United Healthcare CEO killed in Midtown NYC; Luigi Mangione in custody of NYPD awaiting trial

[winb83]

Rodney Hinton Jr killed a random retired police officer because different officers killed his son. I wonder how that person is suggesting that should be treated. At least with the UHC CEO a case can be made that he was targeted for reasons that make sense. As for Tyre Nichols the officers that killed him were the same race as he was so what does that have to do with racism?

 

[Formerly Black Trash]

Rodney Hinton Jr killed a random retired police officer because different officers killed his son. I wonder how that person is suggesting that should be treated. At least with the UHC CEO a case can be made that he was targeted for reasons that make sense. As for Tyre Nichols the officers that killed him were the same race as he was so what does that have to do with racism?

Black people can absolutely be racist towards each other

Ppl on here do it every day

 

[winb83]

Black people can absolutely be racist towards each other

Ppl on here do it every day

When someone suggest racism needs to be addressed in America they almost certainty aren't talking about black on black racism.

 

[Formerly Black Trash]

When someone suggest racism needs to be addressed in America they almost certainty aren't talking about black on black racism.

Thats not what you said

You said everyone involved is Black, how does racism factor in?

 

[winb83]

Thats not what you said

You said everyone involved is Black, how does racism factor in?

In the context of what the tweet said addressing "racism in America" are you suggesting they were specifically talking about black on black racism or are you just being pugnacious?

 

[Formerly Black Trash]

In the context of what the tweet said addressing "racism in America" are you suggesting they were specifically talking about black on black racism or are you just being pugnacious?

Racism is racism

Doesn't matter if it's white on black, black on black, indian on black, Asian on black, and so on

Do you think they would have been so quick to do that to a white woman?

 

[ADevilYouKhow]

 

[BK The Great]

 

[Apollo Kid]

DOJ in Trouble After Lawyers Reposted Trump Rant on Luigi Mangione

The Justice Department’s case against Luigi Mangione just hit a major obstacle.

newrepublic.com

 

[bnew]

Spoiler: thread continued

Spoiler: full text & large images

1/20
@Luigi_Archives
BREAKING: Luigi Mangione's federal prosecutors say that DOJ personnel's prejudicial statements about Luigi didn't break the court order, because they are not "associated" with prosecutors. They also say these statement weren't prejudicial because the trial hasn't started yet.

2/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecution's response comes after the Judge ordered them to explain why DOJ personnel made/reposted prejudicial statements, such as those made by President Trump. Prosecution also included a sworn declaration by Sean Buckley Deputy United States Attorney for SDNY:

3/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors' argument hinges on 1 word in the rule they're accused of breaking - "associated". They say it doesn't apply because statements were made by DOJ personnel they don't work with. However, the court's Apr 25 order told them to inform highest levels of DOJ of this rule.

4/20
@Luigi_Archives
Though, in the footnote prosecution does admit that its their "interpretation" of the rule and that they did not "clarify" this during Apr 25 hearing when the Judge issued this order.

5/20
@Luigi_Archives
Contrary to prosecution's own claim that the rule has not been broken, DOJ directed the post made by DOJ staff, not "associated" with "Mangione matter", to be deleted. Reminder, the Judge asked to explain what's being done to prevent this from happening again-prosecutors.

6/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors' examples of what's being done to ensure it doesn't happen, came from before the prejudicial posts were made. E.g. they quote DOJ's new policy to "control messaging by Department employees" issued on Sept. 2. The posts in question were made on Sept. 19-20.



7/20
@Luigi_Archives
Luigi's prosecutors go on to say that defense hadn't shown that any prejudice occurred or that prospective jurors were "exposed" to these posts. "...prejudice should be presumed only in truly exceptional cases." Reminder: these posts had U.S. President say that Luigi was guilty.

8/20
@Luigi_Archives
Luigi's persecutors' say that defense didn't "establish" a connection between the posts in question & how they may affect Luigi's right to a fair trial. They say that "relevant factor" for this is the time between when the prejudicial statements were made & the start of trial.

9/20
@Luigi_Archives
They say that because the trial hasn't started yet, the statements can't be found prejudicial. This goes in contradiction with what they said in the previous sentence, where they admitted that the Local Rule treats such statements on guilt as "presumptively prejudicial".



10/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors also try to allude that "reposting is "not necessarily an endorsement of the original tweet." However, there is no question that one of the quote retweets in question made by DOJ staff member does explicitly endorse the original tweet:

11/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors conclude that as such no sanctions are warranted. Which is extremely worrying because it would create a precedent where any member of DOJ, not directly involved in Luigi's case, could continue to make public statements that he's guilty, prejudicing potential jury.

12/20
@clubcillian
isn’t the DOJ literally the governing body behind the “people” noted in “people v mangione” like ???



13/20
@Luigi_Archives
"People v Mangione" refers to Luigi's NY state case, as in "People of New York". It's an old tradition for prosecutors to call themselves that. PA prosecutors call themselves "Commonwealth". Feds - "United States of America". Other states may say "the State v Defendant".

14/20
@GoldwinMeribel
So they are gaslighting the federal judge? Cool cool.



15/20
@Luigi_Archives
To be fair, in a way, that is what most prosecutors/lawyers try to do. Prosecutors are just not doing it very well here.



16/20
@lonesomebirdie
do nawtttt piss me offf



17/20
@Red_Pill_Ape
And The Curt not starting yet is not prejudging when you prejudging ?



18/20
@hellena_swan




19/20
@albcipo123
Same old story , They’re useless as ever. Freelulu



20/20
@McHiggs
Basically they do not have a response




To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196

 

[88m3]

evil company

 

[bnew]

absolutely revolting.

 

[Lord Beasley]

evil company

They up there with the Sacklers and Purdue Pharma. Money-grubbing demons

 

[Wargames]

Spoiler: thread continued

Spoiler: full text & large images

1/20
@Luigi_Archives
BREAKING: Luigi Mangione's federal prosecutors say that DOJ personnel's prejudicial statements about Luigi didn't break the court order, because they are not "associated" with prosecutors. They also say these statement weren't prejudicial because the trial hasn't started yet.

2/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecution's response comes after the Judge ordered them to explain why DOJ personnel made/reposted prejudicial statements, such as those made by President Trump. Prosecution also included a sworn declaration by Sean Buckley Deputy United States Attorney for SDNY:

3/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors' argument hinges on 1 word in the rule they're accused of breaking - "associated". They say it doesn't apply because statements were made by DOJ personnel they don't work with. However, the court's Apr 25 order told them to inform highest levels of DOJ of this rule.

4/20
@Luigi_Archives
Though, in the footnote prosecution does admit that its their "interpretation" of the rule and that they did not "clarify" this during Apr 25 hearing when the Judge issued this order.

5/20
@Luigi_Archives
Contrary to prosecution's own claim that the rule has not been broken, DOJ directed the post made by DOJ staff, not "associated" with "Mangione matter", to be deleted. Reminder, the Judge asked to explain what's being done to prevent this from happening again-prosecutors.

6/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors' examples of what's being done to ensure it doesn't happen, came from before the prejudicial posts were made. E.g. they quote DOJ's new policy to "control messaging by Department employees" issued on Sept. 2. The posts in question were made on Sept. 19-20.



7/20
@Luigi_Archives
Luigi's prosecutors go on to say that defense hadn't shown that any prejudice occurred or that prospective jurors were "exposed" to these posts. "...prejudice should be presumed only in truly exceptional cases." Reminder: these posts had U.S. President say that Luigi was guilty.

8/20
@Luigi_Archives
Luigi's persecutors' say that defense didn't "establish" a connection between the posts in question & how they may affect Luigi's right to a fair trial. They say that "relevant factor" for this is the time between when the prejudicial statements were made & the start of trial.

9/20
@Luigi_Archives
They say that because the trial hasn't started yet, the statements can't be found prejudicial. This goes in contradiction with what they said in the previous sentence, where they admitted that the Local Rule treats such statements on guilt as "presumptively prejudicial".



10/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors also try to allude that "reposting is "not necessarily an endorsement of the original tweet." However, there is no question that one of the quote retweets in question made by DOJ staff member does explicitly endorse the original tweet:

11/20
@Luigi_Archives
Prosecutors conclude that as such no sanctions are warranted. Which is extremely worrying because it would create a precedent where any member of DOJ, not directly involved in Luigi's case, could continue to make public statements that he's guilty, prejudicing potential jury.

12/20
@clubcillian
isn’t the DOJ literally the governing body behind the “people” noted in “people v mangione” like ???



13/20
@Luigi_Archives
"People v Mangione" refers to Luigi's NY state case, as in "People of New York". It's an old tradition for prosecutors to call themselves that. PA prosecutors call themselves "Commonwealth". Feds - "United States of America". Other states may say "the State v Defendant".

14/20
@GoldwinMeribel
So they are gaslighting the federal judge? Cool cool.



15/20
@Luigi_Archives
To be fair, in a way, that is what most prosecutors/lawyers try to do. Prosecutors are just not doing it very well here.



16/20
@lonesomebirdie
do nawtttt piss me offf



17/20
@Red_Pill_Ape
And The Curt not starting yet is not prejudging when you prejudging ?



18/20
@hellena_swan




19/20
@albcipo123
Same old story , They’re useless as ever. Freelulu



20/20
@McHiggs
Basically they do not have a response




To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196

The prosecution is Juelzing but the court might allow it cause it’s clear they want a conviction.

 

[num123]

Biggest reason why taking out CEOs or other C-level execs will do nothing in the short or long term, the sociopaths that invest and want a profit no matter what the cost. This is what you use politics for but that is not happening anytime soon.