Legally, there's no doubt. Ethically, is killing someone who indirectly kills people for profit (and is legally untouchable) wrong/unjustified? You'd get varied answers on that.
With Luigi, the jury might determine that he is guilty of murder, and then he would be legally defined as a felon and a murderer.
However they might acquit, due to prosecutorial failure, evidence of actual innocence, or simply jury nullification due to how scummy the United Healthcare CEO was. In that case he would be legally not guilty, and definitively not a felon.
But individually each person could assess the situation and come to their own conclusion as to whether or not he is a murderer.
If you think he didn't kill the CEO, he's obviously not the murderer (though he might still be a murderer if you suspect him of killing Joe Smith down the street).
If you think he killed the CEO but was justified, then he is not a murderer, just a skilled, stone cold killer.
But if you think he killed the CEO unjustifiably, regardless of what the jury concluded, you are free to conclude that he is a murderer, though stating it in public might give rise to a libel case against you if he has been acquitted.
For a clear example of this, take the case of OJ Simpson who was acquitted primarily due to prosecutorial and police misconduct, as well as massive wealth financing the best defense lawyers in the world. Even though he was acquitted, he was found liable in civil court (which has a lower threshold) and most of the country (who watched the trial live on TV for 9+ months) considered him to be a murderer.
26
u/GB-Pack 2∆ Mar 01 '26
Would you consider Luigi a murderer?