Luigi was framed.
He also allegedly had the manifesto with him, which makes no sense. Basically they just said “We randomly got a tip for this guy at mc donalds and he happened to have all possible pieces of evidence on him days after making a clean get away” mmm yeeah sure…
deleted by creator
Btw, it’s “Eavesdropping”.
An eavesdropper was someone who would hang from the eave of a building so as to hear what is said within.
I ain’t been droppin no eaves sir, honest. I was just cutting the grass under the window there if you’ll follow me
My pragmatic theory:
- He is the guy (I’m not saying it’s a bad thing)
- The “anonymous tip” was rather “illegal surveillance/tech us plebs don’t know about”
- Police found the gun and manifesto in NYC, and they planted it on him to ensure an easier conviction
Oof I hate that that is plausible as fuck
Here’s another thought. Some of the cops also support the action and intentionally botch evidence custody.
And it would’ve been so much easier to plant the stuff at his house while he was being taken. Except that would have required a small amount of thinking.
In addition to the rest, from the beginning Luigi himself claimed that there was money and other items in the bag that was not put there by him. This latest development appears consistent with that.
At this point the funniest thing would be if the real assassin was to take down another healthcare CEO.
Someone, can’t remember who…so if it’s you (not necessarily you OP, a general you) put your hand up, in a different Luigi thread a month or so ago had a pet theory that I think probably holds a reasonable amount of water.
The theory is that that CEO was knocked off by a paid hitman, possibly contracted by his spouse, and Luigi happened to be picked up as a scapegoat because the NYPD, or the arresting officer, was complicit/paid off a tidy sum.
With this coming up, it’s even less of an unlikely scenario.
Why would the hitman engrave the bullets? If they’re picking a plausible scapegoat with severe medical issues, then why one that’s young rich and handsome?
Man, I never said the theory was…dare I say… bulletproof? 🤓
Buuuuuut…if all the evidence was planted? Look, the “manifesto”, the engraved bullets, the whole thing is a cop’s wet dream. I’m willing to believe Luigi is in fact the triggerman, willing to believe that he’s unhinged enough to have toted all that about with him. You gotta think though…the NYPD were frothing, Altoona PD are under staffed, under paid. Not outside the realm of possibility it’s a frame job.
Just a tinfoil hat theory that I thought was…fun? Not really the best word for it, but fits well enough.
to make it look like an ideological hit job.
The theory is that that CEO was knocked off by a paid hitman, possibly contracted by his spouse, and Luigi happened to be picked up as a scapegoat because the NYPD, or the arresting officer, was complicit/paid off a tidy sum.
This would be a better theory if Luigi had a serious alibi. Also, if he wasn’t tied up with the Silicon Valley Longtermist movement, which has already produced a number of more low-profile killings.
I wouldn’t discount the pet theory, because it does sound like the kind of shit mega-millionaires get up to. But the NYPD picking up this guy specifically, where and when they did, with no credible counternarrative as to where he was at the time of the killing, makes me strongly suspect they have the right guy. But - like with the OJ Brown-Simpson murder - they’ve got such a clown car of detectives and a grandstanding mayor and self-insert celebrity journalists and prosecutors promoting the case as spectacle that they’re going to completely fuck this thing at trial.
If he wins the criminal case but loses a far more professionally executed civil “wrongful death” case a few years later, I would not be surprised in the slightest.
Does it have to be healthcare? I mean, there are some other candidates to consider
Starting with almost every single billionaire.
All good options.
I would argue that while billionaires are stealing your money, healthcare CEOs are taking lives, which is more important in my mind.
Which isn’t to say that billionaires don’t deserve the same treatment, this is just prioritization for the most benefit in the shortest amount of time… Long term, a lot more heads need to roll.
Both is the correct answer.
I’m just putting an emphasis on the healthcare industrial machine in the USA because it’s causing more acute harm to the people of the USA than anyone else.
Hard to amass billions without taking lives in some form.
I won’t disagree. Most billionaires are at least indirectly responsible for significant harm and loss of life. Whether they support, endorse or profit from inhumane, cruel and exploitative business practices, such as we see in the cobalt mines of the Congo, or other mineral mines whether for diamonds, lithium, or whatever…
Or they are profiting or directly befitting from people who are underpaid, and eventually, because of corporate profiteering, forced into poverty and they die because they are unable to afford to live… Or they are denying people life saving pharmaceuticals though supporting or profiting from the drug industry, or ownership therein (in whole or in part)…
Or they’re more directly responsible for harm by being an active voice in, or in support of, denying, deposing, and delaying, anything that might reduce a companies profits, especially healthcare companies.
The reality of it is: when you achieve a certain level of monetary wealth, your money is invested. Frequently those investments support something that doesn’t causes harm and death to your fellow humans.
Therefore: anyone with sufficient wealth to warrant investments, is almost always, someone endorsing, supporting, or profiting from the pain, suffering, and deaths, of other people. QED: all billionaires are evil, mass murdering pieces of shit, who should be strung up and quartered in the town square. I will settle for seeing their heads roll.
Where did I put my guillotine?
You put it so eloquently, thank you. We sadly haven’t even been able to find our collective pitchforks yet…
P.S. I think you accidentally put a “doesn’t” in the last line of “The reality of it is:”
Ty for the heads up. Cheers!
You son of a bitch, I’m in
Almost
Now I’m intrigued. Which billionaires should we spare and why?
I mean, Taylor Swift recently crossed the line and she’s been incredibly generous with it. So has Bezos’ ex-wife.
Does the work done at the Gates Foundation get them a pass?
Is there really “no such thing as an ethical billionaire”? Should there be no exceptions?
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 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”
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
"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.
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.
That’s the problem though. Everyone’s playing “If I were him”.
The thing is, we don’t know what was going on his mind. Say he actually was the one who did it. Maybe he wanted to get caught. Maybe he assumed he was going to get caught within minutes, and didn’t bother throwing away the evidence because he didn’t think there was any point. Maybe he kept changing his mind about what he was going to do, and in the end that indecision caught up with him.
Assuming he’s actually the one who shot the CEO, I already have trouble understanding his thinking. He shot a guy in cold blood who may have been scummy, but hadn’t actually hurt Mangione or anybody he cared about, AFAIK. He didn’t do it as part of a community. I know he’s not a mass shooter, but shooting a stranger for ideological reasons is most similar to mass shooters or bombers. Most of the times people do that, they’re egged on by a community. He apparently just did it on his own.
So yeah, I don’t get it, but the fact I don’t get it doesn’t convince me it can’t be true.
doesn’t convince me it can’t be true
That sounds like backwards logic - you’re postulating guilt based on the lack of evidence of innocence (if I’m understanding your point correctly.
You’re not. I’m not saying he’s guilty. I’m just saying that it’s silly to imply there’s a conspiracy or something just because some of his alleged actions seem abnormal, when cherry-picking which of his actions you’re looking at.
this sounds like lots of maybes that does covering, where there is talk of plenty of reasonable doubt. We are saying we are confused and there is reasonable doubt, sure you could be correct, but thats some mental gymnastics to get out of that reasonable doubt
I’m sorry it reads that way. What I’m trying to say is that you have to look at the whole picture.
“Let’s say I kill a high profile individual on the street you know, hypothetically.”
If you say that, you have to take into account what kind of person might do that. It’s a person who is not thinking normally. It’s something that people thinking normally might be tempted to do, but they wouldn’t actually do it.
“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?”
This is something that someone who’s thinking normally wouldn’t do. But, we’ve already established that someone who kills someone else on the street isn’t thinking normally. You can’t start from an assumption of normal thinking for someone who you’ve already hypothesized is a cold-blooded killer who killed a stranger on the street.
I would disagree, I would say it is normal to kill someone who is responsable for thousands of deaths, thousands of people dieing so you can make more money. It is only a collective cowardace, one that I have to admit also have. But I would argue within the history of humanity, and just normal human emotion, that that would be someone thinking normaly, you are killing a, truly stagering amount of people for, no real reason, someone has to stop you and there is no reason why that person should not be me.
Once agian i want to point out how truly insane it is that more of us do not do this regularly, how this is seen as a rare and shoking event and killing healthcare CEOs and other Billionares, who ammase their weath on mass exploitation is.
I would say it is normal to kill someone who is responsable for thousands of deaths
If it was normal, it wouldn’t be newsworthy.
It is only a collective cowardace, one that I have to admit also have.
You have it because you’re normal. He didn’t, meaning he wasn’t normal (he being whoever shot the CEO).
Once agian i want to point out how truly insane it is that more of us do not do this regularly
Insanity is an abnormal mental or behavioral state. By definition, if it’s how everyone acts, then it’s not insane. It’s normal.
You can say that we ought to act differently, but that’s not how people are wired. Normal people don’t act that way.
this is seen as a rare and shoking event
In other words, it’s abnormal. That’s why we’re paying attention.
but hadn’t actually hurt Mangione or anybody he cared about, AFAIK
Mangione supposedly had chronic health issues that may have been the basis of hatred for the health insurance business - https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/12/11/luigi-mangione-back-pain-healthcare-shooting/
I’ve heard that, but he doesn’t seem like the kind of person who kills someone due to their medical issues. For that, I picture someone confined to a wheelchair, or forced to use crutches, or severely addicted to pain meds.
Though on the other hand I don’t know of anyone who became murderous over being forced to use a wheelchair / crutches / pain meds either.
I do agree with your overall point where you’d prefer to be agnostic regarding this whole issue, but that’s also exactly why I wouldn’t go off into theorising either about what is required to make a man want to kill a healthcare insurance CEO, or what kind of a person Mangione “seems like”.
and you think my manifesto would start praising with how amazing the cops are and we need to thank them, and we should not rise up?
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 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 hope he did it and I hope he gets off.
I also hope he’s acquitted. I don’t know if a random healthcare CEO getting killed will make the world a better place. But, I do think that a guy getting away with killing a random healthcare CEO is more likely to result in change.
In the first case, it can be dismissed by the CEOs, oligarchs and friends as a crazy lone gunman. But, if a jury votes to acquit after massive donations to his legal case, that becomes a clear sign that it’s not just a lone gunman, that a lot of people support this kind of thing. It also makes it more likely to happen again, because the next gunman might think they can get away with it too. If CEOs start quitting because they don’t want a target on their backs, or they start reforming their companies to avoid being so hated, that’s great.
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.
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))
deleted by creator
Well that sure is weird.
No jury Nullification needed. It looks like it really was a frame job. Can’t wait to see this case unfold.
I still think this would be a bad case for jury nullification. Too much attention, too easily sent to the supreme court, court is too packed with clowns to do anything other than remove the power of jury nullification for the benefit of their wealthy owners.
Who knows though, maybe that would get people to actually decide enough is enough, i doubt it though.
Jury nullification isn’t an enumerated power, it’s an emergent result of jury deliberations being secret and their verdict being legally binding.
As the other comment says, jury nullification isn’t a thing that can easily be removed. The jury doesn’t just claim “jury nullification.” They just state their decision is that the defendant is not guilty. They don’t state why, and we’d only know why they came to that conclusion if they tell us later in interviews or something.
The plaintiff cannot appeal. There are super rare circumstances where I should say “usually can’t appeal”, but those are so rare I will just say only the defendant can appeal.
SCOTUS cannot overturn a Nulification in the not guilty, according to anything about nulification I have read thus far, because the jury said that there is reasonable doubt, that he did not do it.
Wow, imagine being the cop that fucked this up this hard.
I don’t think they could avoid fucking it up. Planting a fucking gun isn’t that easy :D
I mean, I guess it depends on how late in the season you plant it and how many gun seeds you have.
Well, let’s check in that Brian guy, he had a few gun seeds planted pretty successfully a while back.
You have to germinate them in a forge at 1200 degrees for about a week.
It’s all about getting the right balance of water and PH in the soil. I’ve had many guns wither just after sprouting.
deleted by creator
Hero Cop Saves Innocent Man’s Life
First and last time this phrase has ever been said about a US cop
Because no one else has yet commented this:
Fuck The Police.
Seriously! Bunch of slackers around here!
Sorry, I was asleep. I’ll set an alarm next time.
Thankfully/Unfortunately, you don’t need an alarm to know that ACAB
Getting arrested in Pennsyltucky by imbreds was a genius move.
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.
Sure, but it’s gonna be a real stupid attempt if they take it to trial with such shaky evidence, all it takes is a single juror going “lol no way do I trust that evidence” and the jury is hung, a few jurors on his side and he could likely be found not guilty and that would be the end of that, no retrial, he walks a free man.
I assume that jury selection on this particular trial was almost certainly tampered with to pick the least sympathetic to accused to out right bribed or blackmailed into being told how they will decide the case or else.
Brian Thompson was murdered, but all the evidence that has been made publicly available certainly suggest that Mangione had nothing to do with it. The images release of the shooting and the hotel do not match, purportedly the hotel images were 2 weeks old at the time, we’ve gotten no other proof that he was even in the city on the day of the shooting, as well as the backpack found in central park abandoned, yet supposedly 3 days later the suspect had the fake IDs, weapon and manifest on his person while out to lunch?
I’m sorry but no, this entire thing reads like they just want to crucify Luigi because they fucked up their investigation so bad they’re never going to catch the real culprit and his name must have been on a watch list or something to make him a convenient scapegoat.
A hung jury is not an automatic dismissal. The judge can allow a retrial and in this case they absolutely will. Over and over again, until they get the result they want.
Double Jeopardy
Im aware. Which is why I added, “a few jurors on his side and he could be found not guilty”. It was two possibile outcomes listed, not just one.
But that’s actually a risky strategy. If it becomes too obvious they’re pinning it on the wrong guy, the narrative will flip to “If you kill one of them, they will just have a random scapegoat take the fall and let you go free”
We can stop 1 100,000 person march, but we can’t stop 10 10,000 person marches at the same time
Even with that lets be clear Mr. Tompson was responsable for many more deaths for the sake of profit, only deemed not murder because its legal, I do not care if there where 30 videos proven to be genuine, and he said his name when he did it, the jury should nulify. Not because murder is correct, but because well millions died in part because of Brian Tompson, and if the state will do nothing to hold him accountable someone else has to.
I love the smell of “Reasonable Doubt” in the morning
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?
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.
Fruit of the poison tree…
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.
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
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.
Leave it to the NYPD to find the guy who did it regardless of who actually did it
deleted by creator
But why make a hero and a martyr? Are they stupid?
Vs. What?
Letting the world know that you can walk up to someone in the middle of the day and shoot them and get away with it?
We all know CSI shows are over exaggerated, but they give us a feeling of protection
Without a motive or a link to follow. A random gunman is next to impossible to find after they get away.
This way they don’t have to make the charges stick but “they caught” the gunman.
Security theater is important
Yes?
deleted by creator
They have her admitting on another cop’s body cam that she did a warrantless search. I don’t think she missed anything, I think they just NEED her to have missed it for the prosecution.
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?
corroborating articles
The defense argues that the search of Mangione’s backpack further violated his rights, arguing that there were no circumstances that constituted police conducting a warrantless search of the backpack. In the motion, Mangione’s lawyers wrote that it was only once an officer conducting the search “she had made a potentially devastating mistake by thoroughly searching the backpack of a murder suspect in a significant New York press case without a warrant, she suddenly stated that she was searching through the backpack at McDonald’s to make sure there ‘wasn’t a bomb or anything in here’.” However, Mangione’s defense team notes that the bomb squad was never called and the McDonalds was not evacuated over concerns of a bomb, but that another officer did tell the officer conducting the search that they “probably need a search warrant for it.”
Defense attorneys claim that some of the body cam footage is missing including 20 seconds of when Mangione was being questioned by a police when an officer placed his hand over his body cam and the 11 minutes during which the backpack was transferred from the McDonalds to the Altoona Police Department Precinct. The motion goes on the state that once that officer’s body cam footage resumes, it shows her immediately re-opening and closing the backpack compartments she already searched and then opening the front compartment of the backpack “as if she was specifically looking for something. Instantly, she ‘found’ a handgun in the front compartment.”
Good find. That does indeed look pretty damning in the context of chain of custody. I’d be fairly shocked if a reasonable judge doesn’t tell the DA to go fuck themselves with anything yielded from “his backpack”, given that. But that’s also highly dependent on the judge.
deleted by creator
Luigi is innocent. He did not kill Brian Thompson. He is a hero by the simple virtue that he is an innocent young man who was dragged through hell over something he didn’t do and is having his life put on the line.
As for who actually did it. I hope he lives a long, quiet life.
Of course Luigi didn’t do it. He was flying with me to New Orleans from Nashville at the time of the murder. We got beignets at The Vintage then took a ghost tour of the french quarter.
And right after that he went to my place thousands of miles away and we played classic Sierra games together. Given he is much younger than me he didn’t quite understand late 80s and early-mid 90s gaming that much at first. But my god was he such a good listener! He listened to all my middle age man explanations and how revolutionary all that stuff was at the time with full understanding. He even figured out the Gold Rush door puzzle from the get go! The guy is brilliant! And so very nice, too.
I still hope this is correct and the real guy starts act 2 during Luigi’s trial. Also it’s be cool if the next three shells read “super Mario brothers” lmao
We need some chubby copycat so they can be Mario.
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.
