Do you want the murderer of the UnitHealthcare CEO prosecuted?
Do you want the murderer of the UnitHealthcare CEO prosecuted?
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.
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.
Anybody that is charge of or oversees the systemic application of violence toward great numbers of people, who is legally allowed to do so, in a system where the common person has 0 chance of ever altering this system to police itself and actually enact justice by preventing said person from doing that and prosecuting them for their crimes against the people...
Anyone in such a position should be afraid, should keep suffering consequences until theyfinally figure out that they need to acquiesce to a reformation of the system, need to stop fucking over millions for the grotesque enrichment of thousands.
When the game is rigged against you, play by your own rules, otherwise you guarantee your own defeat.
yes, of course. and found not guilty, to send a message.
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.
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.
I want the executives, boards, and shareholders that effectively murder millions every year to be prosecuted.
Do you want the murderer of the UnitHealthcare CEO prosecuted?
Nope. Killing a billionaire parasite doesn't make one a murderer - it merely makes one a credit to the human race.
P.S. this topic is highly controversial
Not really.
No, because I don't see any point to it. If they manage to catch him, they may as well just kill him on the spot when they get him, as I have no faith that his trial would be anything more than a farce to try and present some sense of following process and norms, while guaranteeing he gets some insane sentence, only to be found mysteriously to have hung himself. I'm sure that, somehow, a jury of his peers will be comprised solely of the 12 most ghoulish residents of NYC one could find, and they'll probably try to shop around for the worst judge they can to hear the whole thing.
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.
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.
Don't threaten me with a good time.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" that Dickens loved to paint. It is not done even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried, and minuted) in clean, carpeted, warmed, and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voice.
CS Lewis - Screwtape Letters (preface)
Trinity: what is he doing?
Morpheus: he's beginning to believe..
Exactly. :)
Population Health needs a regulated definition.
I'll take that trade
Brian Thompson and his co-workers murder hundreds of thousands of people with systemic 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.
they’re comfortable, well paid, successful people who will never see a day in jail.
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.
Making exceptions is never a good idea.
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.
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.
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.
Sounded like self-defense to me.
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.
I just hope he doesn’t get caught.
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.
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.
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."
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.
You gotta weigh the decision, on one hand he shot and killed one person, on the other hand the dude he killed was allowing sick people to die unnecessary deaths so he could get his bonus.
So it's a big old fat no from me, that's a greater good scenario.
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
Absofuckinglutely not. I want him to never be found and continue to off 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, of course he must be prosecuted if he can be found. As a member of the general population I feel as though it's possible that a jury wouldn't convict him and could even find him not guilty. Then he is a free man.
Until his identity is known I shall call him Attaboy Goodman, and if a jury were to convene with me on it, I would be unlikely to take seriously any claim by the state that this vigilantism is somehow more destructive of public order than police murdering and robbing people while ignoring wage theft and corporate crimes.
Jury nullification would be nice.
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.
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.
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.What murderer? He fell on lead because he was high on prescription drugs.
For the social agreement society has, it's irrelevant if you think this person is a hero or a villain, they need to be tried by a jury of their peers in a court of law.
If they are not, then the social agreement that we don't go around murdering people, no matter the intent changes and life becomes very difficult.
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.
What murderer? There's an alleged person who allegedly may or may not have allegedly done something that allegedly resulted in the alleged death of that CEO. Allegedly.
Unfortunately this is America, and as members of Congress have publicly stated, there's just nothing we can do about domestic gun violence. So even if an alleged person allegedly committed an alleged crime with a firearm, the system's hands are tied.
Oh well. Anyway I'm gonna go eat some cake, since it's all I have.
Lol Lmao Fuck no. Every day he's not found is another day that the United States is in a better position
🎵🎶 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.
No.
No, I think he should escape into myth. I hope that he had a planned exit strategy for the end of this, and that he manages to flee the U.S. If he is caught, I believe he will be made an example, a metaphorical head on a pike to scare people off.
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.
Wait so can’t you argue this is constitutional?
US is weird.
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 by the people, if that changes the people will attempt to take control back.
In the USA violence can be legal for anyone under certain circumstances, otherwise I don't know what's expected from the second amendment...
Nah he was defending himself against highway robbery.
I'd like the CEO prosecuted post-mortem, and any charges transmitted equally to any and all other policy-makers at UHC.
I would buy him a coffee
I hope they never get the chance
If I was on the jury it would be a not guilty from me
no.
I don't even care about his motives.
only reason why, that CEO jackass never allowed thousands if not millions of his customers to defend their right to care. the system he built, maintained, and expanded denied people their justice.
for that reason, and that reason alone, he and his family should have their justice denied.
If that was a catalyst for many others to do the same instead of an isolated incident, we wouldn't have called it an assassination. We would have called it a revolution. In the kind of time and society we find ourselves in, this is the closest we'll ever get to a revolution. And I say, viva la revolución!
My righteous side wants him to face an appropriate sentence
That's not righteousness. Let me ask you this. If someone killed your spouse, or told you that you can't get treatment for your very curable, but otherwise fatal disease, because they'd rather have a little more money than they don't need, and will never spend, and then that person did that a million more times, do you think the world is better with or without that person?
Yes, in a rule-of-law state a fair trial with a just outcome is mandatory. You can't just go around and kill people. If he lost a loved one to unfair practices of the insurance, that needs to be taken into account during trial.
The best example for a justice system working is a case we had in Germany in the 70s. A child rapist and murderer was shot in court by the mother during trial. She was then prosecuted but didn't have to go to jail due to the circumstances of the case. Her being tried and prosecuted means the case was closed without any loophole having to be used.
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*
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.
Update: It's happening!
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.
"But in that kind of world, this type of murderer wouldn't exist in the first place."
Yes, thank you for saying this.
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.
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 by having the chance to explain his motives.
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 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.
Yes, but only in a legal environment where showing that this CEO made decisions for their own profit that would reasonably predictably lead to some number of deaths (10, 100, 1000?) would validate a defense of defense of others.
I hope he's caught and found not guilty so he doesn't have to live in hiding for the rest of his life. Just like that kid Kyle Rittenhouse that got away with murder and now has a podcast and people donated a bunch of money to him. If he can do it why can't this guy.
Murderer? What murderer? The CEO tripped while carrying a gun and accidentally shot himself twice in the back 🤫
I heard it was a tragic stroke. An act of God if ever there was one.
Honestly, no.
Not that I'm saying it's okay to just murder folks, but, with the amount of people the people of his class have killed (either via policies or just the general fucked up shit they do), it seems hypocritical. This man was making 10mil a year killing his customers to fatten his pockets. More money than he could ever spend and still wanted more, like all of them do. People have been killed for less, by police, with them only getting paid leave, so why should I be up in arms now when they called me a terrorist for protesting, when they said "my kind" are damaging the country. People have tried to be reasonable for far too long imo, but the oligarchs just tell us to wait for the trickle down.
They can wait for my fucks to trickle down 🤷🏿♀️
The fictional outcome that might work best - the shooter has a terminal condition, escapes punishment until their final weeks, publicly admits what and why they did it and dies before the courts can really do anything. That way there’s closure, justice is left in limbo, and the shooter doesn’t really escape either. No happy ending, it’s not a happy story.
Since I'm not in a jury selection panel I would recommend any patriotic American who finds themselves in one shuts the fuck up about their knowledge of jury nullification until they are selected. Then says fuck the law and dutifully informs their fellow jurors about it.
What the fuck are they going to do? Prosecute you? Make jury nullification a headline?
Imagine how your trial for nullification would go.
For me it's a classic Trolley Problem.
Catching and prosecuting this guy will make healthcare barons feel that much safer and more likely to kill more Americans.
A random murder is evil. A murder that ends an evil life while saving thousands of random lives is not.
Don't fall in love with your precious texts scribbled by long dead legislators.
Depends on the justice system and if I respect it. If the justice system isn't prosecuting the people responsible for deaths nation wide due to lack of prosecution, it cannot be respected. Specially given the state of the Supreme Court and the government.
I want it treated like every other murder in New York. I want the police to spend 5 minutes pretending to look for the perpetrator, shrug their shoulders, say "nothing could be done, thoughts and prayers", then throw this into the perpetually growing pile of unsolved murders and move on with their day.
That's what they do when anyone else in the city or state is murdered, this guy doesn't deserve special attention. If they want to solve murders they should solve every murder, not just the billionaire's murder.
No.
No. I hope he is never found
I hope they admit to it on their deathbed a long long time from now so they can be buried under a round of applause.
This guy has done more to united America than anyone in recent history.
I didn't realize we all had this in US.
If he's caught the lessons of how will help the dozens of copycats
For many reasons.
Firstly, never meet your heroes...
I think it's a complicated question. I say yes, but with caveats.
He needs to be prosecuted in order to keep the letter of the law running. You can't just say "you can't kill anyone unless the rest of us don't like him." Laws should be about absolutism.
However the sentencing does not have to be absolute. Find him guilty (because technically he is). Then give him a suspended sentence because of extenuating circumstances.
From an idealist perspective, yes. I want to be able to believe that the law holds everyone equally accountable and no one should be above it.
However from my current realistic position, I know damn well as do we all that they law already doesn't hold everyone equally accountable -- not even close. And the fact that the deceased made a living doing what he did is just exhibit A on a very, very long list of examples. The rule of law has clearly already broken down, which means all bets are off. The fact that it's been doing so slowly over the course of decades rather than in a single coup or hypothetical night of broken glass is completely irrelevant.
Furthermore, even if the shooter is prosecuted I feel that "this was clearly in the best interest of society as a whole given the harm that the deceased was still actively inflicting on thousands of people" should be a valid legal defense.
Most jurisdictions already allow for the use of deadly force in defense of yourself or others against a perpetrator who represents a clear and present danger to the safety, health, or lives of others. This is just that, but with an extra logical extension riveted on.
There is no justice in the US right now. Why bother holding this person accountable when we can't even hold the highest position in the land accountable for their crimes. The social fabric is unraveling.
Why waste all these 1000 man hours solving an incident nobody care to be solved.
Id like to see trump face ramifications before this guy.
I think if they catch him they sort of have to. It's up to the police to drag their heels investigating if they want to avoid that.
It will be interesting to see if jury nullification comes into play if he gets caught and there is a trial. Would at least 1/12 jurors refuse to convict despite the law? The main facebook post about the CEO's death has a 26-1 ratio of laughing emoji to crying emoji...
No, I just want to shake hands with this guy.
And bring him flowers, and place a laurel wreath on his head.
Shit i'd blow the guy if he asked.
That's disgusting.
Not really. Obviously murder is wrong but the rich and powerful deserve a boogeyman.
If they catch him and prove it then yes. Its important for law and order.
i hope he never gets caught
No. Fuck no
But unfortunately if he is caught, the pigs on the payroll will cut him down to avoid any trial or the tape. The elite will want to make an example out of him to prevent others from acting out
Absolutely NOT LOL
It'll be interesting to see how this plays out and how long it goes on for. I feel like every other shooting, even school shootings these days get the "thoughts and prayers" treatment. Then it's onto the next news at six and who won last night's game.
Don't give a shit if he's prosecuted for it, I'd be a bit pissed if a jury convicts him.
Nope.
Yes, of course
I don't want to live in a world of vigilantes, we don't want Batman, we don't want to need batman either
So having said that, CEO's should also be jailed for deaths they cause. If you cause a dozen deaths through purposeful decisions, you usually wouid get the chair so for this particular CEO would need a LOT of chairs to kill him a thousand times.
It's time to stop treating killings by man as a heavy crime and killings by a company as a misdemeanor
Nope
Even if he gets convicted, he'll be a hero in prison. We've had plenty of serial killers with cult followings, and this person is more dangerous to the establishment out in public.
It's very likely that he would get dealt with in a similar way that Epstein was.
Yes. Jury nullification is my right.
This is one of those cases just begging for Jury Nullification.
I want him prosecuted, and freed by jury nullification.
Let them see that yes this was murder, but the people agree with it.
Don't suggest to the mods that its OK to censor. We need to remind them how to do their job, not how to abuse their job
People are saying he wasn't murdered, he just dropped to the ground alone, nobody in the street with him. There's even video, nobody is there...
Chances are, the CEO should've been prosecuted for whatever precipitated this long ago. Sounds like suicide by victim to me.
I'd like him to be eventually prosecuted, but chronologically. So prosecute every corporate murderer, every war criminal former president, every judge who sentenced innocent people to their deaths, etc. Prosecute all of the murderers who are currently free, and when you're done with all of them, you can prosecute this guy.
If he's found, the jury should nullify. It's their right as US citizens.
Yes. He murdered someone. Will I curl up in a ball and cry for hours if he's never caught? Not so much.
I'll never cheer for an act of murder. But I am not broken up about this one.
Genuine answer? He should be tried. Murder is still murder. But I wouldn't go out of my way to catch the guy, given the chance.
Far greater acts of evil and murder happen every single day, but I'm supposed to be bother by this one because the guy who died played by the rules of our broken-ass system? Or am I supposed to still be so blinded by the myth of capitalism, that wealth inherently represents virtue, that I should believe this CEOs life is worth more than the suffering occurring in every other part of the world? Should I choose to believe that the people he neglected to help - in hischoosing to chase the Almighty Dollar - are worth less than his life, because someone pulled the trigger rather than just watching people suffer while holding back the means to help? What kind of fucked up trolley problem is this?
I'll never cheer for an act of murder. But I am not broken up about this one.
Fun fact, murder means “illegal killing,” not an immoral one. There are plenty of unethical but legal killings, and vice versa. So to clarify, murder isn’t always “bad” by definition.
When we prosecute all the avoidable deaths by Insurance Companies in pursuit of greed.
Yes, because murder is illegal. But if they never find the guy... That's okay too.
I'd say it will be nearly impossible to get an objective jury that also represents the defendants peers.
I am under the belief that there was no murder and he had a preexisting condition of lead poisoning. As such, we unfortunately do not cover these kinds of conditions in our penal system and his claim must be denied.
In most circumstances, I absolutely would not encourage vigilantism.
Millions of people effectively have no choice in their health care.
They are seeing friends and family die or become destitute because these companies refuse to give them the care they're paying for.
These companies own the government, and they indirectly write the laws.
They are making the decisions to make money rather than do their jobs and provide healthcare. They are literally taking our money and buying yachts and property instead of just paying for medical procedures and medication.
If this is what it takes for that all to change, I see no reason to make a martyr of him. It's the corporations that need to change, not the guy forcing them to.
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone
Or something
The ceo was a bad dude,
But murdering people isn’t cool.
Trump said he could murder a guy on Fifth Avenue,
Maybe this guy can murder a guy on Sixth Avenue.
🤷♂️
Edit: if he is some crazy cereal killer then I guess he has to get away with it the first time?
In public sure. Behind closed doors he should hailed for his service to the proletariat
I wouldn't ally myself with some random anon, especially not one with a history of violence, but I'm also not actively seeking his arrest. He's the cops' problem and I'm not helping.
Yes, but only if there is an actual jury of his peers to pass judgement on him.
I want them to put an effort to find the guy, but ultimately I hope they never catch him. This dude is a hero, even if not for what he did, but the fear that he instilled in evil executives. It's much bigger than just the one guy. It's already made blue cross/blue shield change a fucked up policy. Even if this type of vigilante justice never happens again, the possibility of it must be in the back of every executives mind, and that alone should be enough to make the world slightly better. Even if just a little.
I mean... If not for the fact that a felon is about to become President again, I would want some form of justice in the law for the assassin. A slap on the wrist, maybe. A few years in jail; definitely not life or a death sentence.
But that's just to enforce the rule of law to not embolden others to commit such crimes, even if they could easily be justified. Since that's not being enforced with an even bigger threat to the rule of law, fuck it. Shit doesn't matter anymore anyway.
If not for the fact that a felon is about to become President again, I would want some form of justice in the law for the assassin.
Maybe we should run him in 2028. I think it would be a landslide.
"Deny, Defend, Depose 2028!"
The repeated mention of "jury nullification" here is a cop-out.
Jury nullification is essentially an admission that the law itself is conditionally unjust and the popular belief is that it should be ignored this time, nullified. So why pretend the legal system is always valid in the first place? I do not see the legal system as fair or representative of the people; if it was, this assassination wouldn't have ever happened. The laws are made by politicians and the politicians represent the owner class, those with enough money to purchase politics.
If you don't want to see the assassin prosecuted, if you too "didn't see anything", then why insist "murder is murder" when you clearly think this one doesn't deserve equal treatment? It's utopian idealism, the kind of rule that holds true in an ignorant vacuum experiment but not in this unfair rigged game of a world.
The appropriate sentence for this crime is: "Keep up the important work."
Yes.
Not because I think what he did was wrong, but because I want his motives to go on record and possibly have a jury nullification, as although it is illegal to murder people; we have fostered a world where people might be driven to do this due to corporate greed.
Edit: It should be noted that I have consumed hundreds of articles on this topic, watched countless videos, and browsed thousands of threads online. I am yet to see a substantial amount of people condemning this action. Which speaks volumes that everybody is united in thinking this is fine and we have no issue with it.
Why in the fuck would I?
If they ever set up a GoFundMe to set up a memorial statue of the killer, just give a shout.
That's so disturbing and disgusting.
okay ❤️ yay ❤️
What's wrong with statues? I think they are pretty neutral and relatively clean.
No, and if they do find him, the jury should vote not guilty and utilize jury nullification.
No. Not while there are people going hungry and living on the streets in the very same country those CEOs inhabit. If we have some semblance of equality I might just change my opinion.
From a rule of law perspective the shooter needs to be punished.
But considering the amount of suffering that CEO and other senior leaders at that company have inflicted on innocent sick people, there's a big fat dose of karma that goes with this incident, . And I wouldn't throw the book at the shooter (although you know they will).
Rule of law in America is over.
Prosecution is required since otherwise it would set a precedent for revenge killings, but holy shit even serial killers did less harm than this one person
Sure catch him first then find a jury who would convict... The people said there is no crime haha
it's like someone revenging from the r4p1st of their daughter, who got away with it and was getting rich from it.
It is revenge from someone who destroyed their life. On top it's someone you don't have any legal route for justice against them.So my answer is he should not be sentenced to anything more than 5 months max.
As much as I take some degree of delight in this CEO’s death, yes, his killer should face justice. Vigilante revenge should not be allowed in a civilized society. If we condone that, we open the floodgates for all forms of reprisal. As justified as I and others may feel this murder is, the CEO still should have had his day in court.
Nope, but the shit CEO is the root cause.
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.
To maybe help your pessimistic side:
Even when the murderer gets convicted, that CEO will still remain dead.
Nah
I am a pacifist, and I recognize the danger of encouraging/pardoning vigilantism. There are people I feel are heroes, who others view as villains. People should argue, debate, and put pressure as much as possible with non violence... but that is clearly not working for the ultra wealthy who are so insulated from 99.9% of what we can do.
The murdered man was, even by US capitalist standards, excessively evil. In a functioning and just system he would have had life in prison with no chance of parole for 1000+ counts of at the very least man slaughter for the millions of people whose health care was delayed or prevented. The world is a slightly better place without that level of extreme greed and heartlessness in it.
I also feel like the main point of prison "SHOULD" be Prevention and Rehabilitation. Which if the Attacker was personally harmed by a CEO and lashed out, I don't think prison can accomplish either for him. I guess the US gov probably disagrees and thinks he should be rehabilitated as someone who is okay with being exploited by CEOs.
But I do want all evidence laid out, I want a jury to determine if he's unhinged and a danger to others, or someone who was hurt on a fundamental level and lashed out. We of course assume it's the second one, but we don't know yet.
Juries and judges will sometimes use the kid gloves when dealing with people who kill their abusers, and I think a light sentence with the message of "murder is wrong... but so is allowing thousands to die to increase profits. So maybe don't be so evil people wouldn't mind giving up 10 years of their lives to see you removed from this world" would be fine.
... but also if this becomes another one of a million unsolved cases, I won't lose a wink of sleep about it.
Yes.
Even in a unjust world mob justice isn't justice. This means a mob deciding someone is guilty and acting out punishment is unjust. But also a mob deciding a crime should go unpunished is unjust.
There's plenty wrong with how insurance works and plenty wrong with the justice system. But instead of giving up, we should be trying to fix these issues. It's all to easy to give in to our basic instincts and point to someone to blame. We punish them instead of fixing the issues. Killing one ceo might feel good, but it doesn't really change the big picture and in fact constitutes layer upon layer of failure. We should be better than that. History is full of people (singular and groups) being used as a scape goat to deflect and feel like something is being done, whilst in fact not actually fixing anything and just feeding hate.
Also in a capitalist world, the people with the most money have the most power. If we collectively decide it's open warfare, purge style distopia, they are going to have the upper hand. So purely from a self interest point of view, it would be better to work on fixing shit instead of reverting to monke.
But instead of giving up, we should be trying to fix these issues.
Genuine question - how long do you think we should try to fix the issues before coming to the conclusion that they can't be fixed through conventional means? Do you think we should resort to nonconventional resolutions at all, if the conventional ones cease to function or don't yield results? If not, why not?
Nobody actually has an answer to that because there is no answer to it.
The system is so broken that there is no longer a way to fix it.
Any processes that could be implemented that have the potential to fix the issues comes from a broken system.
These processes would then be administered by the broken system.
Therefore no matter how good the process is, it will end up broken.
You may say that I am a hopeless person.
You may say that I am wrong and there is obviously something that can be done that has not yet been done.
I would say you are right, but experience indicates that although the possibility of reform exists, the capacity of the system to reform itself would be administered by a broken system.
Therefore even reform will end up broken and fail.
There was a reason why Nero played the fiddle while Rome burned. I'm just out here handing out rosin .
Not quite. The reason we reject vigilantism is not that it is always unjust, but only usually. In this case, however, the outcome was in line with any reasonable objective standard of justice, as far as I can tell.
It did fix one issue. Just hear Blue Cross rolled back their decision to limit General Anaesthesia. That is one good turn.
Perhaps some CEOs must be sacrificed from time to time for fixing all the issues. Not everyone at once, just enough to put some pressure on the companies.
No. He did a heroic act and should not be punished.
Nope.
but morality...
The moral thing happened, imo.
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.
I feel like that's your optimistic side speaking. My pessimistic side thinks this just encourages CEOs to hire more stringent security details, making themselves even more untouchable. I very much doubt that the intended lesson will be learned here.
I believe wrongdoers deserve justice no matter where it comes from. The law is supposed to be a way to achieve that, but if it ceases to achieve that purpose then to hell with it; I prefer incivil justice over civil injustice.
nahh
Well. I'm not sure.
If it was a politician, probably yes. I don't want supporters of the dead politician start doing revenge shootings.
But a CEO that no one cares about? (well, besides the rich)
🤷♂️
I rather him just not getting caught.
BUT: If he's left enough breadcrumbs to be able to get tracked down, then I'd prefer he get caught now rather than later. News about insurances companies doing shitty claim denials are trending, theres a spotlight of evil healthcare practices. This is the best time for him to get the fairest trial.
Put him in front of a jury of his peers. Let them decide his fate.
But remember that:
-
Jurors cannot be punished for their decision either way.
-
Once a unanimous "non-guilty" verdict is reached, it cannot be overturned due to "No Double Jeopardy" clause.
Interpret that anyway you wish to. wink wink, nudge nudge.
-
I recall seeing videos posted to Reddit and other social media from a number of years ago. An alleged child rapist (murderer?) was handcuffed and being escorted through the airport by police, with TV camera crews following along. The father of the victim was waiting at a bank of pay phones, as if he was using one. As the group walked by, the father walked towards them, shot and killed the man, and immediately surrendered to the police.
Although it seemed like a clear cut case of premeditated murder I recall he got off with a very minimal sentence. If this guy is caught and tried then I really hope for a similar outcome.
Yes.
The three Change Healthcare letters I got in the mail informing me of a gigantic data breach compromising my health information, SSN and more tell me that other people also need to be prosecuted.
or face
unforseen consequences.FTFY
I don't want him prosecuted, but not because I think killing people is good or forgivable (though it couldn't really happen to a better person) but because the criminal justice system is awful, especially in the US.
If the death penalty is on the table, then I don't think I need to explain why that's bad, but I fundamentally disagree with imprisonment. I'm no expert, but there are better ways to handle harm and justice, and I feel the current system is unjustifiably evil in it's treatment of convicts.
I should probably point out that I'm not making a judgement about what he's done. More that depending on the context and why he's done this, there will need to be a different more nuanced response than the judicial system is capable of.
From an ethical perspective, killing is often justifiable. We’ve been trained like monkeys in a cage to respond aversely to death, but that reaction is grounded in a social contract that is only conditionally valid.
It is in some cases justifiable, but I don't think it's necessarily the only option in the majority of cases where people might jump to it if given the chance.
I don't really agree we've been trained to respond that way, when I quite often see the exact opposite. Killing is a fast and easy solution that many people are quick to advocate for. I'm quite steadfast in my belief that being able to look beyond killing is one of the few privileges our intelligence gives us, to be better than the cruelty of nature.
I don't agree that breaking the social contract means death is appropriate, justifiable or even necessarily to be celebrated, but it does mean we can seek to undo that injustice and reduce the harm by other forceful methods. Acting in vengeance is not justifiable.
Let me clarify my view on this whole thing: Someone has died and I'm sad about that as an objective fact. I don't expect this death will lead to anything good, it doesn't remove the exploitative structure and so won't lead to any better outcomes for any of the exploited. The only relatively tiny positive is that now that one specific person can't profit from that exploitation, but now someone else will take that place instead. Nothing worthwhile has come of this.
I'll buck the trend here.
Yes, I want him prosecuted. I want every single piece of evidence the cops have put out in public, and I want the public to see exactly how they traced him and caught him. I want people to see just how insidious the surveillance state is, and I want them to understand what kind of lengths they'll need to go to in order to avoid getting caught the next time.
Yes, murder is illegal no matter how glad it makes people - unless of course the President does it, which as we all know makes it okay.
No
No
I would definitely want to see them prosecuted. However, the sentence should probably be light. I'm not perfectly familiar with the justice system, so I don't know how much of this is currently the case, but I think vigilante justice should result in smaller punishments than for example if the reason of the murder was personal gain. If it can actually be proven that the murder victim did those terrible things they were killed for, depending how terrible those things are, the sentence should be reduced. If for example someone killed Hitler, there should be no punishments for this murderer.
Of course that allows murderers for personal gain to claim they did it for vigilante justice, but they would have to find something they can actually prove their victim to be guilty of. This will probably be hard. But I think if they actually find something on the victim, as twisted as it sounds, I think it's actually fine if the sentence gets reduced. Because in the end I think the murder of an unpunished morally bankrupt person is less bad than the murder of a completely innocent person.
No
Assuming they catch him, it's part of the process.
No matter how you cut it, no matter how much you agree with how actions, and whatever reason he may have had, murder isn't something that can be dismissed when it is an act of its own. It has to be prosecuted.
Now, you might notice that italics. When murder is done as part of war, it isn't murder any more, it's an enemy casualty, and isn't typically going to be prosecuted as murder.
If what the guy did is part of a bigger movement, and that movement ends up with enough changes, it might be treated as no different than a soldier shooting a target on a battlefield. I'm not saying there isn't a difference, I'm saying that if power shifts enough, the country changes enough, a killer becomes a hero.
If that's what it turns out to be, trying to prosecute it as murder would be a joke, a waste of time, so I wouldn't want it to happen.
But if it's just one dude grinding his own path for himself? Well, if it isn't prosecuted, it's as much a failure of the system as every decision the shitty CEO made and wasn't fired for. Two wrongs don't make a right on that scale. Tbh, a thousand wrongs for a good reason don't make a right, it just makes the problem a different scale, with different priorities.
The only difference between an insurrection and a revolution is success, in other words.
Assuming they catch him
they will catch him. 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.
Law enforcement have shit insurance scams to deal with too. I certainly wouldn't work hard on the case.
I would say that depends on his resources. And I wouldn't say that the entire country's law enforcement is after him, at least not yet. As of when I'm writing this, I can't find any mentions of anything beyond the NYPD being involved in the investigation.
Normally, you wouldn't even see state level involvement in a local homicide investigation. It just isn't useful. When that does occur, it tends to be because there's a belief the suspect has left the original jurisdiction, or that evidence in other jurisdictions needs to be gathered.
That's extra true for the feds.
Yeah, with this being some corporate fuck that's the victim, if it goes on long enough, those outside agencies will at least "offer" resources, but it isn't going to be happening this soon.
If the guy has resources of his own, particularly if he has somewhere far enough away to go and funds to stay off grid for a while, he could go decades without getting caught, if ever.
Of course, there's still zero information about the guy that's meaningful. He could be planning to turn himself in as a form of martyr, for all we know. Could have been his plan from the start.
This wasn't part of war. This wasn't part of any revolution. This was a disgusting murder of an innocent person in cold blood. The killer needs to be caught and brought to justice.
I want to live in civilization and i enjoy its benefits, so no, i can't go around saying someone should be acquitted because the crime was based. We've collectively agreed to put the law above our feelings, that's a good thing, i wish it was done more, so i'm doing my part and preparing to send him cigarettes in prison.
Yes of course he needs to be prosecuted.
I get that people hate insurance companies but at the end of the day this was a brutal and cold blooded murder.
As unhappy as we may be at the state of the world, the last thing anyone should want is for things to be determined by who has the gun and is willing to shoot.
Having said that though, maybe things are getting beyond the point of no return. Democracy in the US seems to be a joke, and the billionaire class have unfettered power. I worry we're on trajectory towards violent revolution.
The ambivelence and even open celebration of a shocking violent murder is a warning sign of how bad things are right now. Across the democratic world countries are devided and in flux because the political class is not listening to voters and in hoc to the billionaires.
Trump in the US will be a mess. But France and Germany are also in political flux. What we are lacking globally at the moment is an outlet for this mess or a solution. People seem to be divided and unable to coalesce around a solution to the problems. I worry that means more chaos and ultimately violemce to come.
I want his story to be told then have a jury nullify the case. But I don't see how any of that will happen.
Of course, it's still murder, that's why there is a judiciary. But, the system should also be better, and not allow people to be cheated out of their lives by profiteering goblins.
lol nope I think he should run for President.
Is this a one-off or the beginning of a movement? Probably a one-off. We shall see.
Makes sense if they were caught, the system would bring a case against them. But given the facts of the case, a reasonable jury should find them not guilty.
A reasonable jury would give the killer a life sentence.
No
Let's just say I am glad I do not have to make that call.
I wish I could be on the jury for this one (if he's caught and not unalived by cops)
No
Surely there will be a Yougov poll, and they will listen to the results before continuing investigation. /s
The fact they still haven't been caught despite all the attention this has gotten so far tells me the shooter knew what they were getting into & was prepared for it. Legally speaking, I think that eliminates a "temporary insanity" defense, but I don't think it should. Someone despondent over losing a dearly loved one due to the completely arbitrary, cynical, and sometimes outright ghastly "healthcare" system we live under refusing to provide the service they were paid for seems like something that would lead to a temporary insanity that just lasts a very long time.
It hasn't even been two days yet.
I'm not American but here's my view. On one hand fuck the CEO guy it's great, but on the other it's scary that someone is out there capable of doing this.
But I also guess that the murderer isn't necessarily a cold blooded murderer. So I'm leaning towards no.
CEOs will not become more human due to this potential threat, they will just keep a lower and more discrete profile (which have started to happen already) while probably increasing security measures up to their own convenience.
I would love that such kind of CEOs get prosecuted for good ethical reasons, but the legal system seems to not support such cases, so that’s what should be changed on the first place.
Also, because I trust in the strength of a civilised society and its monopoly of the violence, I want that anybody that decide to kill someone unilaterally face the consequences of such action, with consideration to all the circumstances as usual, so I want him also prosecuted: if I ever take justice into my own hands I will do it accepting all the consequences.
I don’t understand the reduction to a simple false dichotomy about which side between the shooter or the CEO must be taken, sounds like the deliberate simply polarisation from ill public forums nowadays.
Yes - I think it is fair that all murders be prosecuted. As for the gray area of morality, sentencing is variable and somewhat lax for this exact reason. I don't believe that a judge will be lax with sentencing, but this would be a case in which I would like the shooter to receive a slap on the wrist punishment.
If caught, he should be punished according to the law.
I also hope he's never caught.
My
righteousbrainwashed side wants himto face an appropriate sentenceput in a cageFTFY.
I could see a certain amount of time in prison, like a decade.
Obviously this homicide was aggravated by the circumstance that the CEO was technically the administrator of.
Therefore I feel like the punishment should be somewhat lenient given that the CEO inadvertently escalated the situation resulting in his own demise.
Kind of like if somebody beats up your best friend and then you beat them up in retaliation, the punishment should be more lenient on you than it is on the original aggressor.
Yes of course. Nobody wants someone walking the streets who thinks it's their right to dish out the death penalty without due process. Who's he going to pick next?
That said, obviously with limited resources the police have to pick what cases take priority over others. For example Sheffield police don't do anything about motorbike theft (even if there's a tracker installed) because they're too busy chasing down all those people who hurt others' fee-fees by misgendering them.
Well all joking aside, he committed first degree murder so yeah. He should be prosecuted and sentenced to prison for several decades.
This should not be a difficult stance to make, and if you're having trouble reaching this conclusion, you need to take a very hard look in the mirror and get off the internet.
No, drag hopes they're never found
Yes, and then let Biden pardon him....
Biden wouldn’t.
The comments here are what has prompted me to stop using Lemmy altogether. Farewell.
Bye :D
✌️
This is not a lemmy problem. This is an everywhere problem. If you find a platform not talking about it then it is being heavily moderated and you're going to be in an echo chamber. For instance Facebook had a United health memorial post with 25x more "haha" reactions than heart/ sad reactions.
Best of luck though
Edit: wall street journal has called this a "nationwide outpouring of anger and frustration"
Sure go back to reddit hehe
I agree with you. Most people on Lemmy have shown themselves to be disgusting and vile, wishing murder on innocent people. It's fine as long as it's not them or their family, as long as it's anyone else.