- Registrado
- 26 de Abr, 2023
you don't determine the sentence the judge does, dumbass. now what.
UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson fatally shot outside Hilton hotel in Midtown in targeted attack: cops - Just Part and Parcel of visiting a Big City
- Iniciador del tema quaawaa
- Fecha de inicio
-
🚨 DDoS attack. Tor is stable: https://kiwifarmsaaf4t2h7gc3dfc5ojhmqruw2nit3uejrpiagrxeuxiyxcyd.onion/.
🔎 Please read my article, How to Dox Anyone: A Liz Fong-Jones Story. (Xitter), (Substack). -
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Registrado
- 18 de Dic, 2019
- Registrado
- 26 de Abr, 2023
this is part of why people think they're using a patsy, it seems way too convenient. honestly if you remember the film Eagle Eye, at the begining Shia's character wakes up and goes to the ATM to find a fuckload of money in his account and him being identified for a crime and that's how the evil AI forces him into the events of the film.
What's stopping the government from literally going "ok let's pick Luigi" and scrubbing his socials, writing the manifesto and arresting a guy and conveniently finding all this shit on him that even he says isn't his.
the biggest problem with that theory is that it would mean the deep state somehow dropped the ball in demonifying this guy, like there's nothing stopping him from being a lolicon dude and that giving women the ick enough to make him a monster. we already have proof he vanished to 3rd world countries a lot, why not fake a thailand trip
the other reason is that this nigga did everything the expensive way and kept all this shit on him, like imagine being italian and you decide to literally make your own gun vs take one of your numerous cousins' guns, same with the silencer. beyond all that is the fact that he kept all of it. dump everything and tell the cops to get fucked.
Honestly it really adds credence to the theory that the cops already knew him that they "found" him with everything. when he should have dumped it all. they arrest him and go "hey we found this stuff on your person" and literally just pull out a bag. I know this guy was insane but literally force the cops to do some amount of work. make it seem like the cops are just harassing everyone, PA cops especially
correct answer.
polakrobak99
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 15 de Mar, 2019
- Registrado
- 4 de Jul, 2022
There were articles about how he played Among Us.
DAREToResistDrugs
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 27 de Jun, 2024
I have no idea of how the law works in this regard, but all the talk about jury nullification has me confused.
Say you kill someone, turn yourself in, get arrested. The jury is sympathetic, nullification goes into effect. You walk as a free man.
What then? If you kill again, repeat the process, what happens when someone comes along whose actions are against the agreed upon laws of society but is effectively immune to prosecution? Has there ever been a situation like that in the past?
I assume after a certain point they would quickly hammer out a fix to the jury nullification issue, or leave them languishing in jail to prolong their time in court before letting the jury have their say, utilizing the Patriot Act.
Say you kill someone, turn yourself in, get arrested. The jury is sympathetic, nullification goes into effect. You walk as a free man.
What then? If you kill again, repeat the process, what happens when someone comes along whose actions are against the agreed upon laws of society but is effectively immune to prosecution? Has there ever been a situation like that in the past?
I assume after a certain point they would quickly hammer out a fix to the jury nullification issue, or leave them languishing in jail to prolong their time in court before letting the jury have their say, utilizing the Patriot Act.
- Registrado
- 13 de Jul, 2017
"Luigincel"
TheBigZee
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 25 de Ene, 2021
There's more to it than that. When the pressure comes off the nerves, there's no way to predict how they're going to respond. They might feel better, they rarely become more painful. You can get an arthosis that shifts or moves, the hardware positioning can change. You can get bone growth that puts pressure on nerves.
It's common to need a revision.
I think Luigi might have opted for a minimally invasive surgery with a higher risk of failure.
There's no spacer or graft.
- Registrado
- 24 de Feb, 2016
She said "you people" and (((they))) took offense to that.
If you are part of the media class, you can slander and libel with no consequences.
polakrobak99
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 15 de Mar, 2019
I don't know if you're retarded or something, but if the guy kills again then he gets a new trial and you can convict him this time??? How did you think that works?
DAREToResistDrugs
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 27 de Jun, 2024
That's what what was implied with 'repeat the process', getting arrested and put in jail again. Hence 'leave them languishing in jail' after their second arrest. My question was a scenario where someone kept being arrested and kept receiving jury nullification, if the courts had ever needed to deal with a situation like this. Or what steps might be utilized to circumvent someone the public refuses to convict, if indefinite detention via the Patriot Act wouldn't just be used to keep a person from ever seeing a jury after the second or third time.
- Registrado
- 15 de Sep, 2016
That’s not up to the jury though.
The judge decides the sentence, and these fuckers go to dinner parties with CEOs all the time. They know they might be next.
If you’re on that jury and vote for guilty, Luigi is going away for the rest of his life.
- Registrado
- 1 de Abr, 2024
Nigger threatening to kill somebody unless they pay you money should be illegal. You sound like the South Park bit you retard.
- Registrado
- 6 de Ene, 2022
That’s true for most murderers though a life sentence is a typical sentence for murder maybe not in all cases but in a large number
You don’t need elite solidarity to lock up a murderer for life when he’s convicted
- Registrado
- 28 de Feb, 2021
It's exceedingly rare for jury nullification to happen, but it's enshrined in the US Constitution that you have a right to trial by jury (further bolstered by the Sixth and Seventh amendments). Refusal to indict people who criticised the Crown was something juries did in the days of the colonies and so the power of jury nullification on the basis of disagreement with the law is built into the American system (returning a verdict of not guilty even though they agreed that the crime was committed). If someone went around shooting CEOs and juries kept nullifying the verdict because they disagreed with the law - which they have absolute right to do - then there isn't any set up to alter that. You can't punish juries for the verdicts they return, you can't compel them to return a specific verdict and you can't overturn a verdict of "not guilty" (in the US system).
This in practice wouldn't happen, as you'd have to keep constantly getting juries that agreed to find the defendant not guilty, and you'd inevitably end up with jurors who have the mindset of the woman who called in the tip on Luigi. But hypothetically if it did keep happening, then they'd ask questions like "if the judge tells you 'this is the law', even if you disagree with it, can you follow the law as he explains it to you?" to try and screen for candidates who want to do jury nullification and deselect them as part of voir dire. Otherwise, sure, they'd probably look at going down the domestic terrorism route and vanishing him off to a black site... or if there was overwhelming public interest, they'd probably just get a random criminal to shoot him.
- Registrado
- 15 de Sep, 2016
There’s a difference between charging her, and giving her a 100.000$ bond to a gun-less mother of two as if she’s some kind of hardened criminal.
The establishment is clearly shook. Not just about the murder but about the reaction.
They always knew they were widely loathed, just not HOW much.
- Registrado
- 6 de Ene, 2019
Good. They should be shook. When the people fear the government there is tyranny, when the government fears the people there is liberty. They’re not the government? They may as well be, we are dictated to by oligarchy. It’s about time they realised what their works do to the average citizen.
They should be absolutely shitting themselves
Bindo
kiwifarms.net
- Registrado
- 26 de Feb, 2024
Lmao, glass cliff theory, only this time the corpos just straight up kill them. Operation: Pink Shield.
- Registrado
- 13 de Jul, 2017
I alluded to this earlier in the thread but I guess UHG and Brian Thompson are the like "comedically evil" version of a healthcare/insurance company that have pushed things to the absolute edge. That means they're the most obvious target as they stick out the most and there probably is a lot of truth in them doing evil shit to make more money.
Based on my own reading (I don't have facts/figures to quote - go look them up yourself) the cost of healthcare is increasing as a result of an aging population plus incidents of cancer and expensive illnesses becoming more common. It appears the cancer mortality rate is decreasing (which means treatment works so less people are dying) but more people comparatively are getting cancer and some other diseases in the first place.
The problem with all of this is that there sadly are numbers involved in what treatments are worth the money and who (primarily based on age/lifestyle/genetics) it is worth paying for those treatments for. It's certainly not a job I would want and I'm sure doctors and also insurance companies have to make shitty, heartbreaking decisions every day.
I worry what people will get out of this is that all companies and all health insurance companies are the comically evil type like UHG with the highest rejection rates when that doesn't seem based on reality.
There's not many other industries that have the same weight on their shoulders and it seems like one of the best courses of action is to break up the monopolies that have developed (UHG being the largest and most significant one) but also that some significant structural changes are needed in the American healthcare industry - it doesn't seem appropriate that things like preventative care and life saving cancer treatment have a stock ticker and people that speculate on that stock ticker (which indirectly means they are seeking to invest in the companies which indirectly reject/"kill" the most claims to keep insane profit margins.
It appears that the blood in the water from this assassination is speeding up antitrust action in this area and it seems like it's going to become a bipartisan issue: https://www.thebignewsletter.com/p/its-time-to-break-up-big-medicine / https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...emark-for-potential-antitrust-violations/amp/
TLDR: there's a world of difference when a company like Apple or Toyota or Tyson poultry have a monopoly - the US government and political apparatus should've seen the UHG monopoly being an issue and dismantled it far before this assassination happened. Healthcare is sacrosanct to keeping a country strong and having a good healthcare system is critical to stop people from becoming bankrupt and/or left with no options. The whole concept of a "mega" healthcare company like UHG with a stock ticker is inherently "problematic" and leads to perverse outcomes like CEOs getting gunned down in the street.
And people should especially start to be aware that beneath the gloss that companies like UHG employ of being "healthcare" providers that the insurance industry is literally a financial instrument for betting odds for good/bad things happening to people. That's what UHGs stock ticker represents more than anything.
Última edición:
- Registrado
- 4 de Oct, 2016
Did he opt for it or was it all his insurance would cover?