you they would’ve been muddying the waters on sites like this just to pull support support away from the revolutionaries.
Who am I to dictate the terms of another man’s liberty? I won’t necessarily walk beside him, but as an American, I think it’s true, tried, and tested that we wrote the book on violently overthrowing the organs of tyranny (and then the French turbocharged it).
Even MLK talked about the white moderate, who would support civil rights just not right now.
I don’t support Charlie Kirk’s assassination. I don’t necessarily support the UHC assassination. I don’t support the Minnesota lawmakers assassinations. I don’t think we need to be doing that right now, or at least my limit hasn’t been hit. I’m doing pretty good. But I try not to be a hypocrite. If you want to burn, burn brightly, and burn bravely, making your stand, then who am I to stop you? It takes moments like these to enact the great changes of history. Maybe the masses see something I don’t? Maybe they have a point that will move me from my apathy?
But I’ll wait. Because I haven’t seen anything but more polarization caused by people that, in my opinion, are too quick to resort to a violent solution when the peaceful one exists. It just requires the right combination of people (who absolutely will not be found on this site, god is it filled with terrible people).
chasemuss@reddit
I understand, and if this were the government sanctioning, supporting, or even just not wanting to bring them to justice, I'd be on the side of the Americans in your example. We need a state that works for the people and brings the justice that the people have agreed to to pass.
I also hope that the nation doesn't polarize anymore. I think we're at a crossroads and our leaders on both sides have some tricky waters to navigate.
P41N90D@reddit
Funny how there's suddenly talk about ending the polarization. Like if James Earl Ray declared that folks need to get along barely a week after whacking MLK.
acab56@reddit
You're conflating justice in the eyes of the law and real justice. The two are not the same. Justice in the eyes of the law let's rapists go free after a year or two in the UK. Real justice would be castration.
appolzmeh@reddit
I mean revenge can very much be justice the world ran that way for thousands of years. You don’t see it as justice because you’ve been indoctrinated to think the only acceptable violence is state sanctioned violence. Not your fault though your simply a victim of the propaganda machine.
Deftek@reddit
What an obtusely patronising comment.
Hunriette@reddit
Lmao what the fuck are you talking about? You do understand the Code of Hammurabi didn’t take “eye for an eye” literally, right?
F-Lambda@reddit
I'm fairly certain that that was the maximum penalty allowed. Bunch of people acting like it was the minimum.
Wikipedia:
chasemuss@reddit
If the world followed through with Eye for an Eye, we'd all be blind.
appolzmeh@reddit
That’s exactly the kind of stuff they teach you in order to ensure a docile and easy to control population. You eat the bread you watch the circus you are content to be exploited.
chasemuss@reddit
If you want to live in a world ruled by revenge/vengeance, that's your call. I'd rather not have people being killed without a chance to defend their actions though.
NinpoSteev@reddit
What exactly goes on in the justice system if not society's revenge?
chasemuss@reddit
If you define revenge as the reaction to injustice, then sure, you're right. But revenge isn't just a reaction. There's an element of malice or dark satisfaction typically
Jiveturtle@reddit
So you’re saying you support a state monopoly on violence?
chasemuss@reddit
You're okay with people killing others for any grievance and their victims not being able to defend their actions?
Jiveturtle@reddit
Dude, you’re the one making what appears to be a universal statement, to wit, “vengeance can’t be justice.” I’m just trying to ascertain precisely where the edges of it lie.
chasemuss@reddit
A society, whether it decides to use a government, pure democracy, what have you, should select how to handle people's crimes. If we have people like Luigi running around killing people they don't like, then A) how do we know they killed the person they should have? B) was death for the victim the right result?
I know the Federal & State Governments get things wrong and that it's an imperfect system and rife with errors and often gives us unsatisfying results; but citizens taking matters into their own hands is more prone to error and can lead to more bloodshed than the State.
Trials afford the accused a chance to defend themselves. I'm not advocating for the death penalty, but I do think that everyone should be able to defend themselves before being put to death.
Jiveturtle@reddit
That sure sounds like a state monopoly on violence to me.
I mean I don’t really disagree, I think with reasonable exceptions for self-defense it’s probably the best we can do.
chasemuss@reddit
Yes. I don't like the state, but I trust the American Government enough to allow me to defend myself rhetorically more than someone like Luigi.
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement.
LLMprophet@reddit
chasemuss@reddit
If you truly think that insurance providers are killing their customers, then work towards bringing a lawsuit against them or petition the legislature to change the law. That's how we resolve problems in this country, not through extra-judicial killings of their CEOs.
Notice that Luigi's actions haven't changed a thing. They have only killed a man. UNH got a new CEO and is still writing policies, approving & denying claims, like every other insurance company.
LLMprophet@reddit
Money in politics has corrupted the system.
Regulatory capture.
If you make peaceful justice impossible you make vengeful justice inevitable.
chasemuss@reddit
See my comment higher up in this thread about "vengeful justice" and the oxymoron that is.
There are courts who are not fully captured. There are jurisdictions that you can sue in. I'll never argue that we have a perfect system, but the system can still work.
Petition lawmakers to change the law
Make your own insurance company that abides by your ethical standards
There's so many ways to go about this in an ethical way and don't require people to lose their humanity by killing one another.
I'm so tired of defending someones right to not be murdered.
LLMprophet@reddit
Supreme Court made it legal to take bribes.
The top office and the top court in the land, captured by grifters.
The social contract is broken.
chasemuss@reddit
Look, if you want to continue defending murder as a viable solution, I have nothing left to say except I hope I never cause you grievance.
Godspeed.
LLMprophet@reddit
Not once have I defended murder.
I'm just laying out the facts.
You want to pretend reality does not exist.
chasemuss@reddit
The only argument I've been presenting throughout all these threads is that there are methods to resolve disputes that don't involve murdering people. That's been my only goal since the first comment. Murder is immoral and shouldn't be condoned. Whether it's of a CEO of a health insurance company, a political activist, or the President of the United States. I'm not saying Brian Thompson was moral. I'd bet money he wasn't. But I don't think that anyone deserves to be murdered.
LLMprophet@reddit
Congress and Supreme Court have demonstrated they are participants in the active corruption and destruction of the system, moving everyone into an oligarchic police-state and unlimited state sanctioned corporate grift with increasing wealth disparity including profits off death.
The social contract is broken.
You expect everyone to go along with eyes closed, docile and ignorant.
Nobody deserves to be murdered, that I agree with. However, as shown in the UNH CEO situation, society recognizes the broken social contract and decrepit morality which has resulted in the lack of sympathy for his exit.
idealfury88@reddit
Batman would disagree
chasemuss@reddit
So a fictional billionaire who beats up on the lower class and mentally unwell is a beacon of morality?
idealfury88@reddit
If that billionaire wasn't beating up the mentally ill then everybody would be infected by Joker toxin. What then eh?
Then you'd be wishing there was a deranged billionaire ninja beating up all the crazy folks in Gotham City
chasemuss@reddit
Did Batman rise to combat the Joker or did Joker rise to combat Batman? In either scenario, it's fiction and irrelevant to real life.
TurnThatTVOFF@reddit
So the state and it's tentacles of bureaucracy can give me cancer or let me die full knowing they could save me or prevent my disease but it's okay because... It was voted in a private boardroom? I'm confused.
chasemuss@reddit
I would be confused too if I thought the State was a private entity.
TurnThatTVOFF@reddit
we're talking about corpos here - who everyone knows is full well lobbying for their best interests.
DaSeraph@reddit
Roosterneck@reddit
Edgy
Spe3dGoat@reddit
so if someone sees you as an immoral threat, game on ?
crazy stance bro
monkeymercenary@reddit
I'd argue that denying a claim is an action, not a lack of action. Additionally, intent is separate from negligence. Demonstrating intent is shown through purpose(I doubt anyone will prove that they are purposefully denying claims to make people die) or knowledge with substantial certainty that their denial will lead to harm.
The problem isn't that what they are doing is wrong, the problem is that when someone attempts to fight them, as you say, with just the right way...the insurance companies litigate the plaintiff's into oblivion. They KNOW they are treading water with medical bills already(because they denied the claims) so they just have to finish them off with legal/attorney fees and the problem either A: goes away due to unaffordability, or B: the plaintiff just does from lack of medical coverage.
It's easy to say do it the right way when you aren't bankrupt and dying.
NotLunaris@reddit
Approving or denying a claim based on established rules that have been agreed on by both parties is literally the foundation of society (observance of contracts) and in no way unique to insurance companies.
Despite all the hubbub of those who love to tug on your heartstrings, there is zero evidence that the dead CEO was responsible for a single death. People conflate denied insurance claims with death, yet not a single family has stood out and be propped up by the media and the people for having a family member die from a wrongfully denied claim. You'd think that with so much support for Luigi (in certain circles), they'd at least be able to find one, but no.
If the claims are rightfully denied due to existing terms, it's just business and observance of a contract. To assume that having insurance of any sort is enough to guard you from all medical misfortune is unrealistic and presumptuous. You get what you pay for. You don't go to the store and pay for a fuji apple then complain about it not being a honeycrisp.
Do rejected claims negatively impact quality of life? Absolutely. Can a worse quality of life lead to death? Eventually, sure. In fact, my quality of life is worsened right now because you haven't given me your money. But you are not obligated to, because there is no existing contract that says you do. Insurance companies have a very clear list of rules to follow, and as long as the policyholder also follows those rules, all will be well.
People take the rejected claims # and their imaginations just run wild, thinking each one is a death or something, but in the overwhelming majority of cases the claims are rejected for being filed improperly or not being covered. Each wrongful rejection is a lawsuit in the making, and lawyers are not shy to fleece big fish for an easy payday. I've only had my insurance claims rejected once, and that was overturned when I gave the relevant info they asked for. Is it a pain in the ass? Absolutely. But follow the rules and you will get exactly what you paid for and agreed to. If one doesn't know what they agreed to and paid for it, that's 100% on them.
ronmex7@reddit
be me
read this galaxy brain take
remember actual cases like Nataline Sarkisyan dying after a transplant denial
recall studies estimating tens of thousands of preventable deaths from lack of timely coverage
mfw “zero evidence”
insurance isn’t buying apples
it’s paying a subscription to maybe not die
contract law != healthcare reality
TL;DR: not reading terms != dying, but insurers weaponizing complexity and delay absolutely does. Stop cosplaying as a free-market samurai, this is life-or-death, not grocery shopping.
NotLunaris@reddit
Businesses aren't obligated to keep you alive outside of their explicit contractual obligations that you pay for. Why is it shocking that corpos won't do more than the bare minimum that is required? It's a business, not a charity.
Want more coverage? Buy it.
Wanting more than what you paid for is peak entitlement and the business is well within their rights to say no, regardless of the consequences.
Regarding the case of Nataline Sarkisyan, here's what Wikipedia had to say (yes yes not a primary source, bite me):
So they couldn't even scrounge up that much to save the girl's life.
Exception, not the norm. The policy is what it is, and the denial is rightful.
The subsequent lawsuit was also thrown out by the judge.
You can argue the morality of the matter all you want. Hell, I would even agree with you that such a small pittance of money (from the eyes of the insurance company) is a very tiny price to pay to save an innocent young life. But from a purely legal standpoint, there was no wrongdoing. Don't like it? Petition your representatives for change, which is the foundation of a democracy.
As a parting note:
My point stands. Saying he was responsible for deaths of the insured is as ridiculous as saying the president of Venezuela was responsible for the death of Laken Riley.
ubernutie@reddit
Do you think that the justice system is impartial and can be trusted to enact justice when people are brought in "the right way"?
Do you think the justice system can be bought if you are rich enough?
chasemuss@reddit
I don't think it's perfect because any system made by man is imperfect.
But if I have to choose between people who kill others because they don't like them or think they've been wronged by them versus a system where you can provide a defense and have a chance at not being summarily executed, we should go with the one that doesn't end with people committing heinous acts on their opposition.
I can't believe I'm having to spend so much time defending someone like Brian Thompson. I don't like the guy, but I also think murder is wrong. While it can lead to catharsis, that isn't justice. It's vengeance and can lead to more people being hurt.
Luigi isn't a good man. He is a murderer. I know that's unpopular on Reddit, but it's true. If more men were like Luigi, we'd all be in fear and society would descend into chaos.
ubernutie@reddit
I think on paper you are absolutely right ethically, but I also think that the means for ethical action have been either neutered or removed entirely.
Is it ethical to refrain from engaging in unethical activities when that absence of action continues to enable systemic exploitation of the entire diaspora of life?
I agree that it is morally wrong but I also am beginning to see that the due processes do not work and that people can decide to violate the sovereignty of others ostensibly legally or illegally and without any repercussion.
Look at Israel x Gaza, look at Russia x Ukraine, look at what capitalism is doing to our environment and global culture. Look at what is going on in the US.
I can't say in good conscience that political assassinations are ethically sound. I'm afraid I'm beginning to think they might be required.
chasemuss@reddit
If we resort to be just as immoral as our enemies, how are we any better than them? I'm not sure this is the best example, but even the Allied Powers gave the Nazis the ability to defend themselves at the Nuremberg Trials.
ubernutie@reddit
Context intent and purpose are the differences.
Between oppressing innocent people or oppressing people whose extravagant lifestyle and reach of power are influencing world affairs in a way that precipitates collapse and exacerbates conflict.
There's probably another way, please feel free to share if you have one, but simply following the rules will continue this downward loop we are collectively in.
It is currently 1984 and a brave new world at the same time, in essence.
Even if you disagree with all I've said, I still want to ask you an unrelated but related question:
Would you allow something you could destroy easily to destroy the entire galaxy as we know it? Why or why not?
chasemuss@reddit
You make fair points, and I'm not going to act like I have a great solution. My primary stance through this whole thread has been that extra-judicial killings should not be tolerated when a different path is present. The alternative path may be difficult, prone to error, and not give us our desired outcomes, but it stops us from having a society where the smallest slight against someone can result in a life being lost.
To answer your question as-is, I would, because it is a thing, not a person.
If you are asking whether or not I should take out someone who can easily destroy the entire galaxy, I can only respond that I am not omniscient. The ability to do something and the desire are different. A man who can kill is not a man who has killed.
ubernutie@reddit
"My primary stance through this whole thread has been that extra-judicial killings should not be tolerated when a different path is present. The alternative path may be difficult, prone to error, and not give us our desired outcomes, but it stops us from having a society where the smallest slight against someone can result in a life being lost."
I think that's a very fair thing to say. I agree that they shouldn't be tolerated.
I'm kind of assuming that the justice system is the alternative path you're hinting at here; in which case I'd like to ask if you think that it can be relied on to make the decisions it is mandated to make. I would offer the current state of US leadership and governmental dismantling as supporting evidence for my position.
"If you are asking whether or not I should take out someone who can easily destroy the entire galaxy, I can only respond that I am not omniscient. The ability to do something and the desire are different. A man who can kill is not a man who has killed."
In this scenario I tried to make it straightforward as a starter to establish a sort of extreme and baseline, perhaps allowing another extreme to then be identified and then a gradient is established.
I'll then rephrase it to: Would you kill press a button to kill a sadistic and violent stranger that you know beyond any doubt will destroy the galaxy tomorrow UNLESS you take action immediately?
chasemuss@reddit
That's all fair. And as for "current state of US leadership", I'm talking about more than just the current admin. I'm including both parties, not saying these statements for one admin or the next. If it were Biden, I'd be saying the same thing: murder is always bad.
And I've already stated my answer for pre-crime punishment: a man who can isn't a man who has. I know that sounds bad in this hypothetical situation, but if we start charging people with crimes due to an underlying factor and not based on actions taken, then we take away their free will to not make those actions. We must let someone show us who they are and not just tell us with words or genetics or another factor.
ubernutie@reddit
"I'm including both parties, not saying these statements for one admin or the next."
Me too. I also put the current admin as a symptom, not an oddity or a "mistake" that will go away. The truth is that game theory is real and we're playing it at a world scale without a rulebook or any kind of arbitration. So the large squeeze the small, and they've become open about it.
"And I've already stated my answer for pre-crime punishment: a man who can isn't a man who has. I know that sounds bad in this hypothetical situation, but if we start charging people with crimes due to an underlying factor and not based on actions taken, then we take away their free will to not make those actions. We must let someone show us who they are and not just tell us with words or genetics or another factor."
Yeah I fully agree, charging people with crimes isn't really logical. I think we need to re-organize into a cooperative global system where crimes wouldn't be useful as a way to participate in society.
Pre-crimes sentencing would be a violation of sovereignty on so many levels, I'm obviously aligned on that.
However, I don't think people should be able to mass murder or other types of deeply degrading acts, even if it means that they don't get to fully exert their free will in a way that fully satisfies them. The suffering necessary for their satisfaction is unethical.
"If it isn't apparent, I very much fall into the Means do not justify the ends camp and that the way something is done is just as important as the ends themselves."
I am fully aligned, but can you say with certainty that this axiom must be followed no matter the cost?
This is where my earlier question about the evil galaxy destroying random person re-surfaces as relevant, in my opinion. It is indeed just a weird variant of the trolley problem, with annihiliation of all with inaction and murder with action in order to remove ambiguity from this particular point of inquiry.
Annual-Invite1@reddit
Great last point and reasoning, basically the plot of Minority Report
Magistricide@reddit
Being pendanic here, but Health care CEOs go through great effort to not pay out their part of the contract as often as possible.
It’s not simply a lack of doing something, it’s trying their hardest to not fulfill their agreement, and to hide and mislead what their exact obligations are.
Ethanlynam@reddit
Justice doesn’t exist once your net worth passes a certain threshold. They own 90% of the wealth and make up 1% of the population. I understand exactly what you’re saying but I think we as a society are entering a techno-feudalism era where billionaires have to be eliminated.
chasemuss@reddit
A human life's value isn't determined by its networth. The poor are not more valuable or less valuable than the rich. If we want a sane society, we must not descend into violence for the sake of vengeance. I'm not arguing that the greed is sustainable, but we must not lose our humanity in the pursuit of good.
zhico@reddit
The rich and powerful has a right to be violent and incite violence, without consequences.
Ethanlynam@reddit
I agree with you. When billionaires start to augment themselves into twisted eldrich horrors, we’ll just be killing monsters. ✌🏻
chasemuss@reddit
Sure, and while a fun thought experiment as to what constitutes a human or being with rights, that's a discussion for a different time and place. For here and now, they are human, and we shouldn't treat them differently than someone else when it comes to their rights.
hakenkrojc123@reddit
Yep, most of you guys are murdering african children by not sending all your disposable income to help feed them. Not me, though.
TomatoTheToolMan@reddit
Disposable income? In THIS economy???
NotLunaris@reddit
Disposable income more like dispose of those starving kids in Africa while I come in ur mom lmao gotem
hakenkrojc123@reddit
Exactly! That's how I retain my moral superiority.
drtij_dzienz@reddit
Murder one person and it is a tragedy. Kill thousands and it is just a statistic. - command and conquer 2 red alert
Previous_Air_9030@reddit
Love that game.
MadClothes@reddit
Based Stalin
Marik-X-Bakura@reddit
I don’t think even killers deserve to be killed, personally. Though I’m not going to be that sad about it either.
IAMJIMMYRAWR@reddit
There is this revolutionary new concept called, BOTH ARE BAD. Wow, what a thought.
fiftyfourseventeen@reddit
Have your insurance premiums gone down since he was assassinated? Have you gotten less claims denied? If not, I'm thinking that it wasn't actually the CEO that was the problem and instead you've just killed a random guy
Smoke_Santa@reddit
really bad argument, file a court case if you think the CEO is actually murdering thousands of people through neglect. CEO aren't responsible for policies either, they are a stage head for stake holders and investors.
SipoteQuixote@reddit
Im not saying murder is okay, im saying if you took a poll and asked people who should go free, I feel it would lean towards Luigi because of how universal that hate reaches. No one is really gonna do mental gymnastics to try and defend a Healthcare CEO vs someone they support politically.
NAPA352@reddit
Even if you didn't like Kirk it's not like he is making decisions that lead to thousands of deaths a year for profit.
He was just a goofy guy that went around stirring up shit. Plus he's got two babies at home.
There's quite a difference.
Codename-WIND@reddit
Minimizing the effect of the hate Kirk spewed on this country is an interesting way to spin it.
P529@reddit
Provide sources
Codename-WIND@reddit
Provide sources is a very roundabout way of saying "I think that calling muslims animals is not incendiary," and I don't really think I need to provide sources on why that's a bad thing unless you're the type of person to think that it's not harmful.
Then I don't think any amount of source would help this dialogue and I'll settle for the downvotes instead.
P529@reddit
LMAO. I asked you for sources on your claim, I dont know why you suddenly brought up muslims as that wasnt stated anywhere
dwlarkin@reddit
He was not "just a goofy guy". He was an unrepentant racist and sexist who spread hate with every word and sowed division across the country he claimed to love. Show me one rational belief he had and I can show you 10 far-right Nazi-style beliefs of his to match.
Have you ever heard of the spoon game? Really racist & fucked up, but white teenagers drive through the hood and throw a spoon at a POC they see while yelling the N word. If they miss, they have to go pick up the spoon. Now, if someone beats the shit out of them when they do that, wouldn't you think they brought it on themselves?
Medical-Ad1686@reddit
I don't think they would be charged for beating them after an attempted assault
SipoteQuixote@reddit
Right, you might feel he spewed hate and stuff you didnt agree with but the other went out of his way to make sure people suffered for a couple extra bucks in their accounts.
Provia100F@reddit
If the Luigi murder was captured in as graphic detail as the Kirk assassination, the backlash would have been greater. It's too easy to dehumanize the CEO because nobody saw what happened in the same way.
LLMprophet@reddit
If the CEO's actions were captured in as graphic detail as the Kirk assassination, the backlash against healthcare insurance would have been far greater.
It's too easy to dehumanize Lu because nobody saw what happened in the same way.
Jiveturtle@reddit
Also perhaps the CEO was more prone to dehumanizing others than Mr. Kirk? I didn’t agree with Mr. Kirk’s views politically… but I’m a lot more sympathetic toward Mario’s bro and if I could only save one of them at trial I don’t even have to think about which one at that trolley is going.
Fact is that I think much of the snarky commentary surrounding Mr. Kirk is much more properly viewed as a venting of the left’s frustrations about gun violence and the perception that stronger gun control would have an impact. Obviously the right disagrees about the impact of gun control - but the irony of a staunch 2A supporter killed in a reprehensible act of gun violence is readily apparent.
As someone who grew up with guns, the weapon used here was a bolt action hunting rifle. Those aren’t going anywhere in the US no matter your views on gun control and there are so many out there it’d take decades to get them all out of circulation.
chasemuss@reddit
And that theoretical poll is why democracy isnt the right answer every time. People arent rational in large groups. Brian Thompson didn't have a trial to say he deserved being executed. He didn't have a chance to defend his actions. Luigi just summarily killed him on the basis that he didn't like him for one reason or another.
returnofblank@reddit
Yeah we can't allow it, but it would be a shame to punish young bright men for making the world a better place...
ReaWroud@reddit
I disagree. Sometimes enough is enough and heads have to roll before the people are heard. I don't give a shit about Kirk, he was a piss ant and not important enough to kill. But the healthcare CEO? He was personally responsible for a horrific number of avoidable deaths. With profit as the only motive. I thought his death sent a powerful message. I hope Mangione goes free.
Flintiak@reddit
This is the bottom line that should be common sense, but people are so quick to throw away their morals if it happens to someone they don't like. It's so fucking embarrassing to witness all over social media, reddit included.
NinpoSteev@reddit
Certainly, murder has no place in a democracy, but democracy is largely a charade in the US. Its shortcomings will be near impossible to overcome without some form of direct action. Most people literally have no good candidates to vote for, for president, parliament, senate or state elections because they're handpicked with the same elitist geriatric convention of inside traders.
Martyring Charlie obviously has a larger deficit than benefit, but offing CEOs who work tirelessly to blow up wealth disparity and commit as many social murders as possible? Shit man, I know they'll just just be replaced by marginally less egregious nameless suits and that it changes very little at the end of the day.
Codename-WIND@reddit
Typical reddit moderate take LMAO
Change including the founding of this country has never been achieved through solely peaceful demonstration, unless you personally are cool with the way this country is then by all means.
chasemuss@reddit
I address this in a comment further down in this thread. I'm too lazy to link my stance on the American Revolution.
Codename-WIND@reddit
And apparently too lazy to answer your stance on moderacy so I mean, do you big dawg.
chasemuss@reddit
Fine. here
Codename-WIND@reddit
Wishy-washy moderacy, hoping a system, that these acts were enacted to fight against, is the exact reason they happened.
chasemuss@reddit
Sorry for not having a radical viewpoint. 🤷
Codename-WIND@reddit
Laughably the most you'll contribute to the political state of the country is downvoting opinions you disagree with. 💀💀💀
rakfe@reddit
What are the legal consequences for being a pedophile president, or a blatant hatemonger, or being CEO that prioritizes profit over lives?
chasemuss@reddit
If the president is a pedophile, congress should impeach and convict, or he should be tried once he leaves office.
AFAIK in the US, Hate speech isn't a crime unless it is a direct call to action akin to "we need to kill members of this group"
As for the CEO, as morally wrong as denying coverage is, he did not directly kill them. If a case is made and brought against the CEO and his company that can prove he is in the wrong, then it should be and they should be tried.
I'm not against the death penalty or against Justice. I'm against murder and chaos.
UnplacatablePlate@reddit
Never going to happen. Same for the CEO; at worst he'd get a slap on the wrist and yes he is responsible for killing people; how is what he did any different than if someone sold Saline as Medicine and people died from mistakenly being given the Saline as opposed to the medicine? He willfully stopped people getting the care they not only needed but were entitled too.
chasemuss@reddit
The current president has already been tried for crimes. It can happen again.
The difference between a CEO and a snake oil salesman is that a CEO isn't the approver or denier of Healthcare. Sure, he may set culture and policy and steer the company, but If you want to punish the approver or denier, you're looking for someone whose face isn't on the website. Brian Thompson probably never read a customer's name.
The fact of the matter is that health insurance is a contract. If you feel your health insurance company isn't abiding by their end of the contract, sue them. Murdering their CEO won't stop the behemoth.
UnplacatablePlate@reddit
Sure but for pedophilia? Come on, I don't think congress wants to set the precedent of actually prosecuting people for pedophilia unless their hand is truly forced.
He pushed his employees to reject as many claims as they could; even used AI to do it so no-one could actually read the customer's name. He's even more responsible than his employees because most of the employees at least had families to feed. The fact that you have your subordinates do something instead of doing something yourself doesn't take anyway of your culpability for your crimes.
Sure, why not have the guy who can't afford his basic life saving care and is dying sue the Multi-Billion dollar corporation; I'm sure they'll both be on equal footing. And even if they Sue him successfully it will only be a civil thing; he deserved a criminal trial and life imprison or death.
chasemuss@reddit
The make your own insurance company that abides by your ethics and doesn't do stuff like this. Keep it private so you don't have to listen to shareholders. I'm just arguing that extra-judicial killings shouldn't be a thing. If they are, we're no better than beasts.
UnplacatablePlate@reddit
A killing is a killing; the state approving it doesn't grant it some magic power that makes it all ok. If someone deserves to die they deserve to die if the state or some random guy does it. Yeah sure the law is supposed to make sure someone is actually guilty and deserves the punishment but when that no longer is the case vigilantism becomes the only to achieve Justice.
And a species that lets someone like Brian Thompson get away with it because some fanatic devotion to a broken system of law are worse than beasts; at least beasts have no problem killing those who wrong them or those they care about.
1chuteurun@reddit
I really do agree with this, but Im supremely aware that if coporations get to continue to treat the working class and lower as they have been, without any meaningful repercussions, we will only see more of this in the future. The marginilized, exploited, and abused people, historically, lash out at their opressors, violently so. This is a phenomena that has not changed in all the millenia humans have existed.
chasemuss@reddit
Absolutely. We need the government to return to focusing on the people and not the corporations.
ikonfedera@reddit
Unfortunately there's no other way for justice to reach them, so we must allow it.
chasemuss@reddit
Just to be clear, you're for people killing others without a trial? Anyone should be judge, jury, and executioner for someone else?
ikonfedera@reddit
No, I am not. We should have a sane justice system so that those people could stand a fair trial and if found guilty, be prosecuted.
But we don't have that.
DonPepe181@reddit
Do you not understand the question or are you being purposely obtuse?
ikonfedera@reddit
The second one. But i have not said anything that's not true.
HotSmokySummerSky@reddit
Why are you booing him? He's right.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Count_Buttsmells@reddit
“I didn’t break the law! I AM THE LAW!” - Rocky Balboa from the movie Rambo III
DemSkilzDudes@reddit
Only for people I don't like
Lolmemsa@reddit
Erm actually murdering the guy who's responsible for bankrupting and/or killing thousands of Americans a year is bad
Sarojh-M@reddit
Yeah thats why Luigi did something about it. Unless you only care about the killings you see on TV lol
Fronesis@reddit
I agree, we shouldn't allow somebody to just sit behind a desk and murder thousands for cash in broad daylight.
chasemuss@reddit
See my comment here
Pleasant_Ad8054@reddit
When the state (society itself) does not do its job to provide justice, and let people off the hook with killings out of negligence and greed, vigilantes will step up. It is a bad thing, those CEOs designing systems to kill people for the most amount of profit. They should be punished within the confines of society (aka the law). Those CEOs made it impossible to be punished within the law, which is unfair, so they risk punishment which isn't fair.
People can be against it, people should be against it and for civilised society, but as long as the injustice isn't fixed this will happen again.
OddioClay@reddit
Wasnt that ceo murdered at night
homingmissile@reddit
There are a lot of things I didn't think we'd be seeing done in broad daylight but here we are.
Inanis94@reddit
They like murder, as long as they dislike the person who was murdered. Then they'll call your principles into question. While they promote killing people because they don't like them. Sick fucks.
DinkleDonkerAAA@reddit
Remember when Benny the Sharpie made a video talking about how evil the left was for killing a poor innocent CEO and his entire comment section turned on him
Res_Novae17@reddit
Amazing how you can not like someone and still not literally murder them.
WTF is wrong with Zoomers? You have become the worst generation in literally hundreds of years.
WebSufficient8660@reddit
Tell that to the baby boomers (actual worst generation in hundreds of years)
Res_Novae17@reddit
Would you rather have someone run up your credit card debt or shoot you in the neck?
SipoteQuixote@reddit
Pretty sure they both got shot
SipoteQuixote@reddit
What's a zoomer?
SkizerzTheAlmighty@reddit
Who cares about "likability". No one should be even slightly ok with assassination. I didn't particularly like kirk but all he did was voice opinions ffs. That's the core of this entire country, having public discourse peacefully
wallbouncebybaird@reddit
Luigi is cool but the other cunt can fry. They are not the same.
ClockworkSalmon@reddit
Fuck no, Luigi is alright but a psycho like this that kills for no discernible reason should stay locked up.
Luigi had a reason, and it was justified. He might have saved countless lives with what he did.
Not this guy, all he did was sow even more chaos in america.
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
Hows the weather in Commiefornia? Law is dont murder. Yes let murderers go free. Lets also give free housing to all Taliban members in usa
RexRj98@reddit
what the fuck is wrong with you
henrikhakan@reddit
I'm rooting for Luigi, he's the hotter one.
CertifiedSheep@reddit
Someone the other day used the term “Crooks-Mangione Scale” to measure the attractiveness of shooters and its stuck in my head
Supersquare04@reddit
It’s scary that you think a politically motivated assassin should go free.
Key_Dish_good@reddit
Rip bozo🚬
Supersquare04@reddit
I'm sorry I don't think resorting to murder is the best way to resolve our countries issues.
F1uffydestro@reddit
Ahh yes let's release murderers back on the streets
cap21345@reddit
I am not American i dont care i just need more chaos and entertainment from the ensuing shitshow
ArtfulBroom@reddit
That’s a horrible thing to say when real lives are affected, I hate accelerationists or whatever they’re called
ZeSauceMan@reddit
Nihilist accelerationists, borderline suicidal people who would like to drag the world into chaos just to confirm their worldview
ArtfulBroom@reddit
How is it a popular opinion to admit that you only pay attention to literal “bread and circuses”
ZeSauceMan@reddit
I was agreeing with you, I hate those people too.
justamiqote@reddit
You're on /r/greentext
What are you expecting from the people here?
ArtfulBroom@reddit
All I know is that Mossad is giggling in their high chairs
Mlfnt1@reddit
Innocent until proven guilty lil bro
HawasYT@reddit
Found a CEO. Just don't build your business model on ripping people off and leaving them to die and you should be safe
FattyCaddy69@reddit
Lefts and rights are ridiculous. If someone murders the opposite side, they think they should be let free because they agree with that person.
KasHerrio@reddit
In fact I supported that ceo denying grandma's their cancer treatments!
romulusnr@reddit
They gonna put his fargin boils in a sling
TheBigKingy@reddit
Did you just assume their gender?
boilingfrogsinpants@reddit
It's Utah, they'll make him wear funny underwear and learn secret handshakes.
lildobe@reddit
They won't do that. Orchiectomy is considered a gender-affirming surgery.
AcrolloPeed@reddit
They already did that, we just don’t know if that contributed to the situation
inspectoroverthemine@reddit
Total_Network6312@reddit
groomers doing what they do best; producing adults with horrible ptsd and other mental illnesses
Redstone_Potato@reddit
No they won't, that would make him trans 😱
ShineeLapras@reddit
Can't rip his balls cuz that would be Gender Reassignment.
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
mmf9194@reddit
Might go nullification the other way. Some of those Fuentes people are happy
RunawayDev@reddit
And make him sit through weeks of scolding before reading the verdict
Captain_Pumpkinhead@reddit
I'm pretty confident Mangione is gonna walk free. Everyone hates health insurance.
For Kirk's alleged killer, I don't know. It probably depends on what county he's tried in. If he's tried in Salt Lake County, he's got a chance. It's much more liberal than the rest of the state. Granted, it's still a red area.
CharacterNameAnxiety@reddit
Nullification in a case where a non-violent political speaker was murdered in cold blood?
I'm not trolling, I'm asking sincerely: do you genuinely believe that 12 random american are so bloodthirsty and radicalized against the right that they would ever do this? This is genuinely delusional.
ComradePotato@reddit
Yes, this is Reddit
Diezelbub@reddit
Just imagine it though; 12 reddit extremists manage to lie their way onto the jury, ignore all the judges instructions, and high five each other as Mangione walks free
He is then immediately Mangione'd in the back by one of the family members of his victim
I_am_Reptoid_King@reddit
Ain 't a jury in Utah that will do this. On the federal level maybe.
The United CEO case is going to be really hard not to because EVERYONE has been harmed by health insurance.
Great_Bar1759@reddit
There’s very little evidence against Mario’s brother
Like seriously we have yet to be shown any damning evidence
Mesarthim1349@reddit
I believe judge has the right to overrule jury in light of overwhelming evidence.
Not sure though
cap21345@reddit
Nope thats only for Guilty. A judge can overule a guilty jury verdict to non guilty but can't change non guilty to guilty. Presumption of innocence and all that its why OJ got away
Mesarthim1349@reddit
That's true, but in OJ's case that was also because of prosecution absolutely fumbling multiple steps for what was supposed to be a winnable case.
If prosecution is on their A-game, juries are usually diverse enough in background that they can play along. Selecting a unified jury with the exact same personal motives and agenda would be a massive fail on the system.
Fail_King00@reddit
A lawsuit from the family against whom? The non guilty defendant or the prosecution?
jackboy900@reddit
The defendant. Generally a prosecution where everyone kinda knows they did it but the bar for reasonable doubt hasn't been met results in a fairly easy win for wrongful death in civil court as the evidentiary standard is a lot lower.
Doomie_bloomers@reddit
From what I heard the investigators fucked up a lot of the steps to get evidence against Luigi. Like not getting permits/warrants and poorly handling evidence. As well as generally rushing the process afaik.
So there's a decent chance that'll happen again
skilliard7@reddit
You can charge the jury with contempt of court or perjury if it can be proven they exercised jury nullification intentionally.
Jury Nullification only works if the jurors pretend to genuinely believe the defendant is not guilty.
If they lie during jury selection about being impartial, and it can be proven that they lied(such as via social media posts), they can be charged.
PacmanNZ100@reddit
They will struggle to find impartial jurors with how hard they are trying to make this the american reichstag fire.
shiny_xnaut@reddit
I feel like the internet has been giving me mixed signals over whether jury nullification is legal or not
ANGLVD3TH@reddit
So, technically it is. The problem is they will usually ask some circuitous questions at jury selection. If you answer them in a way implying you know of and/or would participate in nullification, you will be dismissed, like, "would ever, for any reason, vote guilty if you thought they were innocent, or vice versa?" Therefore, if you do overtly participate in jury nullification, they can say you lied during selection.
shiny_xnaut@reddit
That just sounds like being illegal with extra steps
ANGLVD3TH@reddit
I mean, it is feasible they slip up and don't ask the question. It's also not exactly a steel trap for nullifiers either, one can claim they truthfully felt that way at the time they answered, but the case made them realize they were mistaken, for example. The system does its best to make it legally precarious, but the very foundation of the legal system requires nullification to be possible. You would have to completely change it from the ground up to remove the option.
angelis0236@reddit
Otherwise there is literally no point in having a jury. One man overruling a guilty verdict is a lot less of a problem imo than overruling a not guilty verdict.
pizoisoned@reddit
NAL, but I think there typically has to be some evidence of dereliction or corruption for a judge to set aside a jury verdict. I’m sure it varies state to state, but having the judge be able to just say “nah” to a jury when they don’t like the jury verdict isn’t exactly in the spirit of the whole trial by jury system the Constitution lays out.
schlamster@reddit
1L student here so take what I say with a fat grain of salt. In fact I’m probably wrong so just stop reading now.
Glancing at your reply I agree. It’s a fifth amendment protection issue.
Once a jury acquits, that’s it. Any further action on the part of the court towards a guilty verdict would be double jeopardy since the accused was already acquitted.
Not the case with a guilty->not guilty because the judge isn’t violating any fifth amendment protections with respect to putting a defendant in double jeopardy.
pizoisoned@reddit
I mean 1L > my 0L.
I think the only unclear area to me is when a judge would invoke JNOV to overturn a guilty verdict. There doesn't seem to be a set trigger as much as its in the discretion of the judge that the jury acted inappropriately in some matter of law.
schlamster@reddit
Law school is like the bell curve meme. Shortly after starting you realize you know very little. I’m in my second semester so I know just enough to be wrong about basically everything.
So for a JNOV to be triggered it looks like it would happen almost exclusively as a motion benefitting the defendant, largely for procedural issues with the verdict, say for instance the prosecution did not at all prove all of the required elements of a crime, a judge can JNOV a jury’s guilty verdict. It can happen not just for criminal but also civil cases.
spezeditedcomments@reddit
No. Jury holds the ultimate power, intentionally
Thats why the courts fucking hate you if you so much as mention nullification
Muvseevum@reddit
Seems like if one actually intends to nullify a case (or whatever the proper legal term is), it’s a bad idea to tip your hand during voir dire.
spezeditedcomments@reddit
Correct. God forbid the citizenry decide for itself
Yourfavoriteindian@reddit
You say that, but the DC jury let the sandwich thrower get off, despite it being caught on video in 4K.
HypnotizedCow@reddit
I think that's only for sentencing decisions, not the guilty/not guilty verdict itself
Res_Novae17@reddit
Not gonna happen, sicko. All 12 would have to vote not guilty. One holdout could cause a mistrial, and he'd be held in prison pending a retrial. Neither of these terrorists is ever going to see the light of day again, outside of the prison courtyard.
Cynicism_FTW@reddit
Go back to your safe space in r/cuckservative.
Riipp3r@reddit
You support murdering your political opponents? That's quite fascist of you.
Cynicism_FTW@reddit
Where the fuck did i say that?
Riipp3r@reddit
The part where you attacked and ridiculed a guy who's against the murder and arguing it's sick to support the killer?
Cynicism_FTW@reddit
He called him a terrorist. Im sorry for calling out bias when i see it.
Riipp3r@reddit
Is it bias to support murdering people because you don't like their opinions?
Riipp3r@reddit
Is it bias to use a definition accurately?
Riipp3r@reddit
??????
By definition he is.
ANightSentinel@reddit
Emphasis on the cuck
Riipp3r@reddit
Do you support it?
Drafo7@reddit
Juries almost never know about jury nullification because they ask specific questions to make sure you don't before selecting you to be on the jury. Lying on those questions is purjury so it's highly unlikely jury nullification will ever get used.
1ncorrect@reddit
I think the people who show up with the plan of jury nullification are probably not the ones who care about perjury. If you could make it seem like you came upon it naturally how could they prove you perjured yourself?
All I know is if I got called for Luigi’s trial I would be lying through my teeth and then immediately fighting for his release.
Drafo7@reddit
Perjury is a felony. Do you realize how difficult it is to get a job with a felony on your record? You would essentially be ruining your own life by perjuring yourself just to see someone else go free. I'm not sure what you mean by "came upon it naturally." You mean you would claim that you learned about it after you were placed on the jury but before the deliberation? I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure they prevent you from researching stuff like that. I know you're not allowed to access the news when you're on a jury because that can impact your perspective on the case.
Personally I don't even think Luigi is the actual shooter. Everything lined up too quickly and too conveniently for me to believe all the evidence was genuine. I DEFINITELY don't think he should face the death penalty for killing one person, especially when that one person caused the deaths of thousands of innocent people and faced 0 legal repercussions at all. Even if he was guilty, I think the murder should be treated as a crime of passion, aka voluntary manslaughter. Whoever shot the CEO probably just had a loved one suffer or die because of the CEO's actions. That's the kind of thing that could push anyone over the edge.
-Bushdid911@reddit
probably could fake "just learning of it" by chatting with an AI chatbot like GPT and asking it questions like what do i need to know to be jury in a trial? what are the jury rules in a trial? how does jury affect the verdict of a trail? etc until you get an explanation of nullification
Azylim@reddit
man OJ 2.0 would be wild. imagien he wrote a book too: "if I shot him". guys life would still be fucked though
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
arbiter12@reddit
If there are no witnesses and no proofs and you don't say anything self-incriminating (or talk before your lawyer gets here), then yeh, it's that easy. They always get you to talk though. It's their job.
It starts innocently enough with "so what's your name? What do you do for a living" and most humans are not programmed to shut up. Or you can just throw random accusations and try to get indignant response out of it. Best part is, if you interrogate someone and they don't say anything and you don't say anything, they generally start talking out of sheer boredom. Or if they need water. Or if they need to use the toilets, etcetc.
24 hours of uninterrupted silence with no distractions, in a room, then in bed, is just not possible for most people.
chillanous@reddit
Right, in this guy’s case he’s fucked because there’s a whole chunk of evidence that he did it (prints, cameras, family testimony, etc)
But for lower profile crime yeah just stfu. My friend is a lawyer for my states DA office and we had this conversation just yesterday actually. She was like “just shut the fuck up. Just shut up and 90% of the time you’re going to be alright.” But people aren’t wired to DO that, so we usually don’t.
cantyouwait@reddit
This shooter pretty much would have gotten away with the crime if he hadn't blabbed about it to his roommate/boyfriend and family. The recovered gun and possible fingerprints would have gotten him charged but he had a decent chance to avoid conviction.
2Rome4Carthage@reddit
If your whole freedom hinges on you shutting the F up, and you talk, you have it coming. How stupid can you be?
NoahNinja_@reddit
The dumb fuck allegedly confessed on discord already
Augustus_Chevismo@reddit
You’re reminding me of that detective who interrogated the freak who chopped up his neighbour at college.
Kept leaning back really far and saying shit like “why’d you do it Steven? I mean she’s a pretty girl.“
Kirito619@reddit
Legend
CamelSmuggler@reddit
Oh I remember seeing a sped up video of that interrogation, while the officer was moving around, sometimes standing up, sometimes sitting down etc. the suspect was incredibly still.
I mean all he does is rotate his head to follow the officer, kinda like asking questions to a creepy doll.
MancAccent@reddit
That interrogator was so fucking annoying lmao
holymacaronibatman@reddit
I was not prepared for how far back that man was leaning
Genghis_Tr0n187@reddit
There's a lot of trust in that chair.
md24@reddit
He lets a lot of female suspects walk, after they lean back.
UFCLulu@reddit
I always thought this was edited cus I never watched the slowed down video all the way
rest_me123@reddit
It's photoshopped
holymacaronibatman@reddit
Damn lol
MrSansMan23@reddit
Dude sat too long needed to put some blood into his head
Provia100F@reddit
Hahahahaha holy shit you weren't kidding, I wasn't expecting that far back
logaboga@reddit
This is fake
Anen-o-me@reddit
Yeah I was like, pretty sure I watched that entire interrogation, painful as it was. He didn't not respond, he just refused to say anything beyond basic responses, and was so afraid to give things away through non verbal communication that he froze like a statue, which only made things way more weird and cast way more suspicion on him.
BigHeadDeadass@reddit
STEPHEN!!!
TrueTrueBlackPilld@reddit
The best line: "Staaaayven. Your hair was there Steven. Your hair was there."
Anen-o-me@reddit
You know he was lying about that too. Common tactic to make people think they're already caught. This guy was in school as a lawyer and knew evidence, he no doubt covered up. Who knows though.
Ultimately he admitted guilt iirc in a deal that kept certain details of what he did to the body out of public record.
Which means he had sex with the corpse 💀 he was famously into vore so it's not surprising.
Anen-o-me@reddit
He still would not have gotten away with it.
terragthegreat@reddit
You're acting like this is the 1800s. They can absolutely gather enough evidence to convict without the guy saying a single thing and they do it all the time. They can take the clothes he was wearing and analyze them for gunpowder residue, they can pull fibers from his gloves and clothes and match them to fibers found where the shooting came from. He admitted to his father that he was the shooter. Father can testify. If he so much as coughed on the rifle they can pull DNA from it. Forensics are insane these days. And thats not even dabbling into internet search histories and camera footage.
mrheosuper@reddit
You underestimate my powah
Legal_Direction8740@reddit
Jokes on you, I gots the tism, not talking out loud for 24 hours is my default state.
TaxmanComin@reddit
brings up Warhammer
Legal_Direction8740@reddit
dangit
woahbrad35@reddit
Or talking about your current hyperfixation non-stop
Psykopatate@reddit
I hope the current hyperfixation is not that little silly thing you just did
Legal_Direction8740@reddit
Shit he’s right, if the cop mentions any of my 1000 abandoned hobbies, I’m done for
RK9990@reddit
Nothing in between
ChicMungo@reddit
That's why you shut up and ask for a lawyer.
Even if you need to wait for a public defender, you are exaggerating how bad it is.
bhoe32@reddit
In plain English. One guy said I want a lawyer dawg and the judge later said he never invoked because he asked a for a lawyer dog
TrueTrueBlackPilld@reddit
It's really that simple. Those vids don't make it to YouTube though for obvious reasons.
SugestedName@reddit
Interrogations are made to extract conviction, not truth
discerningpervert@reddit
It's like being forcefully jacked off by an interrogator. You're eventually gonna cum, you're just not gonna like it.
SuperSocialMan@reddit
What a fucking analogy, goddamn.
farrellmcguire@reddit
Beautiful
RicoDC@reddit
This has got to be the most out of pocket analogy about interrogation I've ever seen. Bravo.
meermaalsgeprobeerd@reddit
"out of pocket analogy"
Bravo
Shafticus@reddit
How do I delete someone else's comment?
DuhTocqueville@reddit
What? We’re willing to torture our enemies for information but not jack them off? Where, where, where’s the morality in that Morty?
kekistanmatt@reddit
Woah woah woah don't lump us all together like that.
Shafticus@reddit
How do I delete someone else's comment?
solwaj@reddit
Yeah I guess man
StickyNebbs@reddit
dude what
Velgax@reddit
I spat out my coffee. Fuck you.
Knowledge_Haver_17@reddit
I just spat out my wife’s boyfriend’s cum! Reddit on
SuperSocialMan@reddit
Nah, I'm built different.
theyeshman@reddit
In the US, once you invoke your right to speak to an attorney the interrogation is over. The pigs can't keep asking you questions until your lawyer is present once you ask for one. Don't beat around the bush with something like "I might need a lawyer" or "I think I want a lawyer", clearly state you'd like to speak with an attorney, something like "I want to speak to a lawyer before we continue".
Askeee@reddit
To add to this, if I clearly and plainly invoke your right to an attorney, they can not question you, HOWEVER, if you start talking again, then can resume questioning.
So in short, shut the fuck up and stay shut the fuck up'd.
theyeshman@reddit
Absolutely, if you initiate they can continue questioning.
shiny_xnaut@reddit
Also don't say "I want a lawyer, dawg" or they'll be like "he asked for a lawyer dog, and those don't exist, so... 🤷♂️"
Anen-o-me@reddit
They didn't have to get him to talk to convict him, lol what are you on about.
retsoPtiH@reddit
as an outsider of the US system, it's funny to me that even if you're guilty you can just put your feet on the table and only say "man i really need a monster and a cheeseburger without the cheese slice", then shut the fuck up until your lawyer gets there
or literally just rant about weird shit like the straws being made of paper nowadays, then go back to silence for hours
where i'm from they would beat you before you get to the police department
Rhydsdh@reddit
Oh that happens plenty often in the US too.
homingmissile@reddit
Theoretically, we believe in "innocent until proven guilty" here but I know at least 50% of people unironically don't know there's a difference between a suspect and a perpetrator.
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
ChoiceFudge3662@reddit
Me when I ragebait the interrogators by copying everything they say in a really annoying voice.
tsoneyson@reddit
You've been watching too many movies. Resisting interrogation and no statement obtained is a completely normal outcome. It's not a black site lol
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
Its on like 100 cameras lol
SeaAlgea@reddit
I mean, he's already fucked up by telling his dad and then a family friend. I doubt he's going to be able to withstand pressure from trained interrogators. Even if he does, something will slip eventually when he talks to other people.
Malikonious@reddit
Surely if he is in fact guilty, this crack admin can get some actual evidence. And I’m sure we can trust them to not fabricate bullshit because they’re such morons they told the guy they’re aiming for the death penalty as a form of performative punishment, screwing themselves out of any trust building or bartering with him.
Puzzleheaded-Ad2905@reddit
There's plenty of actual evidence. DNA on the gun, ballistic evidence confirming the gun is the murder weapon, several admissions of guilt between a note and online communication, witnesses testifying against him with chat logs to back up the testimonies. They don't need a direct confession at this point.
Malikonious@reddit
My point is more along the lines that even if they have all that or could find it, I don’t find it far-fetched that this admin who lies about everything any chance they get and refuse to shut up when they can instead let their ego blurb critical or disadvantageous information would fail to utilize what they have and instead will need to fabricate in the end to make up for their incompetence. You could give them a royal flush and they’ll trade down to a pair of twos and insist that was their goal all along and that’s actually the best hand in certain cultures who are playing the game correctly that nobody else has ever heard of but people are definitely saying it, if you catch my drift.
Puzzleheaded-Ad2905@reddit
Except the admin you're referring to and the government workers who are actually responsible for the due process of the law in this case aren't the same. Everything you're saying is just over convoluted word salad that's not based on the reality of the situation at hand. If you want to be mad about our elected officials never doing anything but run their mouths that's one thing but don't misplace that image on attorneys, judges and jurys.
Malikonious@reddit
The FBI who were chasing this guy took credit for the hard work they put in to catch him, after catching two other wrong guys, and not actually catching him themselves but waiting for the guys father to turn him in. I can guarantee we’ll see about the same quality from the rest of the legal system. We don’t have a few bad apples problem, we have a spoiled barrel top to bottom.
real_roal@reddit
He literally said he did it in a discord server, he won't get out of it lol
antonyh212@reddit
Didnt discord say they were not handing over his account or something, just confirmed the username he used?
You could claim "someone hacked my account to frame me"
Puzzleheaded-Ad2905@reddit
Discord gave all logs and even if that was so they have the chat logs with his lover who is testifying against him.
antonyh212@reddit
No offence that is just stupid. why discuss a crime on a trackable app. Just looking to be caught.
Puzzleheaded-Ad2905@reddit
No that is dumb but imagine you kill a man for his views on trans people and your trans gf testifies against you while turning over texts.
antonyh212@reddit
I do not support or share Charlies views at all. Killing him was such a uneeded action
Strong_Dingo3104@reddit
But what about the weapon he left,and dna on it. The footage where he is kinda covored,but still we can tell it's him by haircut and the sneakers he wears on footage and on his pictures.Its to much evidence, so still he faces death penalty/life imprisonment.
Pleasant_Ad8054@reddit
Do we even know for certain that it is the murder weapon? That they found his DNA on it?
Having similar clothes and haircut to a pixelated image is circumstantial. So is being in the area, lots of people were there. The "confession" to the religious figure is not admissible as a confession, they can just claim he said whatever they wanted to hear, or straight up deny they said it.
Puzzleheaded-Ad2905@reddit
Ballistic evidence has confirmed it is the murder weapon.
JeffersonsDick@reddit
I have those same sneakers. They're Chuck Taylors and millions of people own them. Pretty basic haircut that tons of people have. The nose and lips look different.
zbeezle@reddit
I saw something saying they got a palm print from when he dropped himself off the roof.
Its not "oh he's got the same sneakers, he must have done it," it's "he has the same sneakers, and shirt, and hat, and pants, and we found his palm print on the roof where we saw the shooter drop from, and we found his DNA and fingerprints on the rifle and at the shooting point, and a video of someone who appears to be him entering the area with a strange gait but then leaving the area with a normal gait, and..."
Each piece of evidence points towards him possibily being the guy, and the more of those you've got, the higher the likelihood you have the same guy. Maybe he looks a little different in the picture but still frames from security cameras are always wonky (even "good" security cameras are ass, because securely storing camera video is expensive and syorage requirements increase heavily with higher res and less compressed videos). It's close enough to be "maybe" evidence, and enough "maybe" evidence leads to "probably," and then "almost certainly" and then "beyond reasonable doubt."
JeffersonsDick@reddit
Evidence can be falsified. Now that he's in custody it's easy to get his prints and DNA and put it on whatever they want. This is not the same person from the video.
zbeezle@reddit
You could use the same argument for any crime. By this logic, nobody can be proven guilty because all the evidence could have been faked. Best to just release everyone from prison because JeffersonsDick doesn't trust the cops.
JeffersonsDick@reddit
Explain how the shot entered Charlie's right side and exited his left when the supposed shooter was lined up facing him?
HugeCrab@reddit
Epstein had a pretty good surveillance record, didn't skimp on storage space this guy
dronhat806@reddit
Going this far with the whole thing then not wearing gloves blows my mind.
Flashlight_Inspector@reddit
Two layers of gloves. You need them to rub together and break apart the residue your hands leak to break up the finger prints.
SixtyTwenty_@reddit
What about the safari hat with flaps in the back that he was wearing?
nandru@reddit
If all those cops TV shows taught me anything about usa culture, is that all those are circunstantial
Bard_the_Bowman_III@reddit
Circumstantial evidence is still evidence.
Spyans@reddit
how do we know he’s circumcised
retsoPtiH@reddit
he can just say it's alternative facts, made up by democrats
eZpZ
positiv2@reddit
Running out of meds?
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
xRamenator@reddit
The clearest photos they have only establish he was nearby. They have to prove beyond reasonable doubt he pulled the trigger. The weapon is definitely the biggest lead they have, but if they can't prove he was the last person to fire it(blurred, inconclusive prints), then only a confession would get the case past "reasonable doubt"
The defense doesn't have to identify an alternative suspect, just that the defendant didn't do it.
romulusnr@reddit
I read that some of their evidence may have been obtained improperly and will thus be inadmissible, but haven't heard anything specific or since
thatweirdguyted@reddit
Most cops are like most people, inherently lazy. Their job gets done easily for them by people who are caught in the act, blab about it, literally post evidence of crime on their social media, etc.
If they don't have any obvious evidence against you, and you shut up, their only choice is to let you go, and then get off their ass and go actually look for evidence. And the odds of that second thing are directly proportional to how much their boss cares about that particular crime.
If you're ever arrested, just shut up. Get a lawyer, and then shut up again. Save it all for the judge. You're not going to "talk it out" with the cops, that's not why they're there, even if that's what they say. They just want a confession, and they'll keep talking to you until they get one. So just cram it for 24 hours. It's hard but it's vital.
Amatheos@reddit
Man it's really crazy the Americans saying they live in a dictatorship, and then you read something like this. "The police won't have any other option as to let you go" dictatorship my ass
Wanna know how it is where I'm from? They going to do a "kidney therapy" to you - that is, maul you in the lower back with a baton until your kidneys fail
Potential_Region8008@reddit
👍
thatweirdguyted@reddit
You're not wrong at all for saying this, but you have to remember to apply the richness/whiteness factor to it as well.
For comparison, there was a guy arrested once for the terrible crime of taking photographs of a school while being brown. It's worth noting that he was a student and studying photography. They still found it suspicious enough that he was handed to the feds for interrogation, and those guys legitimately forgot about him in a cell with no water, food, or a bathroom, for an entire weekend.
Amatheos@reddit
Yet for what they did they can and should face consequences. You guys are super lucky to have that Constitution. There are parts of the world where the Police legit runs rampant, unchecked
ItBelikeThatSomeTme_@reddit
The police just about are running rampant over here, there’s an extremely low chance a cop gets in trouble for being a POS
TylerKeroga@reddit
Haven’t you heard? America doesn’t have a constitution anymore
TheGoodSmellsOfLarry@reddit
American police don't face shit 95% of the time. Lightest of consequences.
thatweirdguyted@reddit
I'm not an American, I don't have a constitution. Although in my country, all politicians bend over backwards for the police. Issues like corruption, inhumane prison conditions etc are far less serious than the rest of the world, that we know of. There's a strong tradition of downplaying the truth and covering things up, so who really knows the full scope of it?
Deletesystemtf2@reddit
The main concerns that Americans have about dictatorship is not that we are currently in a dictatorship, but that we could soon be in one.
Provia100F@reddit
Most Americans are spoiled out the ass and have zero idea how good they have it in comparison.
sinkktothebeat420@reddit
There’s levels to this
tango_41@reddit
How does a fish get caught? It opens its fucking mouth. Lawyer. Up.
thatweirdguyted@reddit
I'll have to remember that, that's gold!
zbeezle@reddit
Been watching Castle, and while it's a great show, so many interviews with a suspect who's not the actual murderer have the cops be like "yeah we don't care what other illegal stuff you were doing as long as you can give us some info that points towards the murderer." And then they do cut the person loose.
Like, bro, that's not how that goes. They say that, and then hand over the transcript of your interrogation to whichever department handles whatever crimes you were doing.
"I couldn't have murdered him, because i was banging a hooker last night. But i did see the guy get into a car with a guy who looked like [description]"
"Oh, cool, thanks. Also, this is Detective Johnson from Vice. He'll be handling your case from this point."
BemusedBengal@reddit
If I ever get arrested, I'm evolving into the lawyer pokemon.
FireMaker125@reddit
More likely he gets a mistrial considering both the head of the FBI and the actual U.S. President have been publicly calling him guilty lmao
ExaminationOrdinary9@reddit
Who is that?
sealpox@reddit
Joe
Helgrind444@reddit
Who the hell is Steve Jobs?
sealpox@reddit
Ligma jobs
SmoothPimp85@reddit
It's Utah, he's fucked.
_Volatile_@reddit
non-american here. What's up with Utah?
Icy_Magician_9372@reddit
That's where we keep our mormons
CommanderMatrixHere@reddit
pardon me for my lack of knowledge, but aren't mormons the more peaceful ones(mind yo own business type) compared to Catholics who are more...fanatic in terms of their religious opinions?
Icy_Magician_9372@reddit
They work hard to give off that vibe, but ultimately they have a pretty ruthless streak in history. They're quick to disown and abandon family that doesn't conform, have the usual opinions about women's "roles" and really just aren't very different than the rest.
Of course I'm generalizing pretty hard here, as I've known some nice Mormon people, but their collective history is unpleasant. They are the "mind yo business" type because it suits them a lot to have people not looking too hard at their whack ass culture.
sealpox@reddit
Yep. They keep trying to spread, but we’ve managed to contain the spread by making them ride bikes everywhere so they can’t really get places that fast.
SmoothPimp85@reddit
It's on the most conservative states
_Volatile_@reddit
Ah... RIP
academomancer@reddit
And the Mormons got a prove they don't have a beef with Evangelical Christians. Not that it isn't vice versa in real life ...
Special-Remove-3294@reddit
Wait, fr?
flyinchipmunk5@reddit
It is possible but given the evidence they have I highly doubt he gets away with it. They won’t get an easy conviction though they are hoping for since he won’t admit guilt though so they must prove without a doubt and that’s were things can get fishy. If the evidence doesn’t completely incriminate him he could get off on a technicality like OJ and losing this slam dunk case as a DA would be a death sentence to your career. Of course they are begging him to cooperate so they don’t have to do their jobs.
bigmt99@reddit
I assume they just need to tie the gun they found to him and he’s beyond cooked
flyinchipmunk5@reddit
If there is no finger prints at all or any dna evidence then it makes it harder. I’m not an expert by any means but crazier shit has happened in court
Baerog@reddit
Didn't Kash Patel say there was DNA evidence linking him to a screwdriver found on the roof the shooter shot from? And maybe on the towel the gun was wrapped in too or something?
They also have discord logs of him discussing with no uncertain terms that he was going to shoot Kirk. That alone is a crime and definitely evidence against him. He also admitted to his crime to his father, who may take the stand against his own son (given they seem to have very different political affiliations and his father was ex law enforcement).
flyinchipmunk5@reddit
Again i didnt say i was an expert nor did i say i believe that he was gonna get away with it. Obviously they are making big deals about issues with the case. I do not think that hes gonna get away with it but im speculating where the DA might go wrong. Crazier murders happened and people have been aqcuitted before. Case in point, OJ or Casey anthony.
neverstoplurkin@reddit
I doubt the gun is completely free of prints/DNA but even if it was, they can probably tie the gun to him through a paper trail. It's definitely possible to purchase or otherwise obtain a gun with no trail but somehow I feel that's unlikely to be something this guy did.
I think he probably just used a gun that he owned or his dad owned.
KacerRex@reddit
A Mauser 98 chambered on 30-06 is something you have to go out of your way for tbh.
Sapper501@reddit
Sounds like a bubba-ed rifle if I ever heard of one
KacerRex@reddit
Nah, they can be purchased like that new, dunno if it's worth the $1500 price tag though. Don't get me wrong, I had one manufactured in Turkey in 1946 and that rifle is one of the most accurate I've ever shot (until I lost it in a boating accident, tragic story) but I don't know if it's worth 10x the price to have a more common/modern round for it.
magnum_the_nerd@reddit
I think the rifle was a Kimber M96, so an imported, sporterized Mauser.
definitely not 1.5k, more around 500
KacerRex@reddit
If that's true that's pretty reasonable for a nice rifle, I take back my statement.
flyinchipmunk5@reddit
True but they are obviously squirming about him not confessing and are quite upset about it which tells me there is a loose end that could acquit him. Not saying it’s the actual case or will happen but I mean it could be an OJ’s glove case. I mean everyone thought Casey Anthony was a slam dunk case but she got off too.
Scientia_et_Fidem@reddit
They aren’t squirming.
Reporters: Any updates?
“So far he is not cooperating with police.”
That is all this is. They aren’t “upset” or “squirming” about it, they just made an announcement to keep the public updated b/c it is a major public thing and people asked them if he had confessed or not. IDK why everyone is freaking out about them making that statement.
flyinchipmunk5@reddit
I am just speculating and never said I was an expert. No need to downvote me but as far as I see there is a lot of outrage to the point that he isn’t talking at all. Whether the prosecutors are seething doesn’t matter as people are making a big deal about it. That being said I don’t think he will walk at all but crazier things have happened in the past.
zu-na-mi@reddit
No, people are just outraged by a news article stating that he wasn't cooperating with law enforcement.
It's like, people get mad when you keep them updated and mad when you do.
SunriseSurprise@reddit
People watching the "don't talk to police" YT vid: FUCK YEA
People hearing someone not cooperating with their own death penalty: WHAT A FUCKIN' MONSTER
Tthelaundryman@reddit
Honestly if what they say about him is true I expected him to brag about it
redrobin1257@reddit
Damned if you do, damned if you don't, unfortunately. I prefer updates like the ones the media are giving at this time, tbh.
OkSession5483@reddit
It's surprising that they are shocked that he wasn't "uncooperative" because he decided to use 5th amendment.
Timekeeper98@reddit
Is it really surprising when the governor, not the President but the governor, said on live tv they’d be pursuing the death penalty before they even had a suspect?
Gosh, I wonder why he’s not talking after that was aired.
Capnmarvel76@reddit
He got his Donald Trump Gold Star by his name for saying that, which was all he was interested in.
positiv2@reddit
Utah is one of the reddest states. Pretty sure it's what the voters also want.
zu-na-mi@reddit
I don't know who is shocked though? It's just an article stating that the authorities provided this information in their latest release on the matter.
It's not unusual for people to plead the 5th.
Capnmarvel76@reddit
It's semantic, but he's not 'pleading the 5th' as he's not been called to testify in a trial. He's exercising his right to remain silent during a criminal investigation, which is also guaranteed under the Fifth Amendment.
That's something EVERYONE SHOULD DO by the way. I think some states can compel you to identify yourself, so that's fine. Other than that, if you're being questioned by the police in any situation where there's even a remote possibility that you could be under suspicion of a crime, your only words should be 'I refuse to answer any questions without my lawyer present'. Once a lawyer does show up, make sure you're on the same page as far as what information you're willing to provide the police, if any, before resuming the police interview.
my_cars_on_fire@reddit
“Sir, did you know your brake light was out?”
“I refuse to answer any questions without my lawyer present.”
admiraljohn@reddit
Yeah, this cracks me up.... "you have the right to remain silent" and he's doing just that. It's the prosecution's job to prove he's guilty, not his to prove he's innocent.
DigbyChickenZone@reddit
He literally turned himself in. So, no.
shorty-boyd@reddit
They found his DNA on a screwdriver and a towel he supposedly left with the rifle. He is fuckd
Berkuts_Lance_Plus@reddit
frfr no cap ts pmo ong asl
WonderWood24@reddit
Good it’s for the best he says nothing. he either doubles down and sets the country on fire or shuts the fuck up and faces his death like a man.
Timekeeper98@reddit
Wasn’t him, he was at my place playing Silksong at the time of the alleged assassination.
Hugar34@reddit
Are you the furry trans girlfriend all the right wing news sources keep talking about?
SilliusS0ddus@reddit
like wtf. which one is real ?
the trans gf or the groyper thing ? or both ?
positiv2@reddit
There is absolutely nothing pointing to him being a groyper, other than his parents (who detained him btw) being republicans. No idea why random twitter/bluesky accounts got that idea. Definitely feels like a psyop.
The trans partner thing was revealed by the FBI. How much trust you want to put into them is up to you though.
Baerog@reddit
Yes. That's exactly it. People smart enough to come up with something like that and create just enough of a link to it knew that it wasn't true, but intentionally lied to cover their own sides ass.
They also photoshopped a picture of him in a red shirt to be a trump shirt.
These people are horrible propagandists who should be ashamed of themselves. If you can't win with the truth, win with lies apparently.
WisherWisp@reddit
Agreed on all but the smart part. It's an extremely poor long-term strategy.
The_Majestic_Mantis@reddit
It’s a menta illness
Timekeeper98@reddit
No, but I personally engraved some of the hypothetical bullets in our Minecraft server.
BemusedBengal@reddit
God I wish
thearctican@reddit
Playing silksong? Almost guaranteed.
BemusedBengal@reddit
The police already detained 3 suspects that they later released, including someone that the head of the FBI said was definitely the guilty person. I'll believe this person is guilty if/when they're convicted in court.
WonderWood24@reddit
Yeah I’m pretty doubtful of anyone actually “aiding” to the point of being an accomplice or even close. I think more likely he told someone or some group of people on discord about his plans at best. Discord has already said they found nothing but, They took his computer as evidence so who knows. But I think the fact that his trans roomate was one of the people that reached out to authorities. I’m pretty doubtful of him actually having any help.
I think more often than not though with the mass shooters they find giant manifestos and discord or 4chan groups that cheer them on, but the fact that he turned himself in and isn’t eager to run his mouth over his ideologies, and the nature of the shooting I’m pretty sure he’s not the run of the mill shooter that the US has gotten used to.
Baerog@reddit
He was a member of a discord group that he admitted to doing it and a text message saying that he had an opportunity to do it and was going to do it. The FBI said they were investigating 20 people who were members of that discord group. It's likely just a group of his friends who had nothing to do with planning or anything, but it's definitely evidence against him.
He also apparently admitted to his father that he shot Kirk, so if that's true and his father takes the stand against him, he's definitely fucked.
Regardless, despite being legally innocent until proven guilty, in the court of public opinion, it's not looking good for him being innocent.
SunriseSurprise@reddit
"I'll see you in Valhalla" was meant for that definitely guilty person but he didn't get a chance to say it to him, so he said it to Kirk
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
_phish_@reddit
While I personally think this person did it, this DNA evidence doesn’t necessarily prove he did anything, it’s just a piece of evidence in a case.
Without a clear through line it could be any number of other things. Maybe this guy was actually forced at gunpoint to shoot Charlie Kirk or something, we have essentially no clue.
It’s pretty clear Kash Patel has made a number of mistakes regarding this case in particular (as well as many other matters) so I think it’s reasonable to be skeptical until a real case it put together on the guy.
I think it’s MAGA cope to act like catching and releasing multiple suspects after saying “this is definitely the guy” isn’t embarrassing…
WonderWood24@reddit
I don’t know how the case is gunna go. But I do know that his roomate actually called authorities after she saw discord messages about picking up the gun from the spot he dropped it, that might’ve been how they actually found the gun in the first place.
And on top of that, I’m not sure about the time atm, but his parents gathered enough info from him that they convinced him to turn himself in.
That evidence alone seems a little damning but again I don’t know how well that holds up in court.
Realistically the country is walking a tight rope towards de-escalation and one wrong step like letting him walk over technicalities would probably be one of the worst things that could happen.
Justsomeone666@reddit
Its already on fire, its just that one side is under the impression that the fire will only hurt the ''bad guys''
While the other side sits powerlessly doing nothing because of dumb technicalities and absurd morals like its completely okay to indirectly kill a few hundred thousand people but directly kill one live and somehow the second guy is the one with everyones focus on
or how its absurdly obvious to everyone that trump molests kids and even boasted about sexually harassing them live on interviews, multiple times, before his presidence but because theres not a literal video of him fucking a kid, its fine. Even if the epstein list came out with his name all over it, literally nothing would change.
Medical_Artichoke666@reddit
Reddit told him to be quiet so they don't look bad
Theidore@reddit
Reddit couldn't have looked worse the past few days regardless.
Piorn@reddit
They're desperate to prove he's trans, because if he's not, then he's a young white boy with a bright future and boys will be boys, which means he'll get a very light sentence.
jjkm7@reddit
They found his dna/fingerprints on the weapon and a screwdriver left on the roof, he’s cooked.
Scisir@reddit
i wonder what he used that for.
Sapper501@reddit
Sad that you have to clarify lol
TheSeedLied@reddit
Yeah I am wondering this too, but it might have just been to take off the stock of the rifle or something rather than full disassembly
Conscious-Key738@reddit
for the disassembly of the rifle, but still a stretch with the type of rifle they claimed was used
Blaize_Ar@reddit
Didn't he confess to his dad? Also wasn't there stuff left at the scene they can do DNA tests with?
UnreadyTripod@reddit
What I heard was that he said something to his dad that made his dad believe it was him that did it
TheShivMaster@reddit
There’s plenty of evidence tying him to the scene (murder weapon found nearby with gunpowder and his fingerprints found on it, screwdriver found on the roof with his prints on it, videos and photos of him poorly disguised at the scene) plus there’s now multiple witnesses who can testify that he confessed (his dad, his lover, multiple friends) and now there’s the seized discord messages of him confessing online. There’s plenty of evidence even without his direct confession to law enforcement. Also it’s Utah. They’re going to draw and quarter him.
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
DeadHeadLibertarian@reddit
There is so much evidence that it is him its not even funny haha
Res_Novae17@reddit
They have the palm prints, the shoe prints, and will likely find the clothes he was wearing. I think I even read that he was dumb enough to have his cell phone on him, which will track with the video of the killer going from the roof through the nearby neighborhood.
His goose is cooked.
Jonaxg7@reddit
If he still gets out it's only gonna start a war on US and UK most likely
Jabbam@reddit
He left a note which says that he was going to "take out" Kirk. This thread is cooked.
EqualityAmongFish@reddit
he even twitted about it
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
Super7Chaos@reddit
If you maintain the composure of the unbothered Chad, they will be forced to assume the role of the seething soyjak, giving you the win instantly
MarioTheMojoMan@reddit
Top minds on the case
Hot-Adhesiveness-418@reddit
Bruh
Simple-Reporter9102@reddit
Depends on if his fingerprints are on the bullet casings or gun.
If he was using a phone at the time, (gps history).
doyouunderstandlife@reddit
I've seen so many interrogation YouTube videos and the amount of people that don't understand their own rights, even when explicitly stated to them, is insane. So many people seal their own fate by simply yapping their way into a guilty verdict.
Cythmic@reddit
"Your honor, he's white. We should arrest a black guy instead."
alfonsoalta@reddit
I just looked and apparently Patel says they matched DNA on the towel used to wrap the gun to Tyler.
Flashlight_Inspector@reddit
Don't murders have less than 50% chance of being solved? If so, then I guess it is that easy.
WufeiZhang@reddit
Not legal advice but you usually have to state you're utilizing the 5th amendment right. Depending on the state you can't just never say anything. You have to specifically say you're using the right to remain silent.
NetStaIker@reddit
That’s literally only for when you’re in court, because you’ve taken an oath to tell the truth, to avoid self incrimination. If you’re just languishing in a cell, the only words that should come out of your mouth are “I want my attorney”
WufeiZhang@reddit
Yeah you shouldn't say shit to cops. But just not saying anything isn't the way to go. Asking for your lawyer or attorney is definitely the right call and not saying anyone else.
Th34sa8arty@reddit
Really? Which ones? Because I understand that silence is to never to be used against you or to be used as admission of guilt.
Chodor101@reddit
Who is he?
justamiqote@reddit
Literally every arrest video I see, the suspect doesn't shut up, or they fold and confess everything the moment the interrogator gives them a water and McDonald's cheeseburger.
NeedYourHelpWithLife@reddit
i mean the videos are for entertainment, so they only show the ones where the suspect folds or incriminate themselves. It's rare to find a channel that shows a person who does their fifth amendment right because that would be a short video
justamiqote@reddit
Yeah I'm not saying that smart criminals don't exist. I'm just proving that shutting up is an effective technique.
Joelblaze@reddit
Yeah but they are very openly trying to execute this guy.
Why the hell would he talk?
NeedYourHelpWithLife@reddit
even if guilty, you never speak to cops. call a lawyer. let the media and the detectives talk shit.
ibejeph@reddit
I've watched many episodes of The First 48. It seems that yes, if you just shut up, you'd get away with murder.
vanadous@reddit
He grew up on JCS, he knows all the moves
Firemission13B@reddit
If he is freed, he will have to leave the country.
jwji@reddit
Didn't he turn himself in? He already said he's the guy.
Wolfgang985@reddit
No. His parents and church bishop turned him in after recognizing him from photograph evidence.
The FBI subsequently questioned his boyfriend, who voluntarily turned over incriminating text messages. Those of which included evidence of the rifle, post-crime location of the rifle, and bullet engravings.
PokeyTifu99@reddit
They matched DNA on gun, hes not getting released.
shamblam117@reddit
Guilty? Shut the fuck up.
Not guilty? Definitely shut the fuck up.
(This guy clearly did it, but it's still a valuable lesson on your civil rights and a reminder to always shut the fuck up. The only word you should ever say in front of Law Enforcement is "Lawyer")
rippingbongs@reddit
Where is anon coming up with this theory that they're going to release him? I've heard no such thing. They have ample evidence against him. He turned himself in, clearly they had time to have a discussion, possibly even with a lawyer, about not saying anything. They have DNA evidence, chat logs, videos/photos, etc. He's not getting released.
They've mentioned that he's not cooperating with authorities but they're not implying they will have to release him, they're just mentioning that he's not giving them information about motive, timeline, etc..
SamFreelancePolice@reddit
I wish him luck
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
liberals cope DNA evidence found near scene of Charlie Kirk's shooting matches suspect, FBI director says - KOB.com
Dopecombatweasel@reddit
Anyone ever see the show Dexter?
sharterfart@reddit
>Chief
woah prejudice much?
doc_suede@reddit
just ask for a lawyer that's all you have to do
UKLord@reddit
If they release him he'd be a dead man walking anyway. All this bloodshed, turning the left against the right and vice versa can't be good~
bozzeak@reddit
“Man I was praying it would be a brown person but we’re definitely still going for the death penalty, no question” “Why isn’t he cooperating with us?????? 🥺”
TKRAYKATS@reddit
Expect of you're black in the 60s
Lumpy-Obligation-553@reddit
Wait, so how come they got to the "fact" he was the shooter if there wasn't any proof?