top 58 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 110 points 2 months ago (1 child)

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office said in a statement that it would fight efforts to end the state case, in part because Mangione’s federal sentence isn’t yet known.

Compared with federal law and that of other states, New York has uncommonly strong protections for defendants facing multiple prosecutions. A state prosecution can be barred if a federal case involving the same course of conduct or criminal transaction ends in a guilty plea or if a jury is sworn.

Pleading guilty was some deep strategy by his team. It's going to be so fucking hilarious when he gets off state charges because of double jeopardy.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 72 points 2 months ago

    The rich fear jury nullification will encourage more justice, so they made up some bullshit.

  • source
  • [–] 70 points 2 months ago (23 children)

    My god they're going to imprison the poor guy forever without a trial, won't they?

  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 months ago*

    The feds didn't get him on murder. My first thought when I saw this is that he has very clever defense attorneys that at least managed to frustrate the state prosecutors by having him plead to a federal non-murder charge that could shut down the State murder case through double jeopardy.

    I can't remember any other time in my life that I've been hoping somebody would get off on a technicality

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    As a conspiracy theorist: The bigger question is, I wonder what they're distracting us from this week? They're gonna hold him to use his presence as a distraction when they need one. Other than that, he is a suspected murderer and they'll use that as the official reason for holding him but we all know, deep down inside, he's now a tool to be used to distract us.

    So we should all be asking the questions: Who are we invading this week? Where's the next biggest arsenal shipment heading? Who's going to be teaming up with Israel this week? Is Germany teaming up with Israel the will of the US or is it defeatism?

    What is going on that they just plopped him into the news?

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

    They cannot do that. If they aren't going to try him, they must release him.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 2 months ago (16 children)

    The trial in the state can't move forward until double jeopardy is determined to apply or not. Did you think they just suspended the trial cause evil? Cause I'm not following your statement otherwise

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 months ago (13 children)

    Did you think they just suspended the trial cause evil?

    ...Yes?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    While normally that could be the case, but in this case he isn't getting released either way.

    The trial moving forward would be the worse scenario for the defendant. The state charges are worse than the federal charges. The later or never the state case gets tried, the better for him.

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

    The point I was making is that there used to be a human rights violation and against the First and Fifth Amendments to hold someone indefinitely without a trial. But that ended in 2014.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    It is totally reasonable to criticize length of detention while denying the right to a reasonable trial in general.

    However this just happens to not be applicable in this specific situation. The guy entered a guilty plea and so will not be released anyway, and he himself requested the case be dismissed causing the delay. If he went along with it, he could have had a trial sooner but wants the delay in hopes of having it dismissed. Which is totally sensible and he has literally nothing to gain by having the trial sooner given that he is almost certainly due for years of imprisonment under his guilty federal plea.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    It's suspended because there's no point in holding a trial if it's going to be overturned on double jeopardy. It's indefinite since there's no point in scheduling a follow-up until the question of it being double jeopardy is answered.

    Like, guys, stop attributing motivations to what is arguably the only way forward.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Only way forward? They didn’t have to file the double jeopardy cases in the first place. They chose to, in order to be evil and harass and torture him with the legal system to the maximum extent possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    His lawyers filed double jeopardy. Unless the prosecution can provide a reason it's not, they have to drop the case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    I’m saying they didn’t have to file those double charges in the first place. They chose to, knowing exactly how many problems it would cause for him. On purpose. As a torture method.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Actually, it's arguably a huge prosecution mistake in Magione's favor.

    The federal charges were restrained by the circumstances of the event. They couldn't do first or second degree federal homicide, because it didn't meet any of the criteria of those crimes. Of course life without parole is a possibility, but there's high chance that a lesser sentence results.

    Knowing the way the state law works, the DOJ probably should have just let the state case play out, where they could have at least gone for second degree murder, with a significant mandatory minimum sentence if convicted.

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

    Ok, well, unfortunately Luigi's lawyers can't travel back in time to prevent him being prosecuted, so filing for double jeopardy is the only way forward for them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    I'm sure there are plenty of people on their armchairs saying otherwise, but the defense attorney's job is to defend their client to the best of their ability, which often translates into what is the best case scenario? The odds of double jeopardy were certain, while any form of trial and winning are so fantastically small that they're irrelevant.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago

    "Release him"? Dude, he's in jail pending sentencing for his federal case. There is no releasing at this point. This isn't anyone twisting a knife, it's just not scheduling a new court date until the double jeopardy question is resolved. Y'all need to chill and put your heads on before you react to things.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 2 months ago (25 children)

    What does this mean for the non-lawyers still curious?

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 2 months ago (16 children)

    It means he gets double points if he guesses the right question based on the answer

    🤣 1
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (15 children)

    This is the half I do know and also why I'm still lost!🤬

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Double jeopardy is being charged with the same crime twice.

    His lawyers are arguing that because he has already pled guilty to the federal charges of “interstate stalking resulting in death,” and “cyber stalking resulting in death” that the state charges of second degree murder, weapons possession and false identification should be dismissed.

    The state prosecutors are arguing that the state charges are different enough that they should be allowed to go forward with the state trial as well.

    Usually all the parts of a single crime that result in separate charges count as the same incident for purposes of double jeopardy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (12 children)

    The honest answer is basically you can't be tried twice for the same crime. Say someone is found dead, the police think you did it, you go on trial and found innocent, the police can't just put you on another trial hoping for a different verdict.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (11 children)

    What about appeals? In my country you will usually start your case in the city court and can appeal the result to the state court. If it is a special case without clear precedent, you can get approval to try your case at the supreme court. In some edge cases city courts might say you have to start in the state court, but you always get at least one appeal. In very special cases a city court might say you have to start in the state court, but then you can still appeal to the supreme court without approval.

    It is not rare for a higher court to reverse the verdict of a lower court completely if the higher court interpreted the law differently. In that case the lower courts will use that as precedence for future cases whether it will be a reversal of the guilty verdict or the punishment.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    In America you can't appeal someone being found not guilty you only appeal a guilty verdict

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Huh weird, TIL. In Denmark both the prosecution and the defence can appeal any verdict/punishment. But you only have 14 days to decide whether you want to appeal.

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

    In the US, the prosecution can appeal sentencing and pre-trial, but once you get to 'not guilty' or 'guilty', all prosecution associated with a crime is no longer constitutional.

    However, you can get a civil trial after a not-guilty criminal trial (OJ Simpson was 'not guilty' in criminal court and became untouchable, but was found to have killed under civil court and had to pay the victims families).

    From a prosecution perspective, the federal charges were a huge mistake. Nothing about the crime qualified it as 'federal homicide', so they had to settle for lesser charges. Normally the DOJ would back off and let the state handle it because it firmly falls in their jurisdiction, but of course this DOJ wanted to throw its weight around and it backfired on them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    It would be fairly awful given the circumstances. We have a history of faulty and overzealous prosecutions especially against black and poor people. For any given offense there are essentially 3 sorts of sentences. The sentence they will threaten you with in hopes of getting you to plea even if innocent say something absurd like 20 years, the "deal" you may be given which could be 3 months and the punishment for making them actually go to trial which may be 3 years.

    Theoretically everyone is entitled to representation but you may not qualify for free help unless you are desperately poor and the quality of the free help may be so bad its worse than nothing. It's normal for unsuccessful prosecution to cost anything from thousands to hundreds of thousands depending on complexity of case. Ultimately virtually all cases are settled with a plea including cases which are so weak its hit or miss if they would have secured a conviction or sometimes cases so weak there was no chance of conviction but scared people accept it. Especially if its a case in which they get no actual time in jail they just agree to pay the government continually for years and go to jail if they ever get in trouble. Hell some people plea because the alternative is spending months in jail although innocent because they cannot afford to pay to get out but they get out immediately with a plea but agree to get robbed by the government for years.

    In fact there is a sort of plea you can enter where you don't admit you did anything wrong but agree to go to jail anyway.

    So if you understand just how fucked up our system is imagine if they can just keep going after going all the way to trial and definitively losing.

    It's hilarious that our pres talks about shithole countries whilst presiding over one.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    As the accused you can appeal. So if you found guilty and then there is new evidence, better science, an impartial jury etc you can appeal and argue you are innocent. But if you are found innocent the state can't do the same.

    Let's say there's a murder 5 years before dna evidence is discovered. The state accuses someone and puts them on trial and a verdict is declared. Now dna evidence is discovered. If the person was found guilty they can file an appeal saying based on this new dna evidence they can prove they are are innocent. If the person was found innocent however the state can not file an appeal saying based on this new DNA evidence now we can prove that person did it.

    State gets one shot at proving you guilty, you get multiple to prove you're innocent.

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

    State gets one shot at proving you guilty, you get multiple to prove you're innocent.

    To be fair, this sounds better than it works, as your appeal may take a lot of time to actually free you, even after the appeal is successful

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    It's the same here, but the state can appeak the verdict within a certain short period. The verdict is only final once there is no more room for appeals or the period to make an appeal has passed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    I am not a lawyer but in the US I believe once the verdict of not guilty is given the state is done. For example the oj Simpson case. Almost everyone agrees he likely did it but the jury gave the verdict not guilty because, according to interviews after, the state didn't provide enough evidence. They can't go back and say "sorry our lawyer was bad at his job, let's do a new trial". He was released and didn't face any criminal charges for the murder. Fun fact the Kardashians initially got famous/rich because the original father was one of oj's defense attorneys. Now they family of the victim later sued for emotional damage and won and he was also later arrested for other crimes but the criminal case of him killing his wife could/can't ever go back on trial.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

    Can’t be tried for the same crime twice. So if he pleads guilty in federal court then he can’t be tried again in state court.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Didn’t the feds want him so to a death sentence though?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Any death penalty charges were thrown out a while ago iirc. I think life in prison is the max he can get now.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago

    And sentencing guidelines suggest 25-30 years for what he plead guilty too.

    So if he gets the guideline amount, good behaviour in prison, and state case dropped, could easily be walking free in his early 50s.

    Probably a smart play by him tbh. Plus federal prisons tend to be much less horrible conditions than state prisons.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Problem is that the crime didn't fit any of the criteria for federal homicide, so they had to settle for lesser charges if they wanted to pursue it as a federal case. A more strategic DOJ probably would have let the state handle it, since it was by all measures the core of the incident would have been a state crime rather than federal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago

    So meanwhile, has he gotten the healthcare yet that United denied him?? Let us not forget that was the impetus of his prison martyrdom.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Confused here.

    So it's to plead guilty to a lesser sentence, so in attempt to void the same crime with a heavier sentence?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 37 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Well, this man will never be tried.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments