True Crime Update On Luigi Mangione Gets Mixed Responses

True crime suspect Luigi Mangione gained the attention of the media and the public in December last year after allegedly killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. A new update has found some mixed reactions. Read on to find out more.

The Update About Terrorism

When the University of Pennsylvania alum Mangione, 27,allegedly selected his target, it seemed strange because Brian Thompson wasn’t a political figure. Instead, he worked in healthcare. However, many folks saw it as a heroic act. In fact, many people hailed it as a social protest against giant corporations.

Incredibly, the true crime suspect found a lot of donors from his supporters. That’s despite the outcry against those who celebrate the death of anyone, much like those who cheer the death of Charlie Kirk.

Since his arrest at a McDonald’s in Pennsylvania, he faced charges of first-degree murder and terrorism. However, an update revealed that the charges of terrorism and first-degree murder were turned down by a judge. Allegedly, there was insufficient evidence, despite being found with a manifesto and a 3D-printed gun.

Second-Degree Murder Charges

On Tuesday night, Ashleigh Banfield discussed the ruling with lawyer Mark Eiglarsh on News Nation. First, she recapped the case so far, reminding followers that the true crime suspect now only faces a charge of second-degree murder, along with various weapons infractions. Next, she invited the opinions of Eiglarsh.

He responded after Banfield said, “I saw plenty of language that looked like Luigi wanted to effect change in society by killing a guy at the top of the chain.” Of course, that certainly seemed to imply wanting to use violence to change things, which aligned with terrorism.

The Judge Made The Right Call?

In response to the dropping of terrorism charges against Luigi Mangione, Mark Eiglarsh said:

You know, if there’s a reasonable hypothesis of innocence, meaning, ‘okay, there’s an explanation that this was a targeted hit on one individual because he didn’t like this guy and what he stood for versus I want to commit an act of terrorism,” then that’s not enough in the criminal arena.

Additionally, Eiglarsh explained. “So the judge, looking at all the evidence actually found a lot of things that supported that it wasn’t terrorism. So as a matter of law, [the judge] had to do what he did.”