He'll be found guilty in a civil lawsuit and then much later gets attested in Vegas while trying to get back some of his memorabilia at gunpoint. For which he will be getting an unusually high sentence. All the while he will write books claiming he will find the guy who really did it.
I would watch a sitcom about Luigi, and the series starts off with him being found not guilty. So they lock him in with a guy doing life. Their idea is to release him in 40 days. They think the life sentence guy will kill him. They assumed thats what would happen.
Instead he and his cell mate become lifelong friends, and the style of the show changes from gritty and dramatic, to being shot like an 80s NBC sitcom, with a studio audience.
Except it takes place in a comedy version of a jail. And it starts and ends every episode the same way. They wake up in their cell, and they go to sleep in their cell.
Cue the freezeframe, roll credits, as a studio audience gives forced applause that kind of drags, and you can tell some guy is waving his arms like "CLAP LOUDER!!!" and they're all just thinking "how long do we have to clap???"
Hi Im from Netflix and we want to make your show. We already have John Mullany committed. Only thing is we need to some how make it live and David Chang will being cooking the whole time.
I don't see any avenue where he is found not guilty to be honest, but in that theoretical case, I think that there's going to be a lot of older folk that absolutely lose their mind about the principle of the matter.
It’s straight Jury Nullification within an hour of deliberation unless there are people on the jury who have been bought, by monetary means or otherwise.
Not guilty seems very unlikely based on the publicly available evidence. I could see a hung jury happening though, as there are a minority of people who strongly want him to go free.
The most loud evidence since the arrest was the backpack with the gun and the manifesto. Except it was known pretty soon that the cops botched the ‘chain of custody’ for the backpack, as some officer had the backpack in her sole possession for an hour before delivering it to the station.
I keep being baffled as to why I don't see any news about this evidence being thrown away. Maybe it was dismissed from the trial right away, idk.
The thing is, I haven't heard that the backpack was thrown out of the evidence, which is what confuses me. But I'm only following the case via Lemmy and Reddit.
if what slurpy says is true, it should be. doesn't mean it will, the supreme court has ruled the police get a certain amount of whoopsies when it comes to your constitutional rights and you get zero
They're evidence is so weak that it will be easy for the defense to claim reasonable doubt, and combined with people generally leaning that way anyway, it's probably going to be a pretty easy win for him.
That's why they will drag it out for as long as possible, so they can keep him in prison until they absolutely have to release him. That's what they did with Casey Anthony. She ultimately got found Not Guilty, but she still spent 3 1/2 years in jail that she'll never get back.
Right, and I think we are seeing increasing cases of jury nullification, especially for civil disobedience against ICE. However, the reality is that Lemmy is a bubble. Luigi and his alleged murder are nowhere near as popular among the greater population as he is here. So that's why I think the chance of a hung jury is higher than nullification. Hung jury can happen if there is just one or a few people who refuse to convict. But jury nullification requires unanimity. There's bound to be at least a few law & order boomer types on the jury. But only time will tell.
All I have is the publicly available evidence, but that pretty strongly indicates guilt.
he was found a state over, at a mcdonalds. With a fake ID that was the same name that was used to check into manhatten, and for transport. with a bag containing a loaded unmarked 3d printed handgun that matched the footage.
He also had writings which are not public but have been stated to indicate his mindset prior to the murder, and a notebook that contained detailed travel plans and how to avoid capture.
Like pacifist said though, the police are tripping this case up, the biggest defense for Luigi at the moment is the ineptitude of the police during the arrest sequence and investigation. They have already succeeded in throwing out medical records due to improper acquisition, have been found wiretapping attorney lines (which IMO should be an immediate opposing party wins regardless), and are in the process of trying to throw the bag out that was found at mcdonalds due to improper search and seizure claims (although I don't personally think this will happen, it's pretty clear the search and seizure laws in that state clarify that a search will happen on any arrest regardless of case)
the only way I can see him getting a "innocent" verdict is Jury nullification, so I am not leaning on that, because even if found innocent on the second degree murder charges, based off publicly available evidence the prosecution still has a fairly strong case of stalking charges. Plus he still is facing the same charges at the state level as well, as the judges ruled it isn't considered double jeopardy for someone to be trialed both federally and state side (which IMO is wrong but I digress)
I wont break down all the evidence since I dont want to get in an extended argument but looking at what you posted, given what we know publicly there is room for reasonable doubt.
Here would be my counter arguments without going into detail.
The descripencies in photos released by police during the manhunt.
The bag that was ditched with suspicious reports of its contents.
The improper handling of the weapon.
Not saying these for sure indicate innocence just there is still room for reasonable doubt in the court of public opinion.
I agree, there is room for reasonable doubt, I do believe if they manage to throw the bag out of the evidence he will get his doubt. I just don't see them throwing the bag out.
I don't think there is room for a non-guilty verdict though. At minimum he will have stalking conviction, at maximum he will get murder conviction. Outside of the jury nullification I don't see a full innocent being done, but that will have to be done on both the state and federal cases.
To go back to your actual question though: Due to the publicly available evidence, I believe the older folk will have issue with if he goes free. I don't believe any fights will happen in regards to it, but it would be a clear abuse of process (in the eyes of the public). It would be like OJ Simpsons "If I did it" all over again.
It's a big reason why im firmly against the public getting involved with cases like this. It doesn't matter what the jury says, the general public thinks he did it, due to the amount of news given on the case. His battle won't end at the courts, he will have to fight that claim for the rest of his life and thats not fair to him if he is actually innocent.
The only way I can see the general public being ok with an innocent verdict, is if they make it absolutely clear that the evidence given to the public was embellished and not actually correct. That would be an insane turn of events though. If it ends up being a case of the evidence was thrown out/not being able to be used, or a jury nullification did somehow happen, people are going to complain and call it a systematic failure, regardless of cause or reasoning. Innocent until proven guilty is only correct in the court process. With current day media coverage you are guilty until proven innocent.
he'll be swept up by ice for existing, spend 3 weeks in a Totally-Not-Concentration-Camp™ before being deported via airdrop to somewhere in the middle of the Sahara, to far from towns and travel routes to get help before dying of exposure.
While the Bought-And-Paid-For media spin it as a win for americans by dealing with a "Terrorist" that the "Woke Justice System" let go for woke wokeness reasons.
The American government is doing their best to make him and his story disappear from the media. The same tactic will simply intensify. Killing him with the classic 'prison suicide' will only make him a martyr, so they will silence him and make him as invisible as possible.
He'll be released and probably be offered all sorts of book, talk show, movie deals.
He certainly won't do anything criminal. That would would be cuckoo bonkers.
CEO's of unpopular companies will increase their security and certainly not ever just wander around on their own outside in the street.
He will be the subject of all sorts of controversial arguments which will be used to market him.
Or... he'll go into some kind of anonymous relocation program and live a quiet life out of the public eye.
Either way it's going to be one of the most interesting moments to watch in recent history.
I'm not convinced he killed the first. The pictures they showed as evidence looked like completely different people, his backpack was lighter than his clothes in one, then darker than his clothes in another.
Then they "caught him" at a restaurant with a backpack full of all the most convenient evidence days later.
Weird. If I did that I sure wouldn't be hanging out in restaurants DAYS later still toting around all the evidence just for the luls.
I think the billionaire class will have an assassin ready to go. We’re not supposed to fight back. If he can be an example of punishment via the legal system, great. If not, well, they’ll pay to make that example of punishment so.
I mean he literally murdered someone in the middle of midtown Manhattan (I know Lemmy is really into the "Luigi is Innocent" conspiracy theories but I legit think he did it). Even if you think what he did was justified, that doesn't mean it's legal. We can't have a functioning society where you can just extra-judiciously kill people and get away with it even if they're doing something bad. He knew what he was getting into when he did this, and knew that he'd probably get arrested and convicted. If he gets convicted it will be justified, even though I completely understand why he did it and don't feel bad for the victim. If he is found not guilty, then the prosecution really fucked up and that's good for him.
Ok he might have allegedly committed those crimes and killed a man. But doesn't the actions taken by CEO affect and kill thousands of people.
People have been complaining about health care costs and insurance companies tactics of delay, deny and defend but noone does anything. The insurance companies and their shareholders never did anything. The government which was supposed to handle this didn't do anything. At what point is the use of guillotines become justifiable
he'll probably kill someone again. the judge was wrong to not allow a MH conviction to go forward, but ultimately that puts the jury in the position to let out a seriously mental ill murderer with no consequences or not.
If your only definition of "mentally stable" is "they don't murder again", then I guess you could make that argument, but it is ok to just acknowledge the fact that murder is not a healthy behavior. Like you don't have to fight fact on that one. It's just a known truth about the human condition. You can want Luigi out while acknowledging that murder is unhealthy and wrong.
Prosecutors hate this one trick! No murderer is competent to stand trial due to being mentally unstable! What's their diagnosis? Who knows! Who's your expert witness? Some random asshole on lemmy? Perfect!
I think the assessment of “just crazy enough” to step past that boundary is spot on, but to say that the man is batshit? Not at all.
This is a man who looked at a complex societal problem and chose a path, very deliberately. He didn’t just snap and walk into a building, guns blazing.
He also very deliberately limited his damage to one guy. A woman with coffee walked right up to what was happening, he looked right at her, she left, he let her.
His mental health declined until he murdered someone. It’s not that he is “batshit”- he had a very serious issue that he could not manage on his own. When you isolate from others, can’t work, and only focus on your own pain and violently hurting others until you do it- you are not a healthy person who can mange your own affairs. To me, it’s no different from saying someone “deliberately” slammed their head into the wall, so they don’t “need” a room with cushioned walls.
70 Comments
FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website · 88 pts · 162d
He'll be found guilty in a civil lawsuit and then much later gets attested in Vegas while trying to get back some of his memorabilia at gunpoint. For which he will be getting an unusually high sentence. All the while he will write books claiming he will find the guy who really did it.
hogmomma@lemmy.world · 29 pts · 162d
Sounds vaguely familiar.
Burninator05@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 162d
Read up on the some of the controversies surrounding the Lindburg Baby. It's pretty much point to point for what happened.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 162d
I just cant believe they never found the person who climbed in the basement window.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 161d
oh dude, my MIL is fucking insane. she thinks she's the lindburg baby. never mind the kid was male.
hogmomma@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 161d
I thought this was referring to OJ.
Brkdncr@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 162d
“How I Did It” would be a good title.
cephus@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 162d
ComradeMiao@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 162d
huh
WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 44 pts · 162d
They'll kill him.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 15 pts · 162d
Back of the head suicide, style? Lone wolf/mentally ill/fall guy? Or straight up, unambiguous, assination?
WoodScientist@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 162d
Before he's set for release, they'll put him in a cell with someone already serving a life sentence. Another jailhouse killing.
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 162d
I would watch a sitcom about Luigi, and the series starts off with him being found not guilty. So they lock him in with a guy doing life. Their idea is to release him in 40 days. They think the life sentence guy will kill him. They assumed thats what would happen.
Instead he and his cell mate become lifelong friends, and the style of the show changes from gritty and dramatic, to being shot like an 80s NBC sitcom, with a studio audience.
Except it takes place in a comedy version of a jail. And it starts and ends every episode the same way. They wake up in their cell, and they go to sleep in their cell.
Cue the freezeframe, roll credits, as a studio audience gives forced applause that kind of drags, and you can tell some guy is waving his arms like "CLAP LOUDER!!!" and they're all just thinking "how long do we have to clap???"
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 162d
Hi Im from Netflix and we want to make your show. We already have John Mullany committed. Only thing is we need to some how make it live and David Chang will being cooking the whole time.
nylo@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 161d
that last sentence is doin me 'ead in m8
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 162d
Today's popular option seems to be car crashes.
makyo@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 161d
Ah you beat me to it
makyo@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 161d
Zephorah@discuss.online · 2 pts · 162d
Exactly so.
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 33 pts · 162d
I don't see any avenue where he is found not guilty to be honest, but in that theoretical case, I think that there's going to be a lot of older folk that absolutely lose their mind about the principle of the matter.
Zephorah@discuss.online · 23 pts · 162d
It’s straight Jury Nullification within an hour of deliberation unless there are people on the jury who have been bought, by monetary means or otherwise.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net · 11 pts · 162d
Not guilty seems very unlikely based on the publicly available evidence. I could see a hung jury happening though, as there are a minority of people who strongly want him to go free.
RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 162d
Cops seem to be OJing it, getting plenty of publicly available evidence tossed because they fucked up processing it
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 161d
Ah well I haven't followed all those details. Prosecutorial incompetence is always a possibility.
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 161d
The most loud evidence since the arrest was the backpack with the gun and the manifesto. Except it was known pretty soon that the cops botched the ‘chain of custody’ for the backpack, as some officer had the backpack in her sole possession for an hour before delivering it to the station.
I keep being baffled as to why I don't see any news about this evidence being thrown away. Maybe it was dismissed from the trial right away, idk.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 161d
You're saying the backpack was ruled inadmissible? If so that is certainly a big deal, maybe bigger than possible jury nullification.
However again, I have not been following all the twists and turns so I don't know what other evidence may have been uncovered since the arrest.
SlurpingPus@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 161d
The thing is, I haven't heard that the backpack was thrown out of the evidence, which is what confuses me. But I'm only following the case via Lemmy and Reddit.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 161d
if what slurpy says is true, it should be. doesn't mean it will, the supreme court has ruled the police get a certain amount of whoopsies when it comes to your constitutional rights and you get zero
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 160d
They're evidence is so weak that it will be easy for the defense to claim reasonable doubt, and combined with people generally leaning that way anyway, it's probably going to be a pretty easy win for him.
That's why they will drag it out for as long as possible, so they can keep him in prison until they absolutely have to release him. That's what they did with Casey Anthony. She ultimately got found Not Guilty, but she still spent 3 1/2 years in jail that she'll never get back.
Zephorah@discuss.online · 9 pts · 162d
That’s the idea of jury nullification: guilty, but we don’t care.
LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 161d
Right, and I think we are seeing increasing cases of jury nullification, especially for civil disobedience against ICE. However, the reality is that Lemmy is a bubble. Luigi and his alleged murder are nowhere near as popular among the greater population as he is here. So that's why I think the chance of a hung jury is higher than nullification. Hung jury can happen if there is just one or a few people who refuse to convict. But jury nullification requires unanimity. There's bound to be at least a few law & order boomer types on the jury. But only time will tell.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 7 pts · 162d
Ok, what is the evidence of the case? If you know.
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 161d
All I have is the publicly available evidence, but that pretty strongly indicates guilt.
he was found a state over, at a mcdonalds. With a fake ID that was the same name that was used to check into manhatten, and for transport. with a bag containing a loaded unmarked 3d printed handgun that matched the footage.
He also had writings which are not public but have been stated to indicate his mindset prior to the murder, and a notebook that contained detailed travel plans and how to avoid capture.
Like pacifist said though, the police are tripping this case up, the biggest defense for Luigi at the moment is the ineptitude of the police during the arrest sequence and investigation. They have already succeeded in throwing out medical records due to improper acquisition, have been found wiretapping attorney lines (which IMO should be an immediate opposing party wins regardless), and are in the process of trying to throw the bag out that was found at mcdonalds due to improper search and seizure claims (although I don't personally think this will happen, it's pretty clear the search and seizure laws in that state clarify that a search will happen on any arrest regardless of case)
the only way I can see him getting a "innocent" verdict is Jury nullification, so I am not leaning on that, because even if found innocent on the second degree murder charges, based off publicly available evidence the prosecution still has a fairly strong case of stalking charges. Plus he still is facing the same charges at the state level as well, as the judges ruled it isn't considered double jeopardy for someone to be trialed both federally and state side (which IMO is wrong but I digress)
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 161d
I wont break down all the evidence since I dont want to get in an extended argument but looking at what you posted, given what we know publicly there is room for reasonable doubt.
Here would be my counter arguments without going into detail.
The descripencies in photos released by police during the manhunt.
The bag that was ditched with suspicious reports of its contents.
The improper handling of the weapon.
Not saying these for sure indicate innocence just there is still room for reasonable doubt in the court of public opinion.
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 161d
I agree, there is room for reasonable doubt, I do believe if they manage to throw the bag out of the evidence he will get his doubt. I just don't see them throwing the bag out.
I don't think there is room for a non-guilty verdict though. At minimum he will have stalking conviction, at maximum he will get murder conviction. Outside of the jury nullification I don't see a full innocent being done, but that will have to be done on both the state and federal cases.
To go back to your actual question though: Due to the publicly available evidence, I believe the older folk will have issue with if he goes free. I don't believe any fights will happen in regards to it, but it would be a clear abuse of process (in the eyes of the public). It would be like OJ Simpsons "If I did it" all over again.
It's a big reason why im firmly against the public getting involved with cases like this. It doesn't matter what the jury says, the general public thinks he did it, due to the amount of news given on the case. His battle won't end at the courts, he will have to fight that claim for the rest of his life and thats not fair to him if he is actually innocent.
The only way I can see the general public being ok with an innocent verdict, is if they make it absolutely clear that the evidence given to the public was embellished and not actually correct. That would be an insane turn of events though. If it ends up being a case of the evidence was thrown out/not being able to be used, or a jury nullification did somehow happen, people are going to complain and call it a systematic failure, regardless of cause or reasoning. Innocent until proven guilty is only correct in the court process. With current day media coverage you are guilty until proven innocent.
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 28 pts · 161d
he'll be swept up by ice for existing, spend 3 weeks in a Totally-Not-Concentration-Camp™ before being deported via airdrop to somewhere in the middle of the Sahara, to far from towns and travel routes to get help before dying of exposure.
While the Bought-And-Paid-For media spin it as a win for americans by dealing with a "Terrorist" that the "Woke Justice System" let go for woke wokeness reasons.
Muffi@programming.dev · 27 pts · 162d
The American government is doing their best to make him and his story disappear from the media. The same tactic will simply intensify. Killing him with the classic 'prison suicide' will only make him a martyr, so they will silence him and make him as invisible as possible.
lepinkainen@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 161d
So you’re saying they’ll Epstein him?
Novamdomum@fedia.io · 23 pts · 161d
He'll be released and probably be offered all sorts of book, talk show, movie deals. He certainly won't do anything criminal. That would would be cuckoo bonkers. CEO's of unpopular companies will increase their security and certainly not ever just wander around on their own outside in the street. He will be the subject of all sorts of controversial arguments which will be used to market him. Or... he'll go into some kind of anonymous relocation program and live a quiet life out of the public eye. Either way it's going to be one of the most interesting moments to watch in recent history.
arcine@jlai.lu · 22 pts · 161d
Colonel_Panic_@eviltoast.org · 9 pts · 161d
I'm not convinced he killed the first. The pictures they showed as evidence looked like completely different people, his backpack was lighter than his clothes in one, then darker than his clothes in another.
Then they "caught him" at a restaurant with a backpack full of all the most convenient evidence days later.
Weird. If I did that I sure wouldn't be hanging out in restaurants DAYS later still toting around all the evidence just for the luls.
AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net · 4 pts · 161d
For his sake, I really hope he did do it. I mean, being imprisoned as he is would suck regardless, but it would suck extra hard if he didn't do it
DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social · 20 pts · 161d
Nothing, he's an innocent man after all.
Blackmist@feddit.uk · 19 pts · 161d
They'll arrest the jury.
I mean, yeah, they're not allowed to do that, but since when has that stopped this regime?
CileTheSane@lemmy.ca · 17 pts · 161d
Disappeared by ICE.
RIotingPacifist@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 160d
Luigi that ain't a hwithe name!
Zephorah@discuss.online · 16 pts · 162d
I think the billionaire class will have an assassin ready to go. We’re not supposed to fight back. If he can be an example of punishment via the legal system, great. If not, well, they’ll pay to make that example of punishment so.
Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 161d
Mysterious car crash/ heart attack/ fent OD/ fall from a window.
But it won't be too mysterious.
LostSoul8765@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 162d
Zier@fedia.io · 9 pts · 162d
A massive party.
Wilco@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 160d
Hopefully copycats. If defending ourselves from these horrid companies becomes a legal precedent then it is officially open season.
zxqwas@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 162d
Jail, some extremists protesting for a week and then forgotten about when the news headlines changes.
SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org · 2 pts · 161d
We build him a statue. We should to that regardless. I want to encourage certain behavior after all.
pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 161d
I think there will certainly be statues. That's probably inevitable.
SeaSgt@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 161d
Open season on the exploitation class. …that’s my what if.
markovs_gun@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 161d
I mean he literally murdered someone in the middle of midtown Manhattan (I know Lemmy is really into the "Luigi is Innocent" conspiracy theories but I legit think he did it). Even if you think what he did was justified, that doesn't mean it's legal. We can't have a functioning society where you can just extra-judiciously kill people and get away with it even if they're doing something bad. He knew what he was getting into when he did this, and knew that he'd probably get arrested and convicted. If he gets convicted it will be justified, even though I completely understand why he did it and don't feel bad for the victim. If he is found not guilty, then the prosecution really fucked up and that's good for him.
AstralPath@lemmy.ca · 13 pts · 161d
The extra-judicial nature of our society favours the rich. They get away with murder every minute of every day? Why not Luigi?
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 161d
I see where youre coming from. Can you tell me the evidence against Luigi?
AnnaFrankfurter@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 161d
Ok he might have allegedly committed those crimes and killed a man. But doesn't the actions taken by CEO affect and kill thousands of people.
People have been complaining about health care costs and insurance companies tactics of delay, deny and defend but noone does anything. The insurance companies and their shareholders never did anything. The government which was supposed to handle this didn't do anything. At what point is the use of guillotines become justifiable
disregardable@lemmy.zip · -59 pts · 162d
he'll probably kill someone again. the judge was wrong to not allow a MH conviction to go forward, but ultimately that puts the jury in the position to let out a seriously mental ill murderer with no consequences or not.
barooboodoo@lemmy.zip · 33 pts · 162d
Gotta love armchair psychologists
disregardable@lemmy.zip · -28 pts · 162d
yeah, I know so many mentally healthy people who murder all of the time.
FerretyFever0@fedia.io · 22 pts · 162d
All of the time? He allegedly did one murder. Plenty of mentally stable people only do the one. Don't be ridiculous.
disregardable@lemmy.zip · -21 pts · 162d
If your only definition of "mentally stable" is "they don't murder again", then I guess you could make that argument, but it is ok to just acknowledge the fact that murder is not a healthy behavior. Like you don't have to fight fact on that one. It's just a known truth about the human condition. You can want Luigi out while acknowledging that murder is unhealthy and wrong.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 21 pts · 162d
So, killing someone in a war, automatically mentally ill?
barooboodoo@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 161d
Prosecutors hate this one trick! No murderer is competent to stand trial due to being mentally unstable! What's their diagnosis? Who knows! Who's your expert witness? Some random asshole on lemmy? Perfect!
Zephorah@discuss.online · 23 pts · 162d
I think the assessment of “just crazy enough” to step past that boundary is spot on, but to say that the man is batshit? Not at all.
This is a man who looked at a complex societal problem and chose a path, very deliberately. He didn’t just snap and walk into a building, guns blazing.
He also very deliberately limited his damage to one guy. A woman with coffee walked right up to what was happening, he looked right at her, she left, he let her.
This is not the action of a batshit person.
disregardable@lemmy.zip · -16 pts · 162d
His mental health declined until he murdered someone. It’s not that he is “batshit”- he had a very serious issue that he could not manage on his own. When you isolate from others, can’t work, and only focus on your own pain and violently hurting others until you do it- you are not a healthy person who can mange your own affairs. To me, it’s no different from saying someone “deliberately” slammed their head into the wall, so they don’t “need” a room with cushioned walls.
Zephorah@discuss.online · 1 pts · 162d
Fair. Even so. To what degree that was the case, or not, is anyone’s guess. They’ve not pulled the trigger on a mental health defense, last check.
Daft_ish@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 18 pts · 162d
This was a serious question, stop being silly.
aramis87@fedia.io · 13 pts · 162d
.... I think I shall start disregarding you, disregardable. Goodbye.
AstralPath@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 161d
username checks out