1174
Luigi Mangione wants his trial televised and open access to as much media and public as possible. Prosecution does not. (discuss.online)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/luigimangione@lemmy.world
189 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 50 points 3 months ago (12 children)

They broadcast the OJ Trial, they should broadcast Luigi's trial.

The prosecution is scared shitless that the concept of Jury Nullification will become mainstream, and if the Cirizens realize they can just release anyone they want to, then MAGA won't be able to win their bullshit cases.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (11 children)

    Let's be honest, you'll never get a jury that at least 1 person doesn't vote guilty, so it would be a hung jury. Thus he would spend life in prison blowing through all his families money continuously going back to court getting tried for murder over and over. He'd die in prison and his family would give up on him eventually because face it... The system already beat him.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    In practice that's now how hung juries work, even for high-profile cases. No DA wants to have the shame of repeatedly trying the same trial, even if double jeopardy doesn't apply. At some point it looks to the voters that you're just wasting taxpayer resources.

    Instead what tends to happen is that the charges get less severe with each trial, and that the defendant gets a better plea offer each time. For example, maybe Mangione gets a hung jury for the capital murder trial. In the next trial they charge him in a way the death penalty isn't on the table. If first degree murder fails, the next trial they charge him with second degree murder. It becomes easier to get a conviction with each trial, as jurors are less likely to practice jury nullification as the stakes of the trial decrease.

    Eventually the defendant just accepts a plea deal. Every trial is still a roll of the dice for the defendant. If he kept getting hung juries, maybe eventually Mangione accepts a plea deal for manslaughter.

    No one wants to do infinite trials. The prosecutor doesn't want to seem weak or a waster of taxpayer resources. The defendant doesn't want to keep rolling the dice with their life. With each passing trial, the charges decrease. With each trial, conviction becomes easier. Eventually the defendant just accepts a plea deal to eliminate the possibility of spending the rest of their life in prison.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    This DOJ does not give a shit about optics, they control the optics. They will just do infinite trials.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    They don't care about optics? Really? The same guys who lie whenever an ICE shooting happens to immediately portray the victim as a criminal? The same guys who changed the names to the Department of War and the Gulf of America? The same guys that launch political prosecutions they know will never succeed (like the reflecting pool cases), just to sooth Trump's ego?

    These clowns are void of substance. They're nothing but optics.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The prosecutor won't care if it wastes tax dollars or about the image of the case having been hung. Trump will publicly smear the jury members on live television that dont vote guilty. Fox will call them all leftist terrorists who are a threat to our country.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    You need to apply more critical thinking and consider the actual motivations prosecutors are under. It does no good to just model your adversaries as infinitely powerful demons and assume they have the will and capacity to do all the evil all the time. It makes you incapable of rational thought.

    There are very real downsides to a prosecutor bringing a case again and again. Downsides that actually hurt their goals.

    • With each trial the evidence gets less fresh.
    • With each trial the prosecutor seems to more of the public as the villain.
    • With enough trials defendants can start making legal claims based on due process grounds (not double jeopardy grounds.)
    • Every trial is a roll of the dice that the jury will return a full verdict of not guilty, rather than merely a hung jury.
    • With each trial the popularity of the defendant increases, upping political pressure on the prosecutor.
    • After enough trials, the governor will be under pressure to just grant the defendant a pardon.
    • With more and more trials, the prosecutor risks completely destroying their career. They risk being seen as an incompetent clown who either can't get a conviction or is too dumb to realize when he doesn't have a case.

    You can assume the prosecutor is evil if you want. But that doesn't mean you can pretend that the prosecutors still aren't mortal human beings with the same worldly pressures as anyone else. And despite Trump's verbal diarrhea, federal prosecutors have had to abandon countless cases due to lack of evidence, Trump's tantrums be damned.

    Even if you assume the prosecutor is willing to do anything to get the maximum conviction possible, they still will not endlessly try defendants. Each trial makes a conviction more unlikely. Which is why charges get watered down and plea offers get more generous.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Rofl wow sweet summer child prosecutors put all kind of innocent people in jail. Please think before you speak. Wasting tax money is the norm.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    https://thelegalguide.org/how-often-can-hung-jury-lead-retrial/

    I'm just describing how hung juries work and the pressures involved on both prosecution and defendant. Maybe you should think before you speak. And start by not being a pompous ass.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Can't be tried for a crime more than once. Otherwise oj would be in prison.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    In this case, there was no trial, the prosecutor dropped the case, and cited the true reason for the damage, which is the perfect defense if there was a retrial.

    This is just Trump having a tantrum like the spoiled nine year old he is.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent