Luigi is innocent! Free this mans!
Crooked cops? Who’d have thought such things were possible. Oh wait, everyone with more than two brain cells to click together.
Hooooooleeeeeeee fuck that is a comically blatant frame job
But also: corroborating articles? I’m not finding anything from AP or similar that back this up. How fresh is this?
Goes to show how much this isn’t about Luigi, or even Brian Thompson. It’s about the elite sending a message to the other 99%. Think, even if their case against Luigi is rocky at best, all that matters is they can get him to pay for Brian, regardless of whether he did it or not, or where the evidence points.
All that matters is that we the “peasants” get the underlying message:
- If you kill/harm an elite they’ll chase you and make you pay with the full weight of their resources (and emphasis on “resources”, not necessarily “law”).
- If you did not kill or harm an elite you’re still at risk, because then they’ll choose a “peasant” scapegoat to pay anyway.
All that matters is that they get to take their pound of flesh, and that the “peasantry” gets discouraged to fight for their rights as the elite takes, and takes and takes.
Which is why it’s so important that regardless of Luigi having done it or not, he should walk free unless there’s solid, undeniable evidence of him doing it, like an actual and verified non-deepfake video of the assassination with his clear face on it. And even then he must only face the consequences the law demands, and what others would face in his place for killing the everyday average Joe. The fact that the life lost was an elite should have no bearing on the consequences.
The pictures of Luigi in the lobby of the hostel were taken 3 miles away from the shooting, two weeks before the shooting. The jacket, backpack, eyes and eyebrows of the shooter don’t match Luigi’s. I think that immediately after the shooting, cops used Palantir or similar technology to do an AI search of images similar to the shooter. That just meant anyone on a camera the cops had access to wearing a green jacket with a hood and a black neck gaiter. The image of Luigi smiling at a girl in the lobby of a hostel two weeks earlier was the best match the AI found, so they framed his ass. Cops do it all the time. Ask the Central Park Five. NYPD and prosecutors would rather let a guilty man go free than admit that they lied and framed someone.
Now is a good time to remind people to never ever agree to a police search. They’re gonna phrase things weird and take advantage of your good nature. Never agree to any sort of search.
Hell, even if they have a warrant I’m tempted to explicitly say I don’t consent. I’m not going to resist but I’m gonna make it clear I’m not consenting. Because how the hell do I even verify a warrant is real? I have no idea, and I certainly wouldn’t be able to find out if they’re at my door.
Be aware though, in Georgia there is “implied consent” with regards to roadside breathalyzer tests. If you get in that situation, remember I’m just a random lemming and not a lawyer. Other states might have similar things.
deleted by creator
Ask them to show you and take a pic of it for your records.
Pro tip: set a shortcut to your camera on your lock screen so you don’t have to unlock your phone.
On most Android phones there’s a physical shortcut for the camera like pressing the lock button twice.
“If you get in that situation, remember I’m just a random lemming and not a lawyer.”
Indeed! And along those lines, ask for a lawyer if you’re arrested. Especially if you’re innocent. People who think “I’ll look guilty if I ask for a lawyer” just make themselves vulnerable to words being twisted against them.
Uh oh. It would be wild if it was inadmissible. Their whole job is to collect USABLE evidence.
Their job is to enforce, through violence, whatever people in power want enforced
I’ve been saying all along everything happened too quick for him to be the actual guy. It was pretty clear to me they were desperate to make an example of someone quickly and not accurately.
Both things can be true, no? He may actually be the guy, but they acquired evidence illegally and still planted it to subvert due process (again).
He isn’t, we were hanging out that week.
You know it’s a sham the question is, what are you gonna do? you’re the people with access to guns… me here in Europe I gotta fight with literal sticks and stones
I think you’re confused, I live in Europe and I have way more guns that the average American.
That’s only 1.2 guns! Not impressed.
On top or that, compared to an average American, you earned the right to own then by passing several tests and know how to safely manipulate them.
…but MUH FREEDOM 🇱🇷
They need to play 12 Angry Men for every jury before deliberation, but play it twice for this particular jury. That’s not the kind of evidence you send a kid to the chair over.
Spoiled Evidence…
This. The chain of evidence is tainted and cannot be accounted for. Anything in the backpack could have been placed there by anyone, at any time, before, during, or after his arrest.
My feelings on this: good. One less thing that they can use against him. If his defense doesn’t get any evidence from the backpack thrown out, then idk what they’re even doing.
He’s innocent
Free Luigi!
Something that needs to be considered is the possibility of parallel construction in the arrest and alleged evidence
When I first heard about this back in my early 20s, it radicalized me. ACAB.
This is the first time I hear about this, is this just a way to get normally inadmissable evidence admitted through some bullshit loophole or is there an actual good reason to have this system?
At best, you know someone is doing something wrong but get them in something else. Think like mobsters and such. But typically it’s just shitty.
Seems like an “ends justifies the means” loophole. The original intent was to hide the source of NSA tips from terrorist prosecution. We’d all probably agree to that without thinking that it can also be used more widely, that the person is not a terrorist until proven so, that there are really no limits, and is an easy way for police to hide abuse of authority.
Analogous to “Civil Forfeiture”. That seemed so reasonable in the context of seizing wealth obtained through criminal activities by organized crime. But there were no real limits, and it allowed perverse incentives, so now we have local cops stealing people’s personal belongings, and actually creating budgets relying on this theft
It sounds like they’re buying time to find evidence that is admissable in court (ie not their illegal methods they used to first book the defendant while they try to scrounge together what they do need.)
So goes like this. You use illegal surveillance to track someone without a warrant. You arrest them and plant evidence as cause for lock up. Meanwhile now you can actually get a warrant to search the defendants computer, house, etc… To try to find something that does give you evidence of guilt that will actually be used to prove you think they’re guilty.
Obviously he’s innocent though.
This is common knowledge for anyone who was around during the Chelsea Manning / Edward Snowden era and all the revelations of the depths of NSA spying, PRISM, etc.
Everything is being recorded, analysed, manipulated to whatever degree they’re technically capable of, laws be damned.
Jokes aside, I honestly don’t know if he’s the guy.
What I do know, is if this part is true, that should be enough to put doubt into the “beyond a reasonable doubt” part in the jury.
I can’t imagine how much it must suck for him right now if he didn’t do it. Like, the way they’re treating him is awful regardless, but I imagine that being responsible for the widely praised act would help a little (gosh, it must feel so awkward to have so many fans if he wasn’t the one who did it — it has stolen valour vibes (except presumably he wouldn’t have chosen to be the scapegoat))
I want to see him win this whether he did it or not, but at this point it legitimately looks like it isn’t him. Either way, they just want to make an example out of him, it’s literally just class warfare and nothing else.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it was him, if he had a meticulous brilliant plan to make sure there was no direct evidence, so people would know it was him but they couldn’t prove it in a court of law.
And then the cops were like “it’s cute you think we play by the rules” and planted evidence.
I hope he did it and I hope he gets off.
I just point blank don’t believe he did it.
Let’s say I kill a high profile individual on the street you know, hypothetically.
Do you seriously believe that I’d be casually hanging out in public at a McDonalds with a manifesto and loaded gun in my bag? I’m pretty sure that my first port of call if I was assassinating someone would be “Burn all the evidence in an alleyway somewhere, get new clothes on, and lay low for pretty much the rest of my fucking life, possibly in Mexico”
"Burn all the evidence in an alleyway somewhere, get new clothes on
Luigi in the released CCTV photography is already wearing different clothes to the shooter. Not very different though.
Bit strange to change clothes and backpack but keep the same styling and colors.
Not only that, Luigi’s fake ID which he did not use in an illegal way any known time was not linked with the shooting, just linked to a NY hostel.
Also Luigi was not marandised, hes also charged in NY, Pennsylvania and federally at the same time, double (triple?) jeopardy
And his bags were searched without him being able to see the search, which puts into question the search, but they didn’t find any gun or manifesto at that time. 6 hours later, they did find a gun and a manifesto after being contact with NYPD. And the paper work for this evidence is also not properly filed. In addition the inventory of his belonging was also not descriptive.
He was arrested by a rookie cop that didn’t get help from a supervisor to avoid mistakes either, lots of adrenaline in a huge profile case like this. He said he knew right away that this was the killer, and he had only the propaganda NYPD had posted to the media. And NYPD didn’t know who the killer was
I dont know how long it took, but it took well over 100 days before the defence was able to even see the evidence against him. A huge red flag that the prosecution dont think the evidence holds water. And when they did get it, it was terabytes of data, and Luigi wasn’t allowed to use a computer without hus lawyer present, blocking him from seeing what weaksauce they have against him
The aid to the prosecutor also listened in, they say it was an accident to a whole telephone conversation with Luigi and the lawyer, how is this even possible. The prosecutor rebuked him self from the case after they were caught doing this, so they do a new prosecutor
The feds even call for the death penalty before Luigi is even indited, let alone convinced.
I’m just very skeptical this is the shooter, why would they screw up everything so bad every step on puropuse like this. Its just a hail Mary that the judge who is married to a CEO will convict anyway
Yeah, the real shooter is probably in the woods somewhere barely surviving off what they can find. At least, that’s more reasonable than doing a high profile assassination and going to McDonalds for a burger after (I know it was days later, it’s hyperbole).
Yeah, the real shooter is probably in the woods somewhere barely surviving off what they can find.
…it’s mushrooms. Which is just super.
He’s an example of the difference in outcomes between a competent attorney focused solely on your own defense and some public defender that didn’t know you’d be their client until five minutes before trial.
Whether or not he did it, the real outcome of this court case appears to be reaffirming that the
NYPDlocal Pennsylvania PD simply cannot be trusted to do any kind of investigation of a crime or evidence handling even in the most high-profile cases.This was a police department in Pennsylvania, days later, hours away from NY
This police department mainly had information from the media, not from NYPD
I think what ends up happening (as a rando without a legal degree) is that the backpack and all of its contents become inadmissible as evidence. It makes beyond a reasonable doubt harder to achieve for the prosecution because they lack a proposed murder weapon in evidence.
This is just a motion. Judge will decide it’s validity and the remedy. It might end up with the evidence excluded, but it might be that the prosecution just has to provide a different/stronger justification, or even be a nothing burger if the judge is unconvinced by the arguments in the motion.
I agree with your analysis if the judge does exclude backpack and contents as evidence.
Anything other than exclusion will be grounds for appeal, later, too.
I think he probably is the right guy but he was smart enough to cover his tracks and they only found him because of some kind of illegal surveillance we don’t know about. Would explain why they’re so desperate for anything else to explain how they know it was him.
My issue with that is that if he were caught via illegal surveillance so soon after the fact, it seems strange that they wouldn’t have caught him during the planning/prep stages using said surveillance.
Think of it like the eye of sauron, when it’s looking at you it won’t miss anything, but it needs a reason to be looking.
There is so much junk data out there, you don’t know what matters. But the moment you have a face, time, and area you can do some crazy things.
He clearly didn’t want to get away if he kept the evidence. You can just throw it in the trash at a random place
deleted by creator
The images released at the time show two different people. One was from the scene and the other from a hostel in the area. While they look similar, there are details which show there are very likely not the same person. Luigi only matches the details of the hostel image, not the one from the scene.
NYC is full of tall attractive young men of Italian descent. I used to live there and off the top of my head can think of three different aquaintences who were his age and would have matched his profile close enough.
It doesn’t matter whether he did or did not do it just like it won’t matter what evidence does or does not exist.
An example to be made was chosen, and it will be made.
The only question at this point is how will we react to that example.
If they are worried about conviction, I expect he will be suicided.
This is the harsh truth. Right now, legally, their case is falling apart. A nontrivial amount of hard evidence was in that bag and this action should get everything tossed because the chain of evidence is non-existent.
The other poster is also correct, they’ve decided he should be punished for this, whether he did or not is irrelevant. They’re going to twist every ounce of evidence they can to say he did it. If that doesn’t work, he’ll be found hanging from his shoelaces…
