You know what, the people are alright.
We need to talk a LOT about Jury Nullification in this country. They are trying to weaponize the courts, and ultimately it doesn’t come down to the system, or the judges, it comes down the Citizens simply saying NO.
Trials put the power into the hands of the Citizens, and we should exploit that power against our Opressors. WE will decide who gets punished in this country.
Someone just got banned for life from jury duty.
For once, the law was working.
deleted by creator
Of course they didn’t indict him.
I was having ribs with this dude. Couldn’t have been him.
Coulda, woulda, shoulda been Luigi too
That case is way too political. Common sense has gone out of the window there.
Every time they ever move him around every cop in the area always seems to need to be involved. It’s not like he’s accused of slaughtering an entire precinct with nothing but his bare hands or anything, supposedly he shot one person with a gun that he obviously no longer has. I’m really not sure why they treat him as Hannibal lecter.
I’m really not sure why they treat him as Hannibal lecter
Because he has the audacity to kill a capitalist, instead of a fellow poor
To convince the public he’s guilty. It’s one of the ways they skew the narrative.
Remember in the movie “SWAT” where that monster guy who entered the country illegal to kill the one guy and then offered money to get him out? That’s Hollywood doing their part to put the idea in our minds that this kind of thing is warranted.
People do want to help Luigi and that scares the shit out of them too. They expected people’s moral compass to make them side with the CEO he shot. But that’s not what happened. The general public is very much pro Luigi.
The comic of all the insurance claims denied and labeling it “legal murder” does a good job explaining why the moral compass is with Luigi. Everyone knows a friend or friend of a friend who has been denied a claim that could help.
The people leading the push for his prosecution are very much out of touch with that reality though. Cops and prosecutors have some of the best healthcare in the country.
Good point. If I’m not mistaken, court juries can still pass a jury nullification for Luigi Mangione, right?
He entered a guilty plea.
I’m honestly surprised he did that. If I was him I would not trust the state to uphold its end of the plea bargain. I’d much rather take my chances with a jury.
Saw my first one knocked over yesterday. Cheered.
Based waow
Looks like Flock is back on the menu!
the idea of a grand jury is also crazy, basically they just decide wether to charge someone or not, not even a regular jury to determine if they are guilty or not. i heard getting called to GJ is worst than regular, because it can last alot longer.
It’s completely different from a trial jury though. They usually only meet once or twice a week. Sometimes a couple times a month.
Grand jury duty is worse because you have to be there for weeks at a time potentially. Whereas in regular jury duty you are assigned to a trial, which usually lasts 1-2 days if they don’t settle or plead out. The only time a trial lasts weeks is if it’s an absolutely gigantic case over millions of dollars or a murder case.
Requiring a grand jury for a case of vandalism is ridiculous in and of itself.
You do realize that they sought felony charges, right? Any charge like that absolutely should require a grand jury and would be ridiculous not to.
I looked online, and I’m kind of disappointed that there aren’t any nearby where I live. I want to do my part!
Then they are either being discussed by your local government to be installes or they already subscribed to one of the equivelant compeditors. This shit is everywhere.
Holy shit. Over 40 have gone up within 4 miles of my house in the last 3 months.
You heard em boys, not a crime. Get after it!
damn things should never have been built in the first place
I imagine all cases prosecuted for destruction of networked Flock and Axios cameras are going to struggle to get through a jury. It’s a clear privacy violation and everyone knows it.
While you are right, there are almost no laws in the US that protect privacy. Short of being in your own home with the blinds down, there is next to nothing working in your favor. The assumption is that you’re in “public” or clear view of the public, thusly, screw you.
Your pool? Clear view from the road. That douchenozzle with a drone, probably not breaking the law when he takes a video flying over. “Oh, I was looking at my own roof” or some bullshit.
There should be privacy laws. The world has changed so much, but most laws are stuck in the stone age and now sold to the highest bidder who actively monetizes the complete lack of privacy laws.
In the US, you can look up TONS of details about anyone’s house. From the sale price, the tax history, tons of details about it and even photos of the inside. In what normal world does that make sense?! Your employer sells your salary data to ADP who then sells it to any number of others. What the actual fuck?! Nobody asked for this, it’s opt-out only but the opt out expires. I did it a few years ago, and it’s back on again.
If privacy were not important, then there should not be bathroom doors.
On the subject of Flock…
These are “autonomous deputies?” But uh, where is every single warrant for every plate they catch on a car? The plate may be public property, but the vehicle is not. Sure, maybe a bank has a lien due to a loan, but it’s still private property. This is some serious 4th Amendment violation because I have seen 0 warrant for any of these unwarranted searches.
They dont need a warrant for a plate that is visible from public. If your car was locked up in a garage, that would be a different story. Taking your car out in public is the same as taking your face out in public legally speaking.
That really needs to change also. That made sense back when it was just recording something in public that a random officer could have seen, but it’s no longer the same thing. No police force could have such large scale comprehensive surveillance and recording based on what an officer could have seen in public .
The fact that you could even have an officer overstep his authority to stalk someone one nationwide for personal reasons, is not just a failure of privacy safeguards, but proof that large scale surveillance is not the same as “what any random officer could have seen”
There needs to be a threshold, beyond which a warrant is required
You what really works? Having a law on the books that plainly states the “the driver must be ticketed”. And NOT the vehicle. So unless they pull the car over and hand the ticket to whoever is driving, they can’t use cameras for that purpose.
Cool, so anyone who can afford a self driving car is immune to tickets and traffic citations. Very bourgeois.
Ticketing a car is a good practice to avoid police interaction, which is the real danger in this country. The burden of proof still applies in court, so even if you did get a “phantom” ticket, they still have to prove you were in control of the vehicle at the time. I recently got a red light camera ticket on a rental thrown out because I showed i turned in the vehicle 4 hours before the time of the infraction. Goddamn Hertz tried to throw me under the bus. Always keep your receipts.
You were lucky. What would have you done if you couldn’t prove you no longer had possession of the car? If they had ticketed the driver directly, none of that could have happened to you. There would have been nothing for you to prove.This is why the state I live in has had that law requiring ticketing the actual driver and not the car decades before traffic cameras were even a thing.
And since there are no self driving cars that can be commonly found on the roads today, that’s a silly idea. And IF that time ever comes, someone is still going to need to be liable for that self driving car as it goes down the road. That software is going to be so locked down it must follow all laws without exception. Because the company will hold the liability.
I literally say “save your receipts” at the end of my post and you come back with “well what if you couldn’t prove it?”
Thats what court is for.
Are you saying we should implicitly trust what a cop says just because they happened to be around to write a ticket? What makes an officers testimony more reliable than a photograph or video? In my state, cops arent even allowed to pull people over for minor traffic infractions anymore because they cant seem to stop targeting black and brown people. Do you think that’s somehow better than a speed camera or red light cam that doesnt care if the person driving is white or not?
Court is time consuming and expensive. You lose a day’s wages, you get probably get fined anyway, and you may also need to pay a lawyer and court costs. So you assume everyone can afford that? White or Black?
It must be nice to have that extra money.
That man did us a favor
That grand jury.
FTFY
Why not both?
Fair. Point conceited.
