Do you want the murderer of the UnitHealthcare CEO prosecuted?

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.

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?

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.

🎵🎶 jury nullification 🎵🎶

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.

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.

If he's caught we should elect him president so he doesn't have to go to jail.

Sometimes people provide a public service to humanity is very dark ways. Do not turn this guy in.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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. I want the story of how United screwed them and their loves ones. I want thousands of families screwed by United to go as witness and tell their stories.

And hopefully the jury will find any evidence inconclusive.

I'd like the CEO prosecuted post-mortem, and any charges transmitted equally to any and all other policy-makers at UHC.

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.

Murderer? What murderer? The CEO tripped while carrying a gun and accidentally shot himself twice in the back 🤫

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.

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.

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.

No. I hope he is never found

Id like to see trump face ramifications before this guy.

You're asking the wrong question.

This is a story about two people. One committed an enormous act of violence and another person shot that person.

The question is: should the CEO have been prosecuted for his violent crimes?

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.

If they prosecute healthcare CEO's first then yeah i'd be ok with it

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!

No. He did the right thing.

No, I hope they never find him.

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.

Yes, and I want him found innocent by a jury of his peers.

But we all know the police are going to shoot him 17 times in the back in self defense if they find him

I want the executives, boards, and shareholders that effectively murder millions every year to be prosecuted.

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.

I know the mods on lemmy.world are deleting posts educating US citizens on their legal right to nullification if they're appointed to a jury, but I'll say it anyway. You can simply just refuse to find someone guilty, even if there's every bit of evidence and a video recorded confession.

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.

No, I just want to shake hands with this guy.

This is one of those cases just begging for Jury Nullification.

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...

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 🤷🏿‍♀️

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.

I want him prosecuted, and freed by jury nullification.

Let them see that yes this was murder, but the people agree with it.

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.

Chances are, the CEO should've been prosecuted for whatever precipitated this long ago. Sounds like suicide by victim to me.

Not really. Obviously murder is wrong but the rich and powerful deserve a boogeyman.

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.

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.

i hope he never gets caught

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...

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.

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.

Nope.

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.

I want to reward him.

I've never subscribed to anyone's patreon ever before but I would sub to his.

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.

Nope

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.

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.

ITT: Nobody understands the difference between being prosecuted and convicted.

He should absolutely be prosecuted, he murdered someone. Should he be convicted of this murder? Fuck no, and I actually think a jury might agree with me.

No.

I want jury nullification as it would send the most powerful of messages to Wall Street.

Won't happen, but I can dream.

yes, of course. and found not guilty, to send a message.

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.

Jury nullification. If you're called for jury duty, DO NOT LET THEM KNOW YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS WHEN INTERVIEWING.

Not one bell pepper. I want the executives of every health insurance company tried for war crimes. I want The Adjuster to be carried through the streets and lauded as the hero he is.

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

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.

Lol Lmao Fuck no. Every day he's not found is another day that the United States is in a better position

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

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.

If he's found, the jury should nullify. It's their right as US citizens.

Yes, but only if there is an actual jury of his peers to pass judgement on him.

Yes. Jury nullification is my right.

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).

If I was in the jury I could be persuaded to push for jury nullification.

Nah he was defending himself against highway robbery.

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.

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.

If he gets caught (hope he doesn’t), I hope he gets prosecuted, pleads self defense, and wins.

Because let’s be honest, this is 100% a case of community self defense.

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.

I'd say it will be nearly impossible to get an objective jury that also represents the defendants peers.

Yes, of course. Then face a jury. And hopefully go free via jury nullification.

I’ve already received a ban on LW for benign comment when this story broke (like lots of others) and this community is on LW so I won’t give my opinion, but instead point out that more communities should move away from LW (and I definitely don’t mean to ml)

How do we get him to do it again?

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

When we prosecute all the avoidable deaths by Insurance Companies in pursuit of greed.

If they ever set up a GoFundMe to set up a memorial statue of the killer, just give a shout.

No, but I hope someone makes him a cool cape or something of the sorts.

Yes. He murdered someone. Will I curl up in a ball and cry for hours if he's never caught? Not so much.

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 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.

Yes, because murder is illegal. But if they never find the guy... That's okay too.

Absolutely NOT LOL

Jury nullification would be nice.

What murderer? He fell on lead because he was high on prescription drugs.

Don't give a shit if he's prosecuted for it, I'd be a bit pissed if a jury convicts him.

No! But we could slice the CEO into small pieces.... Accidentally.... And accidentally drop the pieces in resin and sell them on eBay? Then when you go in for a healthcare review, you come in wearing the pendant.... "Oh this? Its the tip of his penis! I paid $300 for it, it was cheap!"

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.

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."

If I was on the jury it would be a not guilty from me

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!

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. I have no sympathy for the CEO but murder is still murder

No, and if they do find him, the jury should vote not guilty and utilize jury nullification.

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.

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.

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.

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:

1. Jurors cannot be punished for their decision either way.

2. 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.

Ah, the old tug-of-war between justice and law.

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.

I would buy him a coffee

Nah, seems like a good person tbh. Dude should be elected mayor and then eventually rebuild all of reality or whatever Arrow did.

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.

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.

Follow up question: what is the purpose of the law? Why does it exist? What does that tell as about this case?

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 hope they never get the chance

Nope.

but morality...

The moral thing happened, imo.

I also believe he should face an appropriate sentence. What's the sentence for hunting without a licence in NY?

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.

Hell no. I hope they never find them. Just let it stand. The one who got away.

Why in the fuck would I?

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.

In an ideal system the jury would decide the sentence, and give him one day community service (time served).

No.

No.

Failing that, jury nullification is always an option - jurors have the right to return a not guilty verdict even if a defendant is clearly guilty.

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.

No, drag hopes they're never found

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.

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.

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.

Nah

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 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.

Of course he should be prosecuted.

Regardless of what the victim has done or was doing you can't have a society where it's regarded as ok to intentionally walk up to someone on the street and murder them. That way lies anarchy and madness.

No. He did a heroic act and should not be punished.

Actions have consequences. It's important we have precedents that the world is just

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.