- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Luis Mangione Trial Updates
Posted on 5/18/26 at 3:31 pm to PurpleandGold Motown
Posted on 5/18/26 at 3:31 pm to PurpleandGold Motown
The State trial is a joke anyway. They rushed to schedule it before the Federal trial and it's amateur hour. The Federal judge already ruled to allow this same evidence.
This post was edited on 5/18/26 at 3:32 pm
1
Posted on 5/18/26 at 3:52 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Without a warrant, and without him being able to reach into the bag for a weapon, what legal right did LEO have to search the bag at that point?
They should have just gotten a warrant.
LEO think Terry means they can lie and create any situation involving any random threat and violate out 4A rights.
The guy was the prime suspect of someone who just shot a man on the street in cold blood and presumably had a weapon on him. Isn't there some sort of legal avenue for searching him and his belongings he was carrying with him for a weapon? Or if the bag wasn't on him and he couldn't reach it, then they don't have the right to search?
Posted on 5/18/26 at 3:56 pm to CatfishJohn
quote:
Or if the bag wasn't on him and he couldn't reach it, then they don't have the right to search?
They should have gotten a warrant for the bag if he wasn’t holding it/wearing it.
Even then, once he was in custody it’s so easy to get a warrant to search it. Just do that, every time, and this type of ruling never happens. Absent exigent circumstances, taking the extra few minutes for a warrant >>> mealy mouthed testimony on incident to arrest search
This post was edited on 5/18/26 at 3:56 pm
Posted on 5/18/26 at 4:00 pm to CatfishJohn
quote:
The guy was the prime suspect of someone who just shot a man on the street in cold blood and presumably had a weapon on him. Isn't there some sort of legal avenue for searching him and his belongings he was carrying with him for a weapon?
That's the problem with moving the bag away. On his person? Yes, that's the point of Terry.
But how could he access a firearm if his bag was in their custody fee away from his grasp? There was no way he could have used a weapon in that bag, at that time.
LEO will always articulate some grand master plan of danger to try to justify these searches that shouldn't be protected under Terry and it bit them in the arse this time.
Posted on 5/18/26 at 4:03 pm to SlowFlowPro
Was the search pre or post arrest? If they just started going through his bag pre arrest and without consent, that’s crappy police work. If it’s post arrest, it’s search incident to arrest and should be allowed.
Allowing the later inventory search is weird too. Are they saying the disallowed search didn’t spot the gun and silencer? How do you not see that when looking in a backpack?
For those decrying the ruling, I am as pro law and order as they come but there has to be consequences for violating the Constitution and exclusion of evidence is that consequence. If the search was bad, the officers should face discipline. Salesman fricks up a sale at work, his boss gets in his arse. Should be the same for police. Do your job. Do it right.
Allowing the later inventory search is weird too. Are they saying the disallowed search didn’t spot the gun and silencer? How do you not see that when looking in a backpack?
For those decrying the ruling, I am as pro law and order as they come but there has to be consequences for violating the Constitution and exclusion of evidence is that consequence. If the search was bad, the officers should face discipline. Salesman fricks up a sale at work, his boss gets in his arse. Should be the same for police. Do your job. Do it right.
Posted on 5/18/26 at 4:08 pm to jbgleason
I believe LEO argued it was a Terry stop, but I haven't read the actual motions. What I read earlier was that LEO articulated they thought the bag had a bomb in it, so that's the danger articulation I would imagine.
Posted on 5/18/26 at 4:13 pm to SloaneRanger
quote:
That ruling seems insane. The rule of law has ceased to exist in NY.
You are mad because the Constitution still exists in NY???
Posted on 5/18/26 at 4:15 pm to PurpleandGold Motown
quote:
I don't want to bring back hanging judges
We used to hang judges?
Posted on 5/18/26 at 5:08 pm to upgrayedd
I can’t stand liberal white women. Couldn’t imagine being married to someone as evil as they are.
Posted on 5/18/26 at 5:19 pm to PurpleandGold Motown
Sense isn't so common now days. You know, common sense. 
Posted on 5/18/26 at 6:26 pm to TheChosenOne
quote:
The Federal judge already ruled to allow this same evidence.
And rightfully so.
If he left the bag somewhere the defense can make that argument and say the real killer threw him under the bus. Then the jury decides if they believe it.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 12:18 am to jbgleason
I like how the inventory search at the jail is ok. But searching the same bag before arriving at the jail is not ok. He was getting arrested either way regardless of the bag.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 7:45 am to bulletprooftiger
quote:
Carro decided the subsequent search of the backpack at the stationhouse "as a valid inventory search," so the items discovered there, including the alleged 3D-printed gun used, a notebook and handwritten slips of paper with purported escape routes, will be allowed at trial.
Under Louisiana jurisprudence, the entirety of the contents of the bag would likely be admitted under the theory of inevitable discovery even if there was a flaw in the initial search. The discovery of the contents, and therefore the contents themselves, would go to the weight and not the admissibility at trial. It’s the same as a chain of custody argument. I guess New York doesn’t have the same law.
Posted on 5/19/26 at 9:09 am to ElPresidenteGrande
Inevitable discovery was my thought too, but there must be some counter-argument. He was arrested in Pennsylvania, so this could have been a New York judge applying Pennsylvania law. I don't know.
Is it also possible that the initial search provided the basis for the arrest? I.e. he wouldn't have been arrested but for the search. Would that invalidate inevitable discovery?
Is it also possible that the initial search provided the basis for the arrest? I.e. he wouldn't have been arrested but for the search. Would that invalidate inevitable discovery?
Posted on 5/19/26 at 9:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Without a warrant, and without him being able to reach into the bag for a weapon, what legal right did LEO have to search the bag at that point?
They should have just gotten a warrant.
LEO think Terry means they can lie and create any situation involving any random threat and violate out 4A rights.
I have zero knowledge of the law, but I'm interested in the process - if the gun was later inventoried at police HQ as a result of a more thorough search of the backpack, how can that evidence be introduced at trial?
Especially if the arrest was based on what the police initially found in the backpack? Or did they base the arrest on some other factor, and that allows them to search the backpack more extensively at HQ?
Posted on 5/19/26 at 9:38 am to PurpleandGold Motown
Why is the trial not over? Literally 4K murder, with tons of other evidence?
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News