Luigi's Probably Guilty: Why His Fans Should Accept It

For the first time since OJ, the people of the United States of America have the narrative power to define the trial of a century. Just as race relations defined the 90s trial of the late football player, concerned citizens are rallying in discussion of income inequality and corporate greed to define Luigi Mangione’s.

From a support fund garnering over $1 million dollars, to a plane spelling out “Free Healthcare, Free Luigi” circling New York City, to dozens of billboards and projections displayed across the country, Luigi supporters have some of the loudest voices we’ve seen in recent times. And for the first time in a long time, it feels like we’re actually being heard.

With this level of attention, hundreds have taken it upon themselves to act as personal PR reps, disseminating campaigns attaching his name and face to various ideologies and legal and political sentiments. This is all to garner support, money, and maybe even a little self-worth.

As a concerned supporter myself, I feel like it’s my duty to explain where I sit. This article is me doing that.

Know that this is basically a rally cry for his more chronically-online supporters. If you aren’t familiar with the current discourse, everything I’m about to say will probably sound insane. I encourage you to keep reading either way.

I assume if you’re here, it’s because you already support him, so I won’t try to justify his actions. Everything I say from this point onward is under the assumption that Luigi is already justified.

BTW FBI, please don’t come to my house. Don’t get me wrong, I fully support what he did and will stand ten toes down on my support, but I will never harm anybody. As a Christian, it’s against my beliefs. I’m also smart enough to know that I’m too dumb to do crime, and I don’t want to go to jail! Feel free to monitor me, but I won’t clean house for you, and it’ll just be a waste of time.

Gather ‘round because I have some things I would like to get off my chest.

I take issue with a lot of what’s going on in the current discourse, which I will lay out in the next few paragraphs. I hope to not just rattle off a series of complaints about the community but to also offer solutions so that we may better it and expand.

Now, there’s a non-zero chance I come off as a total asshole in these next sections, but please know I’m saying this out of genuine concern about where this conversation is headed, and I feel it must be said. I’ve found kindness and respect aren’t getting much attention these days, so like the man before me, I’m going to be pretty blunt.

We Are Not Karen And That’s A Good Thing

In the past few weeks, I’ve seen how many people in these online communities see every fight as being one and the same. For instance, Karen says something. We woo, and then we repeat that back on Twitter for a few weeks until the next statement comes. With this notion that “we’re all on the same side here” is a oneness, an implication we have to whole-heartedly back everything she says or she has to back everything that we say – meaning if Karen says Luigi didn’t kill Thompson, we have to too. In many spaces online, this “implying guilt” is completely banned. In fact, there’s very little wiggle room when it comes to disclosing your personal opinions here.

This oneness is censoring you. You are being censored. Just because you’re being silenced by a moderator and not a government official doesn’t mean it isn’t censorship. And this censorship is driven primarily behind the idea that because Karen says something, we take it personally to mean this is the only good narrative to spread.

Because we’re all fighting for the same thing and that’s freeing Luigi.

But we’re not all fighting for the same thing, and that’s okay. People are fighting for a free Luigi, yes, but they’re also fighting for better healthcare. They’re allowed to do that.

Because of this, it’s a good thing to be separate from Karen. If we were all fighting for the same thing, then we willingly give up spaces to openly discuss healthcare reform. That or Karen couldn’t logically defend Luigi since bettering healthcare might be better for her and her family and her communities in the long run. It comes down to what is best for Luigi (and Karen’s employment status) and what is best for the rest of us. Though I don’t buy that Luigi would ever willingly sell out his cause, Karen would because that’s her job. She has priorities outside of what the American people might want.

Plus, anything Karen says could be misattributed to Luigi. For her and her team, it makes sense to not bring up healthcare because, in doing so, it sounds like they agree with the shooting and are speaking on his behalf that Luigi agrees with it. Therefore, he admits he did it aaaaaa.

Fortunately for the bulk of us, we don’t have that connection to Luigi stopping us from voicing our opinion. We don’t know Luigi, so if we attach his name and face to this cause bringing awareness to shitty healthcare practices that are killing and retarding millions, and yet you still want that plausible deniability for his sake, well then we’ve our own defense. We’re just concerned citizens. If he was truly innocent, mainstream media and law enforcement lied to us. We fell victim to propaganda. Oopsie.

It’s not like he confessed to us, so anything we say is only a reflection of what we hold dear and what we’ve been told.

All of this being said, fear should never stop us from talking about things that are important to us. It should never be allowed to. It should never encourage people to rebuke those who do.

Denying The Existence Of “Offensive” Evidence Is Harmful

I know it sucks to admit this, but Luigi’s best shot is jury nullification.

If the bag can’t get tossed, there won’t be a soul on that jury genuinely believing he didn’t do. There’s just too much to get a conviction based on proof alone, and acting like it doesn’t exist isn’t going to make that “much” disappear.

Even if you somehow gaslight twelve eventual jurors that there is no proof of his guilt out there, none at all, it only makes the eventual presentation of evidence look more jarring. And now you look like a liar, and Luigi a psychopath (you having never explained why he would be justified for the deed).

(Obviously, I hope the bag gets tossed! Just from what I’ve heard from lawyer friends, it isn’t likely, and you can’t only prepare for the good outcomes.)

Just be honest with people in your conversations, be real. Moving past the existence of proof, use this time to discuss jury nullification and why it should be applied to this case. Recommend sites like FIJA and POPNYC.

We gotta say the quiet part out loud. If we can’t handle it now, it will only make future discovery a whole lot worse.

Past Arguments/Campaigns

There’s a relative distinct lack of healthcare activism in these digital spaces (since many of these communities ban “assuming guilt”). POPNYC is one of the only entities I’ve seen that actively works towards building a better health system. They do a fair deal, but at times, they too promote fallacious campaigns that waste time, resources, and effort.

It’s this idea that: We can’t discuss healthcare initiatives in relation to Luigi because to do so would (somehow?) help prosecutors in their case, and Luigi’s fate is the most important thing here. And to that I say, “If he cared more about his life than creating a change, he wouldn’t have allegedly shot the guy in the first place.”

This idea completely glosses over the fact a lot of people only want to talk healthcare in relation to this case because he made it interesting. It’s the spectacle. You make a fuss so people will care about the important things again. Luigi knew that, and it’s working. It’s straight-up gamification.

However, in spite of this, his efforts have been effectively erased. Now, instead of combining those efforts, people decide to not discuss healthcare reform period and create a void around the concept of Luigi Mangione. Now, his supporters need to fill that void to justify their community. This void has been filled with oxymoronic and poorly planned campaigns using phrases like “innocent until proven guilty,” “fair trial,” and “no death penalty for Luigi Mangione.”

Though the first two of these sentiments are great on their own, they’re only legal sentiments, directed at politicians and journalists from whom many New Yorkers get their news. They’re usually one-and-done, and they don’t represent how people actually think. They can’t be forcefully applied to the minds of the entire American people – people who are tired and found hope in the attention of the spectacle.

In an actual campaign these phrases are hallow and essentially useless. The problem with them, as well as with the anti-death penalty campaign, is that they don’t do anything. They exist solely to rally other supporters whose minds are already made up.

Let’s look at them individually.

“Luigi is innocent until proven guilty!”

Okay.

Looks guilty to me. Next.

Your proclamation, though legally correct sure, only delays the inevitable. In a campaign you’re promoting to the average New Yorker, you’re telling them, “Wait until you see the gun!” But that time will come eventually. What are we supposed to do after that? Convict him then? No!

“Luigi Mangione deserves a fair trial!”

Sure. I think most people believe this about any prisoner. Again, it’s a great sentiment, but urging a fair trial will not disappear evidence.

You won’t get a free Luigi because you asked prosecutors to play by the rule book. They know the rule book better than anyone else. Also, the rule book is usually right. Murder = prison. You haven’t explained why what he did wasn’t murder to begin with and was instead a defensive act.

And most importantly, most people don’t care.

Because unlike the healthcare issue, it doesn’t affect them.

“Abolish the death penalty!”

Personally, I do believe in the death penalty. I think people like Ted Bundy don’t deserve to live and be a burden on taxpayer dollars. Once you kill dozens of people, there’s no going back. You will keep doing it until someone stops you, and that cannot be at the expense of my community.

This belief if precisely what enables me to sympathize with Luigi. (Replace Bundy with Thompson and reread.)

The problem with the death penalty here is that it’s an overreach, not that it exists at all. If you didn’t agree with it at least a little, then how would Luigi be justified in his actions?

Besides my own beliefs, no one’s changing their opinion on the death penalty because you made a pretty poster asking them to. (No offense. I did warn you I was gonna be blunt.) Without any real argument attached to your demand, you just speak words to the void. Like the last two, this approach remains ineffective because you aren’t getting to the root of the problem – the root of our support.

The reality is the majority of these “campaigns” are designed to be catchphrases. They pander to crowds who already support Luigi and become a sort of fan signal. For those who don’t religiously obsess over this case, it’s just another poster on the street.

Possible Outcomes

If you’re still unconvinced about associating Luigi with better healthcare initiatives, maybe this will explain my POV better.

The way I see it, this trial has four possible outcomes, and I will try to explain them via formula.

IF… + WE SAY… + EVIDENCE SHOWS… = THEN…

This is the utopic outcome the Free Luigi community (and adjacent communities) dreams of: IF Luigi is innocent, and WE SAY “innocent until proven guilty,” and EVIDENCE SHOWS he is innocent, THEN Luigi goes free. Nothing happens in the world of healthcare, but oh well, Luigi didn’t do it and an innocent man walks. These communities are hellbent that this is what should happen, but it’s not a likely outcome. They’ve become paranoid of the following scenario.

Consider this. IF Luigi is innocent, and WE SAY “Healthcare sucks – we need better than this to keep going as a society,” and EVIDENCE SHOWS he is innocent, THEN Luigi is still innocent, and he will walk. The Free Luigi community will have you believe that talking about healthcare period in relation to Luigi will convince a jury of evidence that cannot exist against an innocent man. (Any reasonable doubt is to be met with a not guilty verdict. They tell you this in the courtroom.) They will have you believe this evidence can be manufactured to prove Luigi is guilty, even if he isn’t, but only in the case that Redditors demand better healthcare online. This is not true. Prosecutors don’t care about your opinions. Future jurors aren’t hanging out in these chatrooms, and if they were, they’re already on his side. Let the evidence speak for itself if he’s innocent. That’s what a fair trial is. Don’t try to do someone else’s job for them (like his attorneys for example). Just do your duty as a human to help better systems whenever you can. Everything else will figure itself out.

Now, consider this scenario. IF Luigi is guilty, and WE SAY “innocent until proven guilty,” and EVIDENCE SHOWS he is guilty, THEN Luigi goes to prison. Nobody prepared after that “until” and with nothing to combat evidence, nothing will hold them back from convicting a guilty man. You haven’t explained why we shouldn’t convict him. Nothing happens in the world of healthcare because these communities don’t welcome discussion or preparation for these kinds of situations. All the effort goes to waste. Unfortunately, with censorship (and judgment) abounding in these online communities, this is likely where we’re headed; however, all hope is not lost.

Finally, consider this. IF Luigi is guilty, and WE SAY “Health insurance is legalized theft/manslaughter,” “Brian Thompson was a serial murderer/terrorist who would likely kill again,” and “Jury Nullification is a legal right of any juror to vote not guilty if they disagree with the law/charge/punishment,” and EVIDENCE SHOWS that Luigi is guilty, THEN a jury might still vote not guilty. You just have to explain why. If we as randos are questioned for believing in his guilt, if it were to ever matter, we can easily hide behind the excuse we’re only following propaganda MSM has dispersed since December 9th.

Let’s be serious here. At this point, his chances rely on whether or not people agree with the act, especially with the plain amount of evidence they have. So fill these communities with reason, not pipe dreams.

Moving Forward

So where do we go from here?

Stop the division. We can’t keep canceling each other (or Luigi) because they don’t fit a very narrow set of standards. No one here is too good for another, even if they have a different opinion than you. Having different beliefs is fine, and it’s not your place to tell someone else Luigi doesn’t need their help. Or to tell him he shouldn’t ask for it. United we stand. Divided we fall.

Stop trying to change Luigi’s beliefs and insulting him when not necessary. This one just pisses me off to be honest. He might’ve given up his life for this. Please let’s have some respect.

Discuss healthcare related topics. Predatory practices. Learn victims’ stories. Research. Discuss that research. Be loud. Be annoying. That’s what gets attention. This is so so so vital here.

Circle back to overreaching charges and abuse of power. This one is nice, and probably one of the only non-complaints I have. I really like seeing people bring up the consistent abuses of power in our system. It really goes to show how badly the elite want him dead because of who was targeted. But most of all it pisses off a jury.

Discuss jury nullification and why it should be applied to Luigi. This goes hand in hand with healthcare discussions and research.

Start and be a part of thoughtful campaigns. Make sure you’re fighting for a goal that is attainable. Short term is fine – like getting the word out about a specific organization or a victim’s story. It doesn’t have to be everything all at once. Be wary of blanket campaigns because people can tell when you try to pander to the masses. Aim for the niche communities who wouldn’t already vote him not guilty. Most leftists are already covered. Conservatives are not. Liberal Democrats are not. Take one thing these communities value and turn that into something you can work with. For example, many conservatives are gun owners. Who’s more pro-gun than Luigi Mangione? Who’s more protective of the American people, defending them with the greatest of forces against a corrupted, parasitic elite who wish to take your guns away? Don’t tread on me! Workshop it. Repeat.

Remember Karen’s word are designed to pander. We, separate, need to go further. Cut through the pandering and grab a hold of the unconvinced by targeting them specifically. Maybe one poster won’t be enough to change one person’s opinion. But several? Across the country? Time and time again?

Propaganda works by repeatedly sending the same message over and over again until it becomes subconscious. It’s what convinced people health insurance was ever a respectable industry. So create counter propaganda.

Keep going. Don’t give up just because things aren’t looking good one week. The crash outs can be pretty funny at times, but please, don’t let it actually get to you. You give up, and you give the elite full range to do what they want. It’s okay to take breaks, and it’s okay to work on you. But know that we cannot just give up on the movement. The stakes are too high. The entire American people are counting on this.

I’m a firm believer that the key to freeing Luigi, is freeing ourselves. We can’t do that if every important conversation is drowned out in the noise of the flesh.

And you, fan accounts, yes you – the cutesy editors and the crumb hunters and the activists and the conservatives and the fair trial enthusiasts and the commies – yes even YOU need to get involved. It’s our last chance. Or we’ll be divided until the end.

This may be our last chance at controlling the narrative. Do something with it.

Signed,

Geese

P.S.:

I wrote a bit of a rant originally drafting this article (if you can call it that). I wanted to make this for a while, but I only just now got to finally putting everything down. This is specifically in reference to those moderators banning healthcare related posts or who chastise users linking Luigi to the crime in any way. Though I had nowhere else to sit this in my argument, I decided to place the rant here instead, just in case anyone else can relate.

If the thoughts had to plague me, let them plague you too!

Here is the rant.

I have no responsibility to lie about my opinion. In fact, my responsibility is to my friends and my family, and I cannot in good faith act like Luigi’s life (which in his own decision he decided to sacrifice) somehow means more than theirs, than the lives of millions of Americans suffering at the hands of Big Health, than the idea of creating an America where healthcare is afforded to everyone as it should be.

In the same vein as Luigi’s logic entails that Brian’s life meant less than the lives of millions of Americans, as much as I respect him and wish for his freedom, the same is true about Luigi’s.

This is why I will never say he didn’t do it. It cuts off the conversation that we need to improve our current system. Because if you insist he didn’t do it, you admit you believe if he did that that would be wrong.

Listen, I will fight for his rights every day, and I wish nothing more than for him than safety and freedom.

HOWEVER, if it were to come down to it, I’m not denying his guilt to preserve him over desperately needed activism. I hope that every user within these pro-Luigi communities online knows where to draw that line for themselves – would you shoot Brian for Luigi? Would you shoot a sick mother for Luigi? How about ten? How about thousands of ill Americans across the country? Is it okay to shut down potential improvements to the health conversation in exchange for maybe gaslighting twelve New Yorkers that evidence of Luigi’s guilt isn’t sitting right in front of them? Is it worth losing out on all the conversations and protests and anger and drive and push towards better healthcare that might actually get what he wanted in the first place, on the off chance it makes one juror blind?

The evidence is going to be there either way. What we say as “guilty” supporters can easily be attributed to political propaganda, but our unity over this topic might actually be what saves him.

The trolley problem has Luigi on the tracks now. What will you do in the event that trolley comes flying?

With the height of New York surveillance, the evidence at trial will speak for itself. If he is innocent, let it do so on its own. If he is guilty, the evidence will suggest likewise that. And, I mean, there is a lot of it. Not to be a Debby Downer, but we can’t just ignore it.

And, if Luigi is guilty, are you not then wrong to throw away everything he most likely wanted in order to “protect” him? Why do you think you know what’s better for him and what he wants than he does? Do you not respect his sacrifice? Are you not then insulting him and his cause, spitting in the face of his efforts by saying he couldn’t have done it, or that he shouldn’t be allowed to sacrifice himself for something he believes in so strongly? Where is the agency? The autonomy? The respect?

Do you respect the actions of the Adjuster, or do you just think Luigi is some innocent, helpless fool who somehow got wrapped up into this and now suffers at the hands of an unjust justice system? If so, why don’t you protest that instead?

Oddly enough, I don’t buy that you really care about prison reform, LuigiLover69.

If you do respect the actions of the Adjuster, why would it matter if Luigi is him? Do you really support his actions, then, if he is justified only if he isn’t Luigi? Would Luigi be less worthy of support if he did it? If you do support healthcare reform, why does he need to be innocent? Wouldn’t he be justified? Why waste the months and years leading into this trial spreading this “innocent until proven guilty” narrative? Would that not all then go to waste the second he’s proven guilty? When those ballistics come back a match? Or the DNA evidence? Or the clear footage? Or the handwriting analysis?

Where do your priorities lie? Why are you here? You don’t necessarily need to explain that answer to me, but I do genuinely hope that if you’re here, that you’re able to use these questions as a guide to think deeper than what has been fed to you and further explore your own intentions.

Now I still believe through discussion of the health problem that we can free Luigi, but if it were to come down to it, and you had to choose between Luigi and the world, please choose the world.