Was This Personal or Professional: (UHC CEO murder)

[BlueRidge]

The Manhattan DA is charging him as a terrorist. That’s some bullshit.

It appears to have been a targeted assassination for political purposes, how is that not terrorism?

 

[ilovepaydays]

I don’t think Ted Kaczynski (“The Unabomber”) was charged with terrorism, just charges for first degree murder, attempted murder, and mailing explosives, correct? And he had the entire U.S. on edge for about 20 years.

 

[PRlady]

It appears to have been a targeted assassination for political purposes, how is that not terrorism?

Terrorism is defined as intended to spur fear among civilians. He deliberately avoided that and chose a targeted method. Anyone who has been afraid to board a bus or train during heightened periods of terrorism knows this was not that.

 

[BlueRidge]

Terrorism is defined as intended to spur fear among civilians. He deliberately avoided that and chose a targeted method. Anyone who has been afraid to board a bus or train during heightened periods of terrorism knows this was not that.

I think he intended to sow fear among people who work in health insurance. It definitely was (assuming what we currently know holds up) an act intended to sow fear.

I happen to have been reading a book when this happened that has a lot about the anarchists of the late 19th and early 20th century. Alexander Berkman attacked Henry Clay Frick in 1892 seemingly in much the same way that this crime was carried out in 2024. Were the anarchists terrorists? I don't think we had the terrorism statutes then but we do now and it seems that way to me.

BTW, he "deliberately avoided that" did he state that in his "manifesto"?

ETA: The legal definition in the US is:

the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that-

(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

(B) appear to be intended-

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping;

Domestic Terrorism: Definitions, Terminology, and Methodology | Federal Bureau of Investigation

As required by the National Defense Authorization Act, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence, have developed standard definitions of terminology related to domestic terrorism and uniform methodologies for tracking domestic...

www.fbi.gov

 

[On My Own]

Terrorism is defined as intended to spur fear among civilians

How did he not end up spurring fear among civilians?

 

[On My Own]

Are some people here sympathetic to the act committed by Luigi Mangione? Like that's just strange. And somewhat scary.

 

[BlueRidge]

I don’t think Ted Kaczynski (“The Unabomber”) was charged with terrorism, just charges for first degree murder, attempted murder, and mailing explosives, correct? And he had the entire U.S. on edge for about 20 years.

but Mangione's crime fits the legal definition of terrorism regardless, so is there a reason he should not have been charged with terrorism?

 

[Rob]

Terrorism is defined as intended to spur fear among civilians. He deliberately avoided that and chose a targeted method. Anyone who has been afraid to board a bus or train during heightened periods of terrorism knows this was not that.

It only matter how the appropriate section of the New York Code defines Act of Terrorism.
(b) for purposes of subparagraph (xiii) of paragraph (a) of
subdivision one of section 125.27 of this chapter means activities that
involve a violent act or acts dangerous to human life that are in
violation of the criminal laws of this state and are intended to:
(i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or
coercion; or
(iii) affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder,
assassination or kidnapping.

If he called the civilian population to violent action against the health insurance industry, that might be the basis. Intimidation of the people who work in the health insurance system might also. But some NYlegal experts think it is overreaching, likely a basis for obtaining a plea to a lesser charge that might get him parole eventually. Or to give the jury a basis on which to compromise on the lesser charge.

 

[BlueRidge]

But some NYlegal experts think it is overreaching, likely a basis for obtaining a plea to a lesser charge that might get him parole eventually. Or to give the jury a basis on which to compromise on the lesser charge.

Do they not think they can convict him of first degree murder?

 

[PRlady]

How did he not end up spurring fear among civilians?

He wrote that he considered a bomb but didn’t want to hurt innocent civilians. He certainly wasn’t killing people indiscriminately. You can call it a political assassination if you want but it’s not terrorism, the only intimidated people are high-ranking healthcare executives.

 

[On My Own]

He wrote that he considered a bomb but didn’t want to hurt innocent civilians.

the only intimidated people are high-ranking healthcare executives.

Are these people not innocent civilians in the States?

If someone claiming to be a tree-lover killed an oil tycoon, does it mean it's not terrorism because the only people who were terrorised were oil tycoons (and the high ranking executives in the oil industry, thereof)?

 

[BlueRidge]

He wrote that he considered a bomb but didn’t want to hurt innocent civilians. He certainly wasn’t killing people indiscriminately. You can call it a political assassination if you want but it’s not terrorism, the only intimidated people are high-ranking healthcare executives.

Its been reported that fear is widespread among people who work in health insurance, not just the CEOs. And the crime fits the legal definition of terrorism.

Why should he not be charged with terrorism?

 

[PRlady]

Are these people not innocent civilians in the States?

If someone claiming to be a tree-lover killed an oil tycoon, does it mean it's not terrorism because the only people who were terrorised were oil tycoons (and the high ranking executives in the oil industry, thereof)?

Pretty much. Again, political assassination is a category that fits. It’s not excusing it, just defining it. Agree with @Rob that there seems to be some plea analysis going on here.

ETA: Israelis often get notices about places where it’s dangerous to travel because any and all Israelis are presumed targets. (My husband doesn’t get to wear a sign saying I Worked for Human Right to exclude him, not that it would help.) That's terrorism, where millions of people are threatened indiscriminately. Mangione did discriminate. Even the guy who shot Trump didn’t mean to shoot the civilians, assassination not terrorism.

 

[On My Own]

It’s not excusing it, just defining it.

But your definition doesn't seem like it fits.

Also how can you be sure that the only people who were scared were the health executives?

 

[Jenny]

Someone upthread suggested that because he still had the gun and assorted fake ID, that he might have been on his way to or planning another target. If authorities have evidence of that, then yeah, I can see terrorism.

I'm assuming we don't know the full breadth of evidence being amassed here.

 

[BlueRidge]

I looked up the charges against the guy who was arrested for the second Trump assassination attempt, a bit different since he didn't shoot him, but he was charged with attempted assassination but not with any terrorism charges, fwiw.

 

[BlueRidge]

I'll ask again why do people think he should not be charged with terrorism?

ETA why I think he should be, because political violence is dangerous right now in this country and it needs to be seen for what it is, an attempt to use violence to change policy and politics and we need it to be very clear that this is a danger that could sink our country if people sympathize with it because of the particular target.

 

[BlueRidge]

Pretty much. Again, political assassination is a category that fits. It’s not excusing it, just defining it. Agree with @Rob that there seems to be some plea analysis going on here.

ETA: Israelis often get notices about places where it’s dangerous to travel because any and all Israelis are presumed targets. (My husband doesn’t get to wear a sign saying I Worked for Human Right to exclude him, not that it would help.) That's terrorism, where millions of people are threatened indiscriminately. Mangione did discriminate. Even the guy who shot Trump didn’t mean to shoot the civilians, assassination not terrorism.

According to US law it can be. This isn't Israel.

 

[Tesla]

I'll ask again why do people think he should not be charged with terrorism?

ETA why I think he should be, because political violence is dangerous right now in this country and it needs to be seen for what it is, an attempt to use violence to change policy and politics and we need it to be very clear that this is a danger that could sink our country if people sympathize with it because of the particular target.

If he should be charged with terrorism, then school shooters should be charged with terrorism.

 

[BlueRidge]

If he should be charged with terrorism, then school shooters should be charged with terrorism.

Okay then does that mean you think he should be charged with terrorism?

(whoops I didn't mean anything offensive by saying okay )

 

[Tesla]

Okay then does that mean you think he should be charged with terrorism?

(whoops I didn't mean anything offensive by saying okay )

I think it's cherry picking and political. I don't think he should be charged with terrorism.

 

[BlueRidge]

I think it's cherry picking and political. I don't think he should be charged with terrorism.

How is it political?

(btw, he was charged by Alvin Bragg, so maybe Donald Trump would agree that its political )

It is true that there is leeway for prosecutors for what they can charge people with so they don't have to charge him with terrorism but according to the definition his crime can be charged as terrorism. I'm not getting why it is important to people that he not be charged with terrorism.

If we go down the road to political violence it will look really bad. And it won't get us better health care coverage.

 

[Private Citizen]

I can't remember if I posted it here, but I thought he might be charged with terrorism at the time of the attack. I do think his crimes meet the technical definition, though barely. If I were a juror, based on the facts now, I would not convict on terrorism beyond a reasonable doubt, but absolutely would convict on first-degree premeditated murder. There may be additional evidence that could change my mind re: terrorism charges.

 

[Jenny]

I don't know about the rest of you but there's a lot going on right now that's making me terrified, including the idea that anyone with a beef with anyone or anything can take a life and actually be celebrated for it, thus encouraging a helluva a lot of very angry people that they too can build there own untraceable gun and kill someone and have a better chance of getting away with it because this asshole gave them a blueprint for what to do and what not to do and you might even become a hero and if you don't, Trump will pardon you anyway.

 

[Prancer]

The terrorism or not terrorism discussion reminded me of this old thread: https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/threads/possible-terrorist-attack-in-colorado-springs.97092/

It seems to me that the issue hasn't changed--the definition of terrorism is amorphous, and not just for us. Government agencies have different definitions for terrorism, which is why you find different statistics for terrorism in any given year, depending on which agency you ask.

 

[escaflowne9282]

I can't remember if I posted it here, but I thought he might be charged with terrorism at the time of the attack. I do think his crimes meet the technical definition, though barely. If I were a juror, based on the facts now, I would not convict on terrorism beyond a reasonable doubt, but absolutely would convict on first-degree premeditated murder. There may be additional evidence that could change my mind re: terrorism charges.

Under New York Law, terrorism is required for the charge to be categorized as first -degree. Otherwise, it's purely a second degree case.

This, to me, feels like typical overreach by Alvin Bragg.It blew up in his face already with Daniel Penny. Those who don't learn from history...

 

[once_upon]

I'm involved in enough political lawsuit crap right now in my personal life, I should just shut up. But I do have a question or two.

What IS a definition of terrorism? If we include public fear of an action, people who participate in school shootings are definitely terrorists. We have a society who fears sending their children to school. We have children and parents who are traumatized for life by the actions of school shooters. If public fear is terrorism, why do we not include that charge in that case?

What does the charge of terrorism add to the legal sentencing, in other words what difference does it make?

 

[canbelto]

I have no idea but my feeling is the prosecutors want to avoid a trial and want some plea bargain.

 

[BlueRidge]

Under New York Law, terrorism is required for the charge to be categorized as first -degree. Otherwise, it's purely a second degree case.

This, to me, feels like typical overreach by Alvin Bragg.It blew up in his face already with Daniel Penny. Those who don't learn from history...

What charge do you think should have been brought against Daniel Penny?

 

[BlueRidge]

The terrorism or not terrorism discussion reminded me of this old thread: https://www.fsuniverse.net/forum/threads/possible-terrorist-attack-in-colorado-springs.97092/

It seems to me that the issue hasn't changed--the definition of terrorism is amorphous, and not just for us. Government agencies have different definitions for terrorism, which is why you find different statistics for terrorism in any given year, depending on which agency you ask.

This is why I wonder why people think in this case there should not be a charge of terrorism. I think the charge makes sense, but I'm also really upset by this whole thing and maybe not thinking it through. I'm interested in reasons why it shouldn't be used here.