Submitted 2 weeks ago by hoshikarakitaridia@lemmy.world to [deleted]
This is a genuine question.
I have a hard time with this. My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence, but my pessimistic side thinks this might have set a great example for CEOs to always maintain a level of humanity or face unforseen consequences.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial and I want actual opinions so let’s be civil.
And if you’re a mod, delete this if the post is inappropriate or if it gets too heated.
Maybe get a fine for .0005% of their net worth. You know, so they don’t do it again.
That’s how it works, right?
Even if he’s caught. Dudes going to get off if he demands a Jury trial. Not a single middle class or poor individual in America has a positive relationship with health insurance. Hell how does a prosecutor even screen jurors for this type of trial?
Bribery
This is a good question from the wrong angle. This event is cathartic for many people because the ultra rich who ruin countless lives never get punished. When they see “consequences” it’s a golden parachute. This event is frustrating because the media, legal, and security apparatuses expect us to treat this assassination as a grave act, but actively normalize the acts of harm Thompson and other leaders like him commit every day.
This event is revealing in stark terms the divide between the elite and the average person. Should murderers be prosecuted? Sure - in a world where justice and the rule of law matter for everyone equally. Doesn’t feel like we live in that world.
If murderers got prosecuted equally this CEO should have had a day in court years ago.
He’s been climbing the ladder at United for 20 years. Many years ago indeed.
Do you want to see the people who killed Osama Bin Laden prosecuted?
Because the United Heath CEO killed far more people, including many more children, than Bin Laden did on 9/11.
🎵🎶 jury nullification 🎵🎶
I am not from the US. How many jurors are there in the trial? And don’t they have to all agree? There would definitely be at least one bootlicker or paid off person.
12 angry (wo)men
Why is violence legal when the government does it but not for regular people who have exhausted their peaceful options? Escalation of force gets justified all the time for cops and waging wars.
The monopoly on the use of force is quite the important part of having a state at all. If a state doesn’t have that, it descends into anarchy (the bad kind, with warlords and gangs). The US is very exceptional in this case as it has in its constitution the provision that such gangs (militia) are allowed, even desirable.
Seems like something a politician in power would say.
Yes, and if they use that monopoly of power to suppress and harm people then they will quickly lose that monopoly. A state is run but the people, if that changes the people will attempt to take control back.
Wait so can’t you argue this is constitutional?
US is weird.
In the USA violence can be legal for anyone under certain circumstances, otherwise I don’t know what’s expected from the second amendment…
Yes, I do.
I want the state to make it crystal clear that this guy was the shooter. That he did it. That he had no legal justification to do it. That his actions were undeniably criminal, and that his crime was clearly premeditated.
And then I want a jury of his peers to return a “not guilty” verdict, and every scumbag business executive across the country suddenly deciding to take an early retirement.
His jury can’t return that not guilty verdict if he isn’t prosecuted.
What a good take on this question. Bravo.
And because of double jeopardy he’d be free from further (criminal) prosecution for those charges.
That would be nice. Therefor the powers that be would not let it a jury trial happen. Look at what happens to anyone who pisses off putin (trump’s model for the US). Look at what happen to Epstine or the Boeing whisleblowers. We don’t do justice in this country anymore than we do Healthcare.
No.
I want to see him emulated.
It sounds rough to say, but I genuinely think this is part of a new American revolution, the people have had enough. It shows, I’m not saying we should go out and kill execs, but I am saying I wouldn’t be surprised if something like that happens.
Let me ask counter OP, say a full out rebellion occurred against the corporate oligarch class, ten years from now we have had a bloody and violent change from people who felt they had no other recourse. It was unpleasant but now we are in a society where the general public is much better off and it was generally remembered as a “war on corporate corruption” and the rich are much less willing to tread on their fellow man
In this pretend scenario the killers are now labeled freedom fighters, and public opinion is that it was a necessary overthrow of an unjust system. How would you realistically feel about the man now? I believe it’s all about societal context, and and the line between justice and a slaying does tend to blur after a certain, very extreme point has been crossed.
Now In reality, has that point been crossed yet? I don’t know, that’s yet to be determined, but I feel we will know sooner or later
It’s not even a hypothetical.
In the past workers used to kidnap and kill CEOs, we ended up with worker rights and a higher standard of living.
That stopped, and things slipped away.
Hopefully it’s starting again.
Yes, hell yes.
Get this man in a court room. Let the prosecutors spend weeks trying to find a jury where no one (or any of their relatives and friends) has been fucked over for life because of shitty insurance.
Let them talk about how unstoppable, determined, and committed the defendant was.
And then have the jury nullify the case.
It would be a good day to be alive.
It would make him SO famous.
Agreed, murder is murder. Even if the guy is part of a system of monsters, it does not matter. He is still allowed to due process as part of the American judicial system.
If he’s caught we should elect him president so he doesn’t have to go to jail.
Was the ceo shot on fifth avenue?
Omg this. Yes pls!
Jury selection question to weed out biased jurors: “Have you ever had a claim that was unfairly denied?”
Weeks later: “We have been unable to find enough jurors to try the case.”
No. I hope he’s never found. I hope it destroys the careers of all the cops and politicians blowing shitloads of resources looking for him while they barely look at crimes against normal people. I hope all these insurance executives wake up in a cold sweat every night worrying that they’ll be next. That’s what’s best for the world.
Absofuckinglutely not. I want him to never be found and continue official health insurance CEOs one by one until we get universal healthcare like the rest of the developed world. And after he’s through with them there’s a whole list of other rich assholes that the world would be better off without, starting with the defense contractors.
Yes. I want the story of how United screwed them and their loves ones. I want thousands of families screwed by United to go as witness and tell their stories.
And hopefully the jury will find any evidence inconclusive.
The judge won’t allow that as evidence, I guarantee it.
If this goes to trial, and it probably will at one point provided he gets arrested, there is a decent chance of jury nullification.
There’s also jury nullification.
that’s not how our justice system tends to work unfortunately. if the shooter is caught, he will end up in prison, no doubt about it.
plus, from a purely socialogical standpoint, having a nameless person with an unknown story allows people to put whatever story they want on them, which makes them a way more compelling figure cause they can appeal to pretty much everyone
I want to see a trial.
I also want to start a go fund me for his or her legal defence find.
I’d love to see a well funded law firm make the argument that the shooter acted in defence of self and others and drag all of UHC bullshit under a very large and uncomfortable deposition microscope to prove the CEO was responsible for letting people die.
Maybe we could even start putting these health insurance CEOs on trial for all the wrongful deaths they’re causing without needing someone to take justice into their own hands first.
Absolutely no chance for justice in this system for this person. Musk bought a president that staged a coup 4 years ago. The potato supreme has a member that flew the flag of that coup, they are openly corrupt and have no checks or balances. That is the entire foundation of the legislative system and government. This guy was We the People and far closer to a real justice system than anything from this shit government.
Jury nullification on that case would be 😘👌
All I know is if I’m somehow selected for jury duty on this one, I ain’t never heard of either man or what happened in my life. Coughcough
I don’t think he would make it to trial. The wealthy don’t appreciate those who unite the public against them, and they certainly wouldn’t want him to send another message.
Id love to see him go to trial, and funds raised through gofundme are used to buy off the jurors and judge. It only makes sense that if the rich can use money to make their problems go away, the poor should be able to do so as well. And that is still within our “legal framwork”
If the CEOs that are responsible for price gouging and cutting services in the American health insurance system aren’t held responsible than this guy shouldn’t be either.
Well said!
Then*
Theoretically: no.
In practice, in the world we’re living in? Hell no.
Any attempt to prosecute the killer would simply add to the advantage the ruling class already have, and be basically an injustice by definition no matter how “by the book” could it have been approached in the otherwise wondrful and illusory world of theory.
I’d like the CEO prosecuted post-mortem, if possible, and any charges transmitted to other decision-makers at UHC.
Yes, in a world where judges can’t be bought and criminals don’t get Epstein’d.
I want fair justice as much fair justice can be attained by humanity. But in that kind of world, this type of murderer wouldn’t exist in the first place.
Hear me out before you rage:
In theory? I believe that killings warrant investigation, prosecution and trial, no matter their intention, though the intention should factor into the result of the process. I want him to be prosecuted with the same intensity as any other killing would be, and if found, given a fair trial, convicted for whatever charge applies, as would be proper for a functioning judicial system. But then I’d want to see him pardoned as political expression of his popular support (and the fact that his victim was part of a deeply inhuman complex of exploitation).
In practice? I hope they never find him. Appropriate intensity of investigation? Orderly arrest? Fair treatment as prisoner? Fair trial? Fair charges? Fair conviction? Fat chance. Pardoned? Not even a chance.
I want him to go without punishment more than I want to hope for a fair process, and I couldn’t believe in the latter in any case.
Nope.
If Trump can get alway with almost all of his bullshit, if the Supreme Court can just hurr durr away a hundred + years of legal precedent, then this whole system is bullshit.
Murderer? What murderer? The CEO tripped while carrying a gun and accidentally shot himself twice in the back 🤫
If he gets caught, yes. I want to believe in the process of our law. And part of our laws support jury nullification. Now whether or not i would personally vote to convict/nullify is something I’ve been reflecting on and I’m not sure how i would vote. I do believe murder is wrong, but im also interested to know the actual data behind how many people died because claims were denied by united health group. We have two murderers, one who blatantly broke the law and one who did it within the law to make 22 billion in profit in 2023. How many people died to make that profit? And do those deaths make murder right? Idk.
An answer to a different question, but if he gets caught I hope that the media gives him the same treatment as school shooters; plastering his image everywhere, distributing his manifesto and transforming him into an antihero.
You’re asking the wrong question.
This is a story about two people. One committed an enormous act of violence and one shot someone.
The question is: should the CEO be prosecuted for his violent crimes?
No. If murdering cops can get away with it, so should someone who killed a guy who has indirectly killed millions through the racket that is health insurance.
Do you want the murderer of the UnitHealthcare CEO prosecuted?
Nope.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial
Not really.
Id like to see trump face ramifications before this guy.
No. I hope he is never found
No, I hope they never find him.
TommySoda@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
If he gets caught, then I’d say yes. Murder should be treated as murder regardless of what the reason is. Making exceptions is never a good idea.
I just hope he doesn’t get caught.
nokturne213@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
Then all of the healthcare companies that allow people to die because they will not cover them need to be prosecuted, every executive, every decision maker.
Glide@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
Don’t threaten me with a good time.
FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Trinity: what is he doing?
Morpheus: he’s beginning to believe…
friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
TommySoda@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Exactly. :)
fmstrat@lemmy.nowsci.com 2 weeks ago
Population Health needs a regulated definition.
tiefling@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
I’ll take that trade
TerkErJerbs@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
Brian Thompson and his co-workers murder hundreds of thousands of people with systematic neglect, spreadsheets, and lawyers. They murder in broad daylight, during business hours. And yet they’re comfortable, well paid, successful people who will never see a day in jail. What they’re doing isn’t even considered a crime.
I hope he doesn’t get caught, also. Because the same laws that protect those fucking ghouls will crush him for bringing attention to the grift.
TommySoda@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Like I said, making exceptions is always a bad idea. It’s how these fuck heads even get away with it. But at the same time I can’t agree with exceptions even if I agree with the reason behind it.
TwigletSparkle@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
They also run the risk of getting assassinated by the people who they have exploited, so we’ll see how comfortable they remain in the future.
Tinidril@midwest.social 2 weeks ago
Why not? The whole reason we have judicial discretion is that every crime departs from the platonic ideal in one way or another.
The working class has been losing a class war for decades without ever properly noticing that it was happening. Working Americans have been dying in that war, and now someone struck back.
I’ll be sold on the “no exceptions” ideal when we haul in the corporate murderers alongside the people who fought back.
Jury nullification is the other acceptable option.
TommySoda@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Yeah, that’s kinda my point. The system is fucked beyond repair specifically because these people running the companies get exceptions. These people have basically let thousands of people die for the sake of money. So like I said before, murder is murder and should be treated as such.
Nollij@sopuli.xyz 2 weeks ago
I’m confident that someone will get caught and be made into an example.
Whether they were the one that actually did it is immaterial.
octopus_ink@lemmy.ml 2 weeks ago
2 or so years ago I’d have agreed with you.
But it’s become clear that the wealthy and powerful are beyond the reach of our justice system. coughdementedfeloninthewhitehousecough
So fuck 'em.
I understand why they will prosecute him if they catch him, but I wish for him to never get caught, and I feel really confident (given the other signs of planning) that the phone, water bottle, and very public appearance at Starbucks in recognizable clothing are nothing but a red herring.
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Sounded like self-defense to me.
14th_cylon@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
he will get caught. they already have his photo, he is not professional hitman, he can only evade for so long when there is the whole country’s law enforcement after him.
TommySoda@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Except the photo they have of him with his face visible isn’t even the same guy. Doesn’t even have the same clothes or backpack. So unless this dude is proficient at changing his clothes and ditching a backpack all while riding an electric scooter down the street in New York, then they have the wrong guy in that photo.
Vespair@lemm.ee 2 weeks ago
I hear and understand your point, and I can’t say that I disagree with it.
That being said, I sure as hell wouldn’t convict the guy.