I wish people would stop repeating without evidence the idea that Luigi M did anything other than get harassed eating at a fast food restaurant. The official story makes no sense - someone apparently recognised him from a blurry CCTV release that is likely another person albeit of the same build and hair colour, and phoned it in with absolute certainty, and then the police happened to find a ‘manifesto’ on him, and then later, not even straight away when he was searched, an improvised weapon. If the real killer could do the crime and get away to a completely different state, they’d have had numerous opportunities to dispose of everything - it just strains credibility.
Consider on the other hand that the powers that be were eager that someone take the fall for this - they couldn’t have the perception that such a thing will go unpunished (see also: the extreme push for the death penalty, and the involvement of very senior political appointees). They can achieve that by picking any random approximately fitting the description off the street and framing them.
Whether he is guilty or not, he is the symbol now, like it or not. Debating the semantics of it is pointless. You knew what they meant and so did we all. They are calling for murder.
I wish people would stop repeating without evidence the idea that Luigi M did anything other than get harassed eating at a fast food restaurant. The official story makes no sense - someone apparently recognised him from a blurry CCTV release that is likely another person albeit of the same build and hair colour, and phoned it in with absolute certainty, and then the police happened to find a ‘manifesto’ on him, and then later, not even straight away when he was searched, an improvised weapon. If the real killer could do the crime and get away to a completely different state, they’d have had numerous opportunities to dispose of everything - it just strains credibility.
Consider on the other hand that the powers that be were eager that someone take the fall for this - they couldn’t have the perception that such a thing will go unpunished (see also: the extreme push for the death penalty, and the involvement of very senior political appointees). They can achieve that by picking any random approximately fitting the description off the street and framing them.
Whether he is guilty or not, he is the symbol now, like it or not. Debating the semantics of it is pointless. You knew what they meant and so did we all. They are calling for murder.
A succulent fast food meal?!
I thought he pleaded guilty?
Yep. No matter how flimsy the case, if the defendant pleades guilty then it’s hard to argue they are innocent.