top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 164 points 11 months ago (31 children)

Wow look at how torn up he looks from the guilt of his actions.

Poor guy, he must be devastated for what he didn't do.

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 118 points 11 months ago (7 children)

    His actions have no guilt. We were playing cards together in Oregon. Nothing wrong with that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    The fuck he was! He was balls-deep in my wife in Seattle at the time of the murder.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    didn't he save thousands of people? as in the aftermath of the event insurance companies started approving claims they were meant to approve until shareholders sued them to stop

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 11 months ago (20 children)

    Honest question, does anyone actually think he didn't do it?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 56 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    The fact he was "found" in the most nonchalant way at McDonald's with the evidence on him is very suspicious. And then he just walked around with it for 2 days? Dude, I'm ditching and burning everything in the first hour. I know criminals are supposed to be dumb. But come on, this guy doesn't look dumb.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 37 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Especially given the shooter printed parts of the weapon and had no cellphone on them when they shot Brian McEvilCEO or whatever his name was. And then hopped on a scooter and left the island without a trace. So much planning went into the prep and, ahem, execution of the plan that holding into blatant evidence like a signed confession 2 days after the fact doesn't make any sense. It screams planted evidence on a person who vaguely looked like the only screenshot I've ever seen of the ahooter smiling.

    At the very least I have very reasonable doubts and would not be selected for the jury.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 11 months ago

    Another thing that gets me is that Mangione seems like just the kind of guy you would try to pin something like this on. He was a queer kid, estranged from his family (or at least out of contact for a prolonged period), and living in a hostel. Isn't that the oldest police trick in the book when they want to "solve" a case, blame it on some drifter from out of town?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 24 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Obviously we can't know for sure, but there was a lot of stuff about the incident and especially his arrest that point toward him bring used as a useful patsy to try to control the narrative in light of the near universal approval of the death of a health insurance CEO.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    I get rooting for him, it just always felt like all the comments about him not doing it were mostly memes (see the "he was with me" comments under my original comment), but lately I got the feeling people seriously think he's innocent.

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

    My Dad doesn't. He's very opposed to the killing ideologically and thinks Luigi is taking the fall for someone. My dad's weird.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 11 months ago

    Here's the thing: the default position is not believing something either way. They have to get enough evidence to make me believe. So far, it doesn't seem to be there. There's some evidence, but there's also plenty of reason to be skeptical of it. My position currently is that it's possible, but I don't believe he did it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    Yes. Some people think the original picture released doesn't match Luigi and therefore it can't be the same person, for example.

    There's also some people who suspect it probably was him, but believe that illegal means were used to find him and they can't use such evidence in-court because it would require admitting to having a secret mass surveillance network. I assume for such people, a belief in a secret CIA/FBI mass surveillance network came first, so of course they could find the guy using it.

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

    What came first, actual parallel evidence construction or people believing such a thing was possible?

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

    When I was a little kid, my older sister used to bite me sometimes. My mom once told her in front of me when I was about 4, that if she did it again, my mother would bite her back. As soon as my mom was elsewhere, I bit the outside of my forearm hard enough to leave a mark that looked like someone else had done it (I know, younger siblings, but she was ten years old biting a preschooler, so I support it). My mom did bite her, but probably not really very hard and my sister stopped biting me after that. I’m not sure how I feel about that parenting, but I’m not a parent, so I’ll withhold judgement. Plus it worked.

    I’m pretty sure they’ve both been around forever

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago*

    personally i don't care either way if he did or didn't, in this case a terrible human is dead...maybe other terrible humans will have moment of introspection and change their ways if one of their own is murdered and the (alledged) killer gets away with it.

    therefor the result with most net-good is a not-guilty verdict

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 90 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    My ancestors are smiling at me, imperials, can you say the same?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 14 points 11 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 276 points 11 months ago (29 children)

    I'm so glad we have actual freedom of speech on Lemmy

    No fucking auto-mods to ban us for mentioning a person's name because it hurts advertising revenue

    Also I don't think there's a jury in the entire United States that would actually convict Luigi

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 119 points 11 months ago (10 children)

    I mean, have you kinda ignored the whole of US politics? Finding 12 people that will have him killed is easy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 54 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah exactly. I’m not as optimistic. But hopefully his lawyer doesn’t let the prosecution stack the jury.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (5 children)

    Good thing we thought of that already (250 years ago or so) and don't let the prosecution just pick whoever they want to be on the jury.

    Here, have a read: https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/jury-selection-criminal-cases.html

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    I'm mistaken, then, sounda as well thought out as the rest of the US system, like the winner-takes-all "democracy."

    Man, those guys 250 years ago were so smart! Like so smart you should never ever do anything differently than they'd do it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 11 months ago (3 children)

    It's a pretty bedrock part of every nation with trials by jury that the accusers don't get to unilaterally select the jury. "Finding 12 people that will have him killed" would as you said, be easy. So would finding 12 people that would not. That's why the prosecution and the defense are given equal powers to appoint and reject jurors, in a process that sometimes goes on longer than the actual trial.

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

    It’s interesting to me to note the differences in jury selection between the US and Australia: here in Aus (at least in my state of NSW) both sides get to strike jurors, but there isn’t a round of questioning - it’s purely based on physical appearance - and each side only gets three challenges (per accused person). That means for most trials, those with only one defendant, at least six of the original randomly selected jurors will end up serving.

    I’ve done jury service twice - once I was part of the original 12 and wasn’t challenged, and the other time I replaced the last challenged juror but each side only ended up challenging two.

    I feel like not being able to question jurors and having limited strikes makes the system far more random and, therefore, more just in terms of the jury being a random selection of citizens.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 child)

    That is really interesting the differences there. I think the intended goal of the US system is to make sure that you get 12 people capable of being objective about the subject at hand, rather than 12 random people. For example, it usually takes all 12 jurors to make a conviction, so if you get just one person who won't convict no matter what because of religious reasons or pre-existing biases or whatever, then automatically you have a hung jury that can't be swayed by evidence. So the US system tries to insure we get 12 people who are willing to put aside their biases and be objective (enough) to render a verdict based on the facts before them either way the facts lead. So it's a long process, but in our system anyway we try to weed out anybody who might believe, for example, that all Mexicans are criminals if it's a Mexican on trial, or someone who doesn't believe that rape should be a crime in a rape case. And the big one of course, people who are already so convinced by media they've consumed that the person is guilty that they can't act as a fair juror.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Yeah, it seems clear that the goals are different and so the methods of selection have to be different in order to try to achieve those goals. I wonder if there are any statistics available to determine what approach results in more accurate results in terms of convictions! Personally I see the merit in both approaches, and potentially in other approaches to the jury selection process.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 37 points 11 months ago (12 children)
  • [–] 17 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    Never been banned by an .ml mod. Now .world? Some real psychos there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

    I recieved both a ban and a death threat from a .ml mod.

    My opinion was that Harris would have been better than Trump. I even included that I didn't even like her or the democrats. I just view them as, unfortunately, the better option right now.

    They told me I should be executed and thrown in a pit with the rest of the garbage (ie the other people they view as undesirable) and promptly banned. It was a crazy escalation

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 11 months ago

    I've had the opposite experience. I was mobbed and then site-banned by .ml for mildly criticizing communism in China and defending my opinion. But the hateful, rule-breaking comments, the derision, the incivility--all of that stayed up right where it was.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago (5 children)

    lol lemmy.ml wouldn’t ban someone for posting about Luigi, are you being for real right now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 11 months ago (4 children)

    Maybe not Luigi specifically, but freedom of speech on ml is... questionable.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 11 months ago

    I agree, although I feel like that's across the board for Lemmy. Mods aren't all joining together and discussing the rules they will enforce. Every community has its own idea of how moderation works, and we all do what we see fit or please. I've seen some stupid shit on the modlogs everywhere, often using the ban and remove content feature that essentially scrubs the user's history, which imo should be fixed.

    I do feel like .ml takes that to an extreme, though. Like, what do you mean you can't criticize Russia or China without being banned by an admin? Dessalines is especially guilty of this, and the other admins deflect and defend his behavior.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    I’m so glad we have actual freedom of speech on Lemmy

    Eh....

    Have to go to .ml to properly comment about american imperialism and other things that jordan doesn't like.

    Have to go anywhere but .ml (except slurping up more of that .world slop) to properly criticize china, russia, or north korea.

    Have to go to hexbear to see my pig shit on pig balls.

    Have to go to tiny, one user communities to see insane harry potter fan fics....

    What is this world coming to? Why can't I have it all? Free speech? 6/10, provides a minimum, but could be better. Would use again.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 71 points 11 months ago (9 children)

    He's thinking about the millions of lives he improved.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

    He also shielded the actual guy who shot Thompson. I hope the actual assassin lives a long, comfortable, and quiet life.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    About that. The CEO he shot was actually in hot water with Blackrock, who were functionally his bosses, for not doing enough to screw over people. Blackrock owns many insurance companies. So that was like 1% progress on solving a problem. Until you get your IRA/401k divested from Blackrock and stop shopping at Blackrock owned companies (good luck), you can shoot all the CEOs you want. Blackrock will still instruct their employee to screw you over.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 64 points 11 months ago

    If it drip you must acquit

  • source
  • [–] 60 points 11 months ago

    That officer is a named character. Her importance will be revealed during the big twist of this arc.

  • source
  • [–] 58 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Why does this look like a porn parody of itself?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    I was afraid to upvote and get banned, but then I remembered that I'm not on Reddit ;)

    Live, Love, Luigi

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 37 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    I hope he gets off cos I'm about to 😩

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

    I know Luigi is just the third Franco brother I just can't prove it

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 50 points 11 months ago (8 children)

    Mangione might be the richest person Lemmy loves.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -29 points 11 months ago* (6 children)

    He's also a Musk fanboy and rails about the "woke mind virus".

    Which is interesting, if Luigi is conservative, does he oppose universal healthcare?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›