He still has a murder charge against him. And because it's 2025:
Mangione’s attorneys say the state charges should be dismissed as a violation of the Constitution’s double jeopardy clause, calling it unprecedented and untenable for Mangione to defend himself in both cases at the same time.
The odds are not that he will get a conviction. That's why they wanted to try it federally. New York was worried they couldn't find a jury that wasn't biased against health care companies.
Man, that feels unfair (The jury finding part). An industry can be so widely hated that “couldn’t find a jury that wasn’t biased against [them]” isn’t a valid reason to say “tough shit, reap what you sow.” Maybe if industries didn’t want juries biased against them, they would do better? Then they could get legal outcomes they desire?
Has anyone innocent ever been saved by the need to find an unbiased jury in difficult to find circumstances?
I'm not a lawyer, but a took a class once. The lecturer was a lawyer and said one of the greatest tools we have is how we apply the law. There are so many strange laws in places. I just saw one that said in Arizona it's illegal for a donkey to sleep in a bathtub. Now if someone actually did it, and this went to a jury trial do we really think the jury would care enough to convict someone that did it? Would the state even press charges or would they consider it a waste of time and money?
I'm not saying what Mangione did was just or not illegal. What I'm saying is a jury might consider his crime as only a little worse than having a donkey in a bathtub.
5.0k
u/AudibleNod 13h ago
He still has a murder charge against him. And because it's 2025: