NY - UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson fatally shot in Midtown. #11 *Arrest*

[LaborDayRN]

No chance of that IMHO, he will want his day in court, he will make the trial about putting the healthcare industry/corporate America on trial. Especially if the trial is televised like OJ/Jacko were he will love the attention of making grandiose statements infront of the cameras. He will take it all the way and take the gamble that a juror will be symathetic

I agree. As much as I would love to be able to watch the trial, I'd much rather L.M. didn't get a chance to sensationalize this murder further.
For the sake of the Thompson family who must be so broken hearted I hope he pleads guilty. (one can hope right?)
As much as people may hate their healthcare coverage in our country, they have no right to murder anyone! JMO

 

[ilovewings]

I think the charge involving terrorism was over-reach. just sayin'

 

[BrianJohnson]

I agree that the nullification thing is really not a legitimate concern here.

Let’s say the polling is correct, and about 20% of the public supports what this guy did.

You have voir dire to filter them out.

What is stopping someone giving fake answers to questions to get on the jury? and then saying the complete opposite in jury deliberations to get him off the hook. As someone who has acted/has acting training I could very easily convince people I am something I am not

 

[MassGuy]

What is stopping someone giving fake answers to questions to get on the jury? and then saying the complete opposite in jury deliberations to get him off the hook. As someone who has acted/has acting training I could very easily convince people I am something I am not

That’s where the second part comes in.

 

[BrianJohnson]

I think the charge involving terrorism was over-reach. just sayin'

Disagree, by shooting BT because he disagreed with the healthcare system he was trying to intimidate the CEO’s and decision makers of every healthcare company and they had a genuine fear he would come for them next.

noun

1. the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
   "the fight against terrorism"
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

 

[10ofRods]

The rules of evidence will very much squash the defense’s ability to put the healthcare industry on trial. It just won’t happen. New York trials aren’t televised, anyway.

I wonder if he knew that before he committed his crimes and I wonder if he knows it now.

What I envision, though, is that his supporters will be outside the Criminal Courts, in fairly high numbers (enough to make the press show up and interview many of them). They'll have signs and give many interviews/speeches. So, the issue *will* get publicity at trial - just not in the courtroom (although if Luigi takes the stand, a lot will come in - they cannot deny him his rights at the trial, either, it just won't be televised).

What is stopping someone giving fake answers to questions to get on the jury? and then saying the complete opposite in jury deliberations to get him off the hook. As someone who has acted/has acting training I could very easily convince people I am something I am not

Absolutely nothing and I've seen it happen (former jury consultant here). And then there's that category of people who truly think (in the moment) that they are unbiased or willing to say that - in order to be on such a high profile jury.

One does have to consider the types of people who are willing to commit to what may be a very long and difficult process. There are definitely people who want to be "part of" history, so to speak.

However, I do think lawyers and judges get a sixth sense about this kind of thing. Hopefully.

 

[ilovewings]

Disagree, by shooting BT because he disagreed with the healthcare system he was trying to intimidate the CEO’s and decision makers of every healthcare company and they had a genuine fear he would come for them next.

noun

1. the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
   "the fight against terrorism"
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

It may be a legitimate charge, but the DA has enough without complicating the case with this charge--

 

[detective.moon]

i was wondering, would it be a mistrial if it turns out a juror has lied to get on the jury? would there be consequences for that juror? has this happened before?

 

[fred&edna]

That makes sense. Mitigation is really her only option considering the mounds of evidence we’ve seen. The risk of acquittal or jury nullification is grossly overstated, imo.

As a defense attorney, a good portion of my job is doing damage control for clients, which often involves negotiating as fair of a plea deal as possible. I imagine that’s what will happen here (though it may take quite some time), unless LM or the prosecution are unwilling to cut a deal.

I suggested it yesterday... Federal charges and the possible penalties suggest a subtle shove towards, "Let's make a deal". Life in prison seems the best deal for both pros and defense.

jm (very-non-legal) opinion

ETA: And, if defense won't play the plea deal game... let the Feds take over!!

 

[Eaglette]

Can you give us a feel for what Australians think of the case? Yes I know it's a huge country, and I think you have public health care?

Most Australians are very anti-gun.
My friends would condemn such a brazen murder (shoot someone in the back).

Briefly:
Yes, we have a public health care system (Medicare) but, lots of us opt into private health funds (this gives us a choice of our specialist surgeons and to elect to have a single room in a private hospital etc). Lots of Specialists opt in to work with the private funds also - it can get a little complex, as funds ask for $500 up front payments upon Day Surgery/Admission etc. (which is a one off payment which covers you for the year).

Govt tax us for the Medicare system when we do our Tax Returns every June. It's on a scale of what your income is.
Single opt-in Private Health Insurance costs would be AU$225 per month on top of.

In saying that - if it is an Emergency you will be ambulanced to the nearest Public Hospital (teaching hospitals) for expert care (no fee).

Ambulance fees are about $1000 to hospital - if you don't have private health insurance.

We still have Ambulances ramping (waiting in line - banked up) for emergencies... wait lists for operations etc. It's not perfect - but its for everyone. We have reciprocal agreements with certain countries too, for travelers if they fall ill.

EDIT: spell

 

[10ofRods]

Disagree, by shooting BT because he disagreed with the healthcare system he was trying to intimidate the CEO’s and decision makers of every healthcare company and they had a genuine fear he would come for them next.

noun

1. the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
   "the fight against terrorism"
   
   
   
   
   
   
   

CEO's are not the "American public" nor the "American political system.

Most violence is committed to intimidate. Indeed, in the US, we are reluctant to even use the word femicide - even if the man who kills a woman has a long history of anti-woman hate speech. Public hate speech, hate speech observed in the workplace, etc .

DV is a form of intimidation. Heck, that UCSB man who murdered fellow students (with the intent to culminate at a sorority in order to kill the "cute girls") was a terrorist, IMO. Has fundamentally changed life on that campus and on others. It was meant to do so. He also targeted immigrants. There was no trial as he committed suicide.

There are people all over the internet who still praise him, were radicalized by him and have taken up his name as their internet moniker, in some way.

At any rate, arguably, a lot of things could be charged as terrorism - but aren't, usually. If it were up to me, all rapists would be charged with terrorism - as it is an attempt to intimidate and terrify a whole swath of the public.

IMO. I'd love to feel safer walking about. I can argue that LM's aims were economic and not political. I don't believe any political change can be expected - but I do think there are some big corporations who are very sobered by what just happened.

Again, IMO.

 

[fred&edna]

Lying during voir dire (and more) always reminds me of the Grisham book (& movie) "Runaway Jury"

jmo

 

[justpeachy22]

wow, i wonder what they were thinking with this hollywood photo opportunity! it seems like whoever makes these decisions is not really in touch with the sentiments of the public. i think if you want to nip something in the bud, you first have to understand what’s behind it. for example, the idea of wealth/power disparity, something that luigi supporters are angry about, is only strengthened with this display because well, someone who kills ordinary people wouldn’t get this treatment

also just the imagery of lots of armed characters in black, and one unarmed, calm looking handsome guy in colour, i think it’s having the opposite effect of what they were going for

the whole parading LM around like that - seriously those pics and money spent for that show - will actually be a gift to the defense imo. Lm atty is going to make a statement to the jury that this kid has been dragged through the ditches by the system already. Unfair and unusual treatment…should garner sympathy. Again I’m not on lm side, just stating what to me seems to be the obvious.

 

[BrianJohnson]

CEO's are not the "American public" nor the "American political system.

Most violence is committed to intimidate. Indeed, in the US, we are reluctant to even use the word femicide - even if the man who kills a woman has a long history of anti-woman hate speech. Public hate speech, hate speech observed in the workplace, etc .

DV is a form of intimidation. Heck, that UCSB man who murdered fellow students (with the intent to culminate at a sorority in order to kill the "cute girls") was a terrorist, IMO. Has fundamentally changed life on that campus and on others. It was meant to do so. He also targeted immigrants. There was no trial as he committed suicide.

There are people all over the internet who still praise him, were radicalized by him and have taken up his name as their internet moniker, in some way.

At any rate, arguably, a lot of things could be charged as terrorism - but aren't, usually. If it were up to me, all rapists would be charged with terrorism - as it is an attempt to intimidate and terrify a whole swath of the public.

IMO. I'd love to feel safer walking about. I can argue that LM's aims were economic and not political. I don't believe any political change can be expected - but I do think there are some big corporations who are very sobered by what just happened.

Again, IMO.

Being from the UK I admit to having very limited knowledge of American legal matters but here in the UK we have a person called Director of Public Prosecutions who when the police send cases his way he decides whether the evidence threshold matches the definition of the law, is there a similar type of person in the USA who would have examined all the evidence and determined it fits the threshold?

 

[Sundog]

From what I've read, doing time in federal prison is mostly boring but generally safer than state prisons, although there have been stabbings at MDC Brooklyn (where LM is currently) and Derek Chauvin was stabbed in federal prison.

Just another armchair expert guessing here for a possible plea deal - maybe life in prison for the federal charges (take death penalty off the table). For state charges, maybe murder 2 with possibility of parole after 25 years, although I'm not sure how it works for sentencing if someone is charged both at the state and federal level.

I wonder if LM's attorney will be successful if she challenges the parallel investigations and charges as constituting "double jeopardy" as she has initially stated. And if she is successful, I wonder which court will proceed with their charges - the feds or the state.

ETA - The federal charges were filed first, although I don't know if that would be a factor.

 

[Forest_Wood]

CEO's are not the "American public" nor the "American political system.

Most violence is committed to intimidate. Indeed, in the US, we are reluctant to even use the word femicide - even if the man who kills a woman has a long history of anti-woman hate speech. Public hate speech, hate speech observed in the workplace, etc .

DV is a form of intimidation. Heck, that UCSB man who murdered fellow students (with the intent to culminate at a sorority in order to kill the "cute girls") was a terrorist, IMO. Has fundamentally changed life on that campus and on others. It was meant to do so. He also targeted immigrants. There was no trial as he committed suicide.

There are people all over the internet who still praise him, were radicalized by him and have taken up his name as their internet moniker, in some way.

At any rate, arguably, a lot of things could be charged as terrorism - but aren't, usually. If it were up to me, all rapists would be charged with terrorism - as it is an attempt to intimidate and terrify a whole swath of the public.

IMO. I'd love to feel safer walking about. I can argue that LM's aims were economic and not political. I don't believe any political change can be expected - but I do think there are some big corporations who are very sobered by what just happened.

Again, IMO.

What does your response have to do with my post that you linked?

 

[MassGuy]

I wonder if LM's attorney will be successful if she challenges the parallel investigations and charges as constituting "double jeopardy" as she has initially stated. And if she is successful, I wonder which court will proceed with their charges - the feds or the state.

Experts say she’s very unlikely to be successful, as there’s plenty of precedent.

 

[justpeachy22]

Do we know that he would have had this sort of protection team available? It's been mentioned but I'm not sure of any definitive answer on it. Heads of big companies don't really have huge protection teams, I don't think. The mega wealthy may do but that is more of an anti-kidnapping measure, I think. Also, big security teams are sometimes counter productive as they might serve to bring attention to someone who isn't already well known.

I'm curious of the legal situation in New York regarding private security; NYC is extremely restrictive as regards firearms (handguns have been effectively banned for civilian possession for over a century) and I'm not sure how easy it is to get the relevant permits to carry and suchlike.

Edit: on reading up on it, it seems that handgun possession isn't as difficult as it was following some court cases. It still looks really complicated, though.

It’s startling to me to know that UHC heads had to have known about the recent serious threats on BT and they still did nothing to protect him. If someone is threatening your ceo, do something about it. Actually I seem to recall that maybe they had hired a security team for him but they were off duty that morning…?

 

[Fabled Automatic]

Ugh, I hate this SO MUCH. This rock star treatment of what is, after all, just a murderous bum.

This enormous contingent of LE from various agencies is:

A) completely unnecessary as he’s in cuffs and 2 cops would have been enough for safety’s sake, and:

B) does nothing but aggrandize the celebrity that has accrued to this two-bit murderer.

This is Secret Service levels of security. This is Taylor Swift to the tenth power levels of security.

Almost like they're trying to send a message to the 'proles', lest any others get similar ideas. A show of force not afforded any other common killer that I can recall.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

I think the charge involving terrorism was over-reach. just sayin'

I don't understand it - it only brings more sensationalism to the case. I'd think they'd want to deescalate that. Why not just press murder charges and get it done.