Updated in Post 67. Some guy shot the head of a health insurance company in the back.

[MineralMan]

Last edited Wed Dec 18, 2024, 03:41 PM - Edit history (1)

There is video of the shooting, in which the shooter shot a man in the back on a city street.
The shooter has been located and apprehended.
The shooter had a "manifesto" that probably attempts to justify the action he took.
The shooter still had the weapon used in the shooting.
There is considerable evidence online of the shooter's thinking.

My prediction:

He will be charged with first degree murder. All of the elements of that are clearly there.

It will take a couple of years before there is a trial, at which he will be convicted. He will get a life sentence.

And that will be the end of that story.

[OLDMDDEM]

1. Unless Trump pardons him.

[MineralMan]

2. Not a federal crime. Trump can't pardon him.

It will be charged in New York State.

[OLDMDDEM]

10. Good point. But he did cross state lines. Isn't that make it a federal crime?

[MineralMan]

12. Yes, there are Federal Crimes involved, but not Murder.

He's going to be tried in a New York court, not a federal court. Guaranteed.

[JI7]

9. Why would Trump pardon him even if he could ?

His wealthy supporters would never allow it .

[OLDMDDEM]

11. You are probably right.

[yardwork]

32. Trump is more likely to sic his DOJ on him.

If they can figure out how to press federal charges. Crossing state lines with a ghost gun with the intention to commit felony murder or something.

New York has strict gun laws, so they're not going to like the ghost gun, either.

Young kid with his life ahead of him just ruined his life. It's actually very sad, all around.

[H2O Man]

3. The End

"The killer awoke before dawn
He put his boots on
He took a face from the ancient gallery
And he walked on down the hall"
-- Jim Morrison, The End

[MineralMan]

4. Very good!

[doc03]

5. Young good looking guy kills a rich CEO, the

Last edited Mon Dec 9, 2024, 06:09 PM - Edit history (1)

MSM will cover the trial 24/7.

[ck4829]

6. Yep. Go back to sleep, go back to health insurance companies legally killing people for MONEY

[BannonsLiver]

7. Unfortunately

Some seem more upset by what this guy did than they are about what the insurance companies do even though it's essentially the same thing.

[MineralMan]

54. Not really. Two different things.

I'm upset about both. And, as usual, I have virtually zero influence in either.

[MineralMan]

14. Who Is Going Back to Sleep?

Our problems with healthcare are not going to get better. With Trump in the White House, they are certain to get much worse. United Healthcare is already looking for a replacement head. There are plenty of potential candidates.

Elections matter. They really do. Just watch.

[berksdem]

28. Spot on!

this will do nothing to change the health insurance industry. as someone who works in the industry things will only get worse.

[Silent Type]

8. +1. If I were a juror and he had personally witnessed the death of family/friend because of denials, I might have had

enough sympathy to acquit him.

If he's just another Una-Bomber type, I'd vote to lock his rear up for good, just like a trump insurrectionist, Timothy McVeigh, etc.

[MineralMan]

15. I'd be willing to bet a large sum that he will be convicted easily.

People on juries tend to go with the evidence. They truly do.

[Emile]

17. Is that why Kyle Rittenhouse walked?

[MineralMan]

25. Well, think about the two cases.

Not much similarity in them.

[Emile]

59. That's right, Rittenhouse shot and killed two

people in the street and this guy only killed one.

[MineralMan]

61. Which of those two was

a corporate executive?

[Emile]

62. Murder is only murder when the person killed is rich.

Got it!

[MineralMan]

63. That shoild not matter,

But it does in this society. It is what it is.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

58. Not the same

The evidence the prosecutors presented in Rittenhouse's case was crap.

[MineralMan]

23. Nobody wants a five-year-old KIA Soul.

[Mr.WeRP]

50. Oh, like this case?

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100219804360

[MineralMan]

55. No, not like that case at all.

[Random Boomer]

64. That person wouldn't make it anywhere near the jury

Anyone who has had a friend or relative die due to insurance claim denial would immediately be struck off as a potential juror. The prosecutors will be on the lookout for that particular bias. Good luck finding enough jurors without that experience, though.

[haele]

68. Voir Dire will weed out anyone who admits to experiencing insurance denials

Several of the prosecution questions for the jury will be designed to ensure anyone who even has an acquaintance with someone who was experiencing coverage issues and suffered won't be on the jury, just in case they might end up with a person who lied about being able to weigh the case strictly on it's merits without attribution to the motive.
In other words, the jury pool will be small and most likely restricted down to people leaning towards Conservative, "Rule of Law" Capitalism credulous that a motive would be that CEOs could ever be considered responsible for a bad product so long as the shareholders are served.

I'm sure they could find two dozen like that in NYC.

Haele

[unblock]

13. I don't know his motive, but judging from the public reaction,

A possible defense strategy at trial might be to acknowledge that he did it and try to say it was justified or at least an understandable reaction to harmful actions on the part of the ceo and his company.

Not saying that actually does justify murder, but I am suggesting that a strategy might find a sympathetic ear in the jury, perhaps leading them to convict on a lesser charge.

I certainly agree that a bench trial would very very likely lead to conviction on second degree murder (first degree murder in New York requires special cases, like killing a police officer, not present in this case). But a jury might bend the rules.

[MineralMan]

19. I don't think that defense will work.

In fact, I think it may not even be allowed to be presented. The case is pretty simple, really. He lay in wait for the person he killed, and then shot him in the back at close range. Open and shut, really. The motive is irrelevant.

[unblock]

30. Motive irrelevant in a murder case?

If you're convicting someone of intentional killing, you have to show... intent. Yea, the prosecution may rely on just the hard evidence of the mechanics of the shooting itself, it certainly looks intentional, but the defense can certainly offer more evidence as to the defendant's state of mind.

That's where the insanity defense, self-defense, heat of the moment defense, etc. come in.

If nothing else, they can ask the defendant on the stand and ask him "why did you do it." They're not going to refuse to let him answer that question if they want to use that strategy.

[H2O Man]

41. Intent and motive

can be the same or different. Intent must be proven in a murder case. Motive does not have to be.

[unblock]

45. Agreed. The prosecution doesn't need to enter the defendant's mind.

But if the defendant can't explain his motives if he wanted to, that would be truly shocking to me.

[H2O Man]

48. It sounds as if

the three-page document he had explains his motivation. At first, many (including me) thought it was likely he had a relative denied coverage. I suppose that still could be. But with the writing on three bullets and the monopoly money, it appears he was intent upon sending a message.

There has been quite the public reaction to that message. "Strange days have found us," as Morrison sang.

[Mr.WeRP]

47. So, you are a lawyer in addition to a fortune teller?

You speak with such authority on what will happen and can be done from a legal perspective…

[MineralMan]

56. No, not a lawyer.

And I have no authority about anything. I am simply writing what I think about this. You can do that, too.

[unblock]

16. In New York it's second degree murder. This case does not meet the requirements for first degree murder in New York.

In New York, premeditated murder is usually second degree murder. First degree murder requires special circumstances:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_in_New_York_law

The victim was a police officer, peace officer, correctional employee, judge, or a criminal case witness
The murder was committed while the perpetrator was serving a life sentence
The murder was committed with torture of the victim
The murder was committed as an act of terrorism
The murder was committed during the commission or attempted commission of one of the felonies under New York's felony murder laws.
Murder committed for hire (with the charge applying to both the murderer and the person who paid the murderer)

[MineralMan]

21. A case could be made for the "act of terrorism, given his "manifesto."

Yup.

[unblock]

33. Rhetorically, maybe. But legally, under New York law, I seriously doubt it.

1. "Act of terrorism":
(a) for purposes of this article means an act or acts constituting a
specified offense as defined in subdivision three of this section for
which a person may be convicted in the criminal courts of this state
pursuant to article twenty of the criminal procedure law, or an act or
acts constituting an offense in any other jurisdiction within or outside
the territorial boundaries of the United States which contains all of
the essential elements of a specified offense, that is intended to:
(i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or
coercion; or
(iii) affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder,
assassination or kidnapping; or
(b) for purposes of subparagraph (xiii) of paragraph (a) of
subdivision one of section 125.27 of this chapter means activities that
involve a violent act or acts dangerous to human life that are in
violation of the criminal laws of this state and are intended to:
(i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or
coercion; or
(iii) affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder,
assassination or kidnapping.

https://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article490.php#p490.05

[MineralMan]

35. "(i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population;"

And there you go...

[unblock]

38. He did not do that, any more than any other murder does that.

[MineralMan]

39. Interesting. Two other health insurance companies in Minnesota are shut down.

They are definitely intimidated, and are civilian organizations that make up a "population."

The shooting has generated fear in the population that works at private insurance companies. That is a population.

Easy argument.

[Random Boomer]

65. They might go for the terrorism connection to get first-degree murder

The choice of the specific person was less about the person and more about his role in the industry. The intent was to sow fear in CEOs and insurance executives by killing one of them. That's terrorism.

[unblock]

66. I think it's a thin argument and a prosecutor would more likely go for the nearly sure thing second degree, but

if they do, it even more clearly opens the door for the defendant to take the stand and explain his motives, which may sway a jury to go for a lesser charge if they are sympathetic enough to his views.

[33taw]

20. He has not even been charged and he isi g called "the shooter@

[MineralMan]

22. Yes. That's true.

There is video of the shooting. You can see the unusual weapon he used. We've all seen it.

[33taw]

24. Yes, we have all seen the tape of a person shooting

the gun.

[MineralMan]

26. And soon, all the evidence showing that it was him will be available.

[33taw]

51. I am sure we will. I still prefer he get a chance to defend himself

[Orrex]

52. How can righteous moralizers preemptively wag their fingers if they have to wait for evidence and charges?

[MineralMan]

53. Of course. He'll have his time in court.

[Bookreadingliberal53]

27. There are people on Reddit wishing death on the McDonald's employee who tipped off NYPD nt

[MineralMan]

29. There are people on Reddit who eat their own boogers, too.

I'm not sure that's relevant, really.

[leftstreet]

34. What low wage worker couldnt use the reward money? n/t

[Mr.WeRP]

49. I read it was an elderly patron who reported him

The media is racing to get the story and background on the suspect. I bet there is a lot of misinfo on this

[Mr.WeRP]

31. Your predictions have not had a high degree of accuracy

[MineralMan]

36. Oh, OK. Thanks.

[JCMach1]

37. Social Media pretty full of RW brosphere posts...

Also, if this was someone I was following, I would be questioning his mental stability.

[MineralMan]

40. It sure is.

[edhopper]

42. Second degree

NY reserves first degree for special circumstances.

[MineralMan]

43. Yes. An argument could be made, though.

[edhopper]

46. Not really

and it would be prosecutorial over reach subject to appeal. No reason to do it.
Most likely a plea deal and no trial.

https://newyork.public.law/laws/n.y._penal_law_section_125.27

[MineralMan]

57. Yes. We seem to live by plea deals. You're right.

Looks to me like he had a point he wanted to make, so he acted to make sure the point was made.

It may well be that he is looking forward to his day in court. Some folks do things like that, despite the personal risks.

[madinmaryland]

60. So this boils down to one thing. GUNZ.

Probably going to just end up a random shooting. No more story.

Edited to add: don’t forget your thoughts and prayers to help end gun violence.

😡😡🤬🤬

[MineralMan]

67. Update: In My OP, I predicted a First Degree Murder Charge for Mangione.

Several people argued with that, implying that I didn't understand New York law.

Now, New York has charged him with First Degree Murder, based on the terrorism clause in that state law, just as I expected.

And there it is.