3 ms·

I guess they’re claiming it was an inside job? So did Mangione, etc. pierce the corporate veil, or does limited liability apply like it usually does when Unite

by hedora 2y ago

I guess they’re claiming it was an inside job? So did Mangione, etc. pierce the corporate veil, or does limited liability apply like it usually does when United Healthcare kills someone?

downrightmike 2y ago
I don't think he did it. The guy on the camera in NYC didn't have a unibrow and Luigi clearly does. I think they have a scapegoat that they are trying to pin it on.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > guy on the camera in NYC didn't have a unibrow and Luigi clearly does Wat. Mangione has a light unibrow. That will obviously show up more clearly head on (as it does in the taxi photo) than from above looking at the tippy tops of the hair.
- avidiax 2y ago
  Not saying that's impossible. Certainly a ghost gun has an advantage to corrupt government agents just as it does to criminals. But it's going to be difficult to make it stick against a patsy. What will be very suspicious is if he dies in custody before trial. Otherwise, at trial, I expect: * He has no alibi * The ballistic evidence matches the gun. * He has possession of additional ammunition from the same lot. * He was in fact a client of UHC with a substantial claim denial history * His computers/phone show that he was cyber-stalking If they have all that, I don't think a reasonable person could believe that the FBI crime lab and Google can be coerced in a grand conspiracy into fabricating evidence. If it turns out that the gun is a "2nd ghost gun", and the prosecution claims that he ditched the 1st gun and the ammo, and his alibi is "weak", and he cleared his digital history, that would be a much weaker more suspicious case.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > he was in fact a client of UHC with a substantial claim denial history It doesn't appear he was [1]. [1] https://apnews.com/article/luigi-mangione-united-healthcare-ceo-d148fbdde498c3ea4cf768945889d7e7 https://apnews.com/article/luigi-mangione-united-healthcare-...

by hedora 2y ago

I guess they’re claiming it was an inside job? So did Mangione, etc. pierce the corporate veil, or does limited liability apply like it usually does when United Healthcare kills someone?

downrightmike 2y ago

I don't think he did it. The guy on the camera in NYC didn't have a unibrow and Luigi clearly does. I think they have a scapegoat that they are trying to pin it on.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> guy on the camera in NYC didn't have a unibrow and Luigi clearly does Wat. Mangione has a light unibrow. That will obviously show up more clearly head on (as it does in the taxi photo) than from above looking at the tippy tops of the hair.
avidiax 2y ago
Not saying that's impossible. Certainly a ghost gun has an advantage to corrupt government agents just as it does to criminals. But it's going to be difficult to make it stick against a patsy. What will be very suspicious is if he dies in custody before trial. Otherwise, at trial, I expect: * He has no alibi * The ballistic evidence matches the gun. * He has possession of additional ammunition from the same lot. * He was in fact a client of UHC with a substantial claim denial history * His computers/phone show that he was cyber-stalking If they have all that, I don't think a reasonable person could believe that the FBI crime lab and Google can be coerced in a grand conspiracy into fabricating evidence. If it turns out that the gun is a "2nd ghost gun", and the prosecution claims that he ditched the 1st gun and the ammo, and his alibi is "weak", and he cleared his digital history, that would be a much weaker more suspicious case.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > he was in fact a client of UHC with a substantial claim denial history It doesn't appear he was [1]. [1] https://apnews.com/article/luigi-mangione-united-healthcare-ceo-d148fbdde498c3ea4cf768945889d7e7 https://apnews.com/article/luigi-mangione-united-healthcare-...