If they were setting up a patsy it wouldn't be an Ivy League techbro from a wealthy family. His parents own multiple country clubs and his cousin is a Republican lawmaker in the Maryland House of Delegates. We should all have a healthy skepticism of the police account of events, but keeping your brain on conspiracy-mode all the time isn't productive.
We should all have a healthy skepticism of the police account of events, but keeping your brain on conspiracy-mode all the time isn’t productive.
I mean, that's what the "might be the fall guy" position here is, as far as I'm concerned. "The fall guy" doesn't need to mean some brilliant construction the cops set up to take the blame. It can just mean they made some stuff up under pressure or warped the facts to suit a narrative and we shouldn't take all of the news about this at face value.
We're dealing with institutions that pathologically lie. They don't lie 100% of the time, but they do lie shamelessly. Whatever comes from this, they're not going to want the takeaway to be that they are incapable of catching someone who would do a thing like this, which gives them motive to rush to a conclusion and pin it on someone.
We're also dealing with the same country that did MKUltra. I understand not wanting to go for wild conspiracies with no grounding, but the US has been known to actually do stuff that sounds completely made up.
Police found so much evidence that he'd have to be idiotic to still have on him. Gun, suppressor, and the fake ID he used to check into the hotel.
I suspect this might be them just wanting to pin it on anyone that matches the picture just to save face.
I'm skeptical, too. I could imagine the cops bribed the guy to go to court and put on a show because they didn't want to set the precedent that people could murder CEOs and get away with it due to the cops' incompetence with their massively funded surveillance system.
Like I said, I'm believe it's kinda sus, multiple reasons are plausible. We'll have to wait and see.
on average, people who do murders don't tend to be geniuses
Edit: to be clear, most moral acts don’t require great genius. sacrificing yourself to undermine a system that murders countless innocent people is a heroic act independent of how skilled you are at serial homicide. a person who is exceptionally skilled at killing people and getting away with it is much more likely to be a bad person, since the roles that enable you to get the most practice at it are things like imperial cop, imperial soldier, or CEO of a private health insurance company
On average, murderers don't go to Ivy League schools either. But this guy Luigi did. Why would he be so careless?
Edit: also graduated from an engineering program. Not exactly the easy route through most schools. Engineers are famously lacking in common sense and real-world experience, though.
Ivy League means nothing about intelligence - or rather it just means he met the bar to attend post-secondary. Ivy League speaks more to one's socio-economic position.
Agree. But I say that's a much better argument against this guy's motive (and likelyhood of guilt) than making any kind intelligence argument.
an Ivy is a measure of family wealth, not individual intelligence. I know US TV has conditioned everyone to believe that they could totally get away with murder if they wanted to, but there’s a reason most people don’t test that belief. even the smartest person isn’t at their best when acting on impulsive decisions under pressure
The pigs also claim he had $8000USD in cash on him and $2000 in an unnamed "foreign currency". Luigi said himself in his bail hearing that he did not have that much money with him, and suggested the additional amount was planted. How very convenient for the police and the prosecuting attorney, because they used that money they "found" to successfully convince the judge that Luigi shouldn't be granted bail.
It's not uncommon for these high profile adventurists &/ killers to keep a "trophy" from their endeavors.
They 'found' him in a McDonald's with all the relevant information on his person. The same guy that was smart ebough to drop his backpack at the scene and leave no traces. That's fishy, but we won't know for sure until more comes out.
people make mistakes, keeping the stuff because he didn't expect getting caught in the first place is not an insane thought. also seems like a weird individual to put as a fall guy.
the BTK serial killer got caught because he taunted the police with a microsoft word document licensed under his name.
This seems most likely to me, given the situation with his Youtube channel. Possibly the killer might be someone else but it being Mr. Mangione is more likely.
My question is whether a jury would find him not guilty. If it were e.g. a grieving father who didn't have to lose their child if UHC had covered some treatment, I could see a jury throwing the verdict. With this guy?
But don't they weed out biased people from juries? Before accepting someone onto a jury they'd ask "do you have a grudge against health insurance companies," or something.
I hope every juror who has ever had a claim denied by health insurance lies about it in the interview.
I think that the "bias" thing has more to do with relation to the involved parties or the incident itself, not some general predisposition.
I think you're right. The difficulty is finding yanks who don't have a grudge lol.
I can absolutely be wrong here, but I'll stick my neck out and say I don't buy this story so far. The color of language the police are using alone suggests less proof than they claim.
I do, however, generally believe everything the NYPD says, especially under pressure from the zuggurat lords. And it's not like the Mayor of NY is a comically corrupt and compulsively lying pig, or anything...
Edit: phrasing
