It's suspended because there's no point in holding a trial if it's going to be overturned on double jeopardy. It's indefinite since there's no point in scheduling a follow-up until the question of it being double jeopardy is answered.

Like, guys, stop attributing motivations to what is arguably the only way forward.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Only way forward? They didn’t have to file the double jeopardy cases in the first place. They chose to, in order to be evil and harass and torture him with the legal system to the maximum extent possible.

[–] Simon_Shitewood@lemmy.ml 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

His lawyers filed double jeopardy. Unless the prosecution can provide a reason it's not, they have to drop the case.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I’m saying they didn’t have to file those double charges in the first place. They chose to, knowing exactly how many problems it would cause for him. On purpose. As a torture method.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Actually, it's arguably a huge prosecution mistake in Magione's favor.

The federal charges were restrained by the circumstances of the event. They couldn't do first or second degree federal homicide, because it didn't meet any of the criteria of those crimes. Of course life without parole is a possibility, but there's high chance that a lesser sentence results.

Knowing the way the state law works, the DOJ probably should have just let the state case play out, where they could have at least gone for second degree murder, with a significant mandatory minimum sentence if convicted.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago

Fascists do tend to be rather incompetent at being evil. Tale as old as time.

[–] Simon_Shitewood@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Ok, well, unfortunately Luigi's lawyers can't travel back in time to prevent him being prosecuted, so filing for double jeopardy is the only way forward for them.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Nobody said otherwise?

[–] fantasyocean@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 days ago

I'm sure there are plenty of people on their armchairs saying otherwise, but the defense attorney's job is to defend their client to the best of their ability, which often translates into what is the best case scenario? The odds of double jeopardy were certain, while any form of trial and winning are so fantastically small that they're irrelevant.

[–] Simon_Shitewood@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 days ago

You said otherwise when you objected to them saying filing for double jeopardy is their only way forward.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

While normally that could be the case, but in this case he isn't getting released either way.

The trial moving forward would be the worse scenario for the defendant. The state charges are worse than the federal charges. The later or never the state case gets tried, the better for him.

[–] lemmyvore@feddit.nl 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The point I was making is that there used to be a human rights violation and against the First and Fifth Amendments to hold someone indefinitely without a trial. But that ended in 2014.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

It is totally reasonable to criticize length of detention while denying the right to a reasonable trial in general.

However this just happens to not be applicable in this specific situation. The guy entered a guilty plea and so will not be released anyway, and he himself requested the case be dismissed causing the delay. If he went along with it, he could have had a trial sooner but wants the delay in hopes of having it dismissed. Which is totally sensible and he has literally nothing to gain by having the trial sooner given that he is almost certainly due for years of imprisonment under his guilty federal plea.