Luigi Mangione will not face the death penalty for allegedly killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December 2024, a federal district judge ruled.

The decision is a loss for federal prosecutors, who were adamant about pursuing the death penalty in the case.

The judge dismissed the murder charge because it requires that the killing was committed during another “crime of violence.” Prosecutors alleged the other crimes of violence were two stalking charges, arguing Mangione stalked Thompson online and travelled across state lines to carry out the killing.

The judge disagreed, finding stalking charges are not “crimes of violence” and dismissed two counts in his federal case – murder and a related firearm offense.

    • Taldan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      86
      ·
      19 hours ago

      IANAL, but that’s surprising to me. He wasn’t read his rights at the time, and there were chain of custory issues

      Any lawyers know if it’s common for evidence to be allowed in situations like with Luigi?

      • DrFunkenstein@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Some lawyers made a video explaining that if the evidence was likely to have been found in a legal search anyways, it can usually still be admitted. I also ANAL

          • ohulancutash@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            16 hours ago

            It would be expected that he would be read his rights and the bag searched in due course. It wasn’t like they looked in a random person’s bag then decided to arrest him.

            If the purpose of lawful searches is to prevent police from harassing just anyone on the off-chance, that purpose is still intact here.

            • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              8 hours ago

              I thought it was like Uno rules: if someone calls you out before you read them their Miranda Rights, you have to toss all your evidence…

            • moody@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              20
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              The issue is that a key piece of evidence that should have been a very obvious find at first glance wasn’t found at the scene, but only later after the officer had stopped searching the bag and driven to the police station.

              • FiniteBanjo@feddit.online
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                10 hours ago

                You would need to produce reasonable suspicion of tampering with the evidence to have it removed as evidence. Some random local cops in buttfuck nowhere wouldn’t need to frame the murder of a New York private healthcare CEO on some schmuck, and there is other related evidence from Luigi’s computer and banking records which help legitimize the evidence in the bag.

    • village604@adultswim.fan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      18 hours ago

      It depends. It gives the defense a chance to destroy their case in front of a jury.

      They now get to show the jury the unlawful search, the turned off body cam during the search, and the broken chain of evidence.