One year after the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, the court is now weighing whether police violated alleged gunman Luigi Mangione’s Miranda rights.
One year after the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, the court is now weighing whether police violated alleged gunman Luigi Mangione’s Miranda rights.
They want the search of his bag to be ruled out as evidence. The bag contained the murder weapon and his personal notes, which were likely incriminating.
That’s actually a much bigger deal for Mangione at this hearing than the Miranda warning issue.
That seems like more of an uphill battle. Even if the search incident to arrest is illegal, the defense also has to prove that the feds would not have inevitably gotten the search warrant for the backpack anyway.
The sequence of events with the backpack was:
12 minutes into the McDonald’s interaction, the cops moved the backpack some distance away from him, and put themselves between Mangione and the backpack.
While still in the McDonald’s a local cop opened the backpack, searched all the inside compartments, and found the key items, including the gun. The cops say this was an inventory search incident to arrest.
She then put the gun back in the backpack and zipped it back up. This is a clue that the cops were actually worried about the legality of the search.
They took the whole backpack back to the police station.
The same cop then searched the backpack again at the police station, and magically found the same gun that she had put back into the backpack. Still no warrant.
7 hours later, Altoona PD applied for and received a warrant to search the backpack.
Despite the preposterousness of this sequence, if the prosecution can show that the team that applied for the warrant was not excessively tainted by prior knowledge of the gun or notebook, they can probably still use the evidence.
How do you know it’s the murder weapon? Why do you think the notes are likely incriminating?
Well I’m essentially citing the article, but your questions are not relevant to the point I was trying to make.
Alright, they do call the notes that, but calling that gun “the murder weapon” is inappropriate. It robs Mangione of his presumption of innocence.
I have a much bigger problem with calling that gun “the murder weapon” anyways. That’s the bigger issue of the two.
I’m not a court of law. I don’t owe Mangione anything. Go argue your point to someone who cares.
Explain to us what point you were trying to make by misrepresenting allegations as established fact, then.
I was clarifying for the commenter why Mangione’s lawyers were trying to argue that he was inappropriately detained. He suggested it was because of statements made that he wants to retract. I suggested it was more likely because they wanted the search of his bag and the discovery of the murder weapon or notes thrown out.
Also fuck off with this misrepresentation of facts crap. I don’t owe Luigi or you anything. If I think he committed the murder then I can shout it from the rooftops if I want to. Welcome to the Court of Public Opinion! We all know he did it it, and with the gun from his bag. Lawyers in court have to argue and prove a high bar to prosecute. I on the other hand do not!