Summary

Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare, was fatally shot in a premeditated attack outside the New York Hilton Midtown before speaking at an investor conference.

The gunman, still at large, fired multiple times, leaving shell casings marked with the words “deny,” “defend,” and “depose.”

Authorities suggest Thompson was targeted but remain unclear on the motive. His wife confirmed prior threats against him.

Analysts speculate a possible vendetta tied to his company. The case raises questions about executive security, as Thompson lacked personal protection despite known risks.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    13 days ago

    Are you really suggesting that only possible realistic motive to murder him is because of his position at UHC?

    I can think of so many plausible scenarios. I just gave you one, here’s another: he was cheating on his wife, so she paid to have him killed, something that actually happens in the real world and doesn’t involved time travelers.

    I’m sure you would like this to be a just world where bad people get killed for good reasons, but that’s not how the world works. Hitler’s generals tried to assassinate him and it wasn’t because they thought he was being too mean to the Jews.

    • rumba@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      Are you really suggesting

      nope, just toying around with the concept, figured it would be about 3/5 on the joke scale.

      edit: Though if you really wanted to get into it, the words scribed on the casings might direct you to a likely solution. *

    • Lightor@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 days ago

      Possible vs Probable.

      Lots of things are possible, sure, but his position and impact on people due to his position does make one very probable.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        13 days ago

        I am guessing you do not know enough about him personally to know what is the most probable. Maybe he very openly cheats on his wife. That would make his wife hiring a hit man very probable. Maybe he’s swindled someone out of a ton of money on a personal level rather than via UHC. Again, that would make a good motive to kill him.

        We do not have enough information here and pretending we do is not very wise.

        • Windex007@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          13 days ago

          He MAYBE fucked around on his one wife causing embarrassment.

          He CERTAINLY fucked around with THOUSANDS of people causing DEATH.

          It’s worthwhile to consider alternatives but it’s unwise to paint all scenarios as equally likely.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            12
            ·
            13 days ago

            It’s also unwise to come to a conclusion when the person who did it hasn’t even been identified.

            • Windex007@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              13 days ago

              I don’t think most people have strictly concluded anything, they’ve just acknowledged the a significant probability.

              You’re on a semantic crusade.

                • Windex007@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  12 days ago

                  I’m entirely empathetic to your position.

                  Internet conversation is intrinsically imperfect. The contract of semantics isn’t sufficient.

                  I think in so many senses of the word, you’re right. Technically right. But not practically responding to the practical intention of the communication.

        • Lightor@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          13 days ago

          True, it’s possible he has numerous enemies.

          But what I can say is the average person doesn’t have people wanting to kill them. If all things are equal, and given the message written on the casings, there seems to be one that is currently the most probable.

    • Windex007@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      13 days ago

      Obviously there are many plausible scenarios, but one of them scales significantly differently than the others.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        13 days ago

        If there are many plausible scenarios, even if one is the most plausible, it’s silly to assume that’s the one.

        • Windex007@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          13 days ago

          It’s only silly if one misunderstands an assumption to be established fact.

          If I hear hoofbeats, I will assume horses, not zebras.

          If I see Zebras, I’ll say my assumption was wrong. No shame in it. I’m wrong all the fucking time, being right isn’t part of my identity.

          But until then, if someone says “what do figure those hoofbeats are?” I’m not going to say “50/50 horses or zebras”

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            13 days ago

            Assumptions are claimed to be established facts. That’s what an assumption is. You’re making a claim of fact without having the evidence.

            • Windex007@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              13 days ago

              Established facts do come with proof. That’s how they are established to be fact. You’ll notice a suspicious avoidance of the word “fact” in the definition you posted.

                • Windex007@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  13 days ago

                  No.

                  But if you preface them with qualifiers that means something, no? Are those words meaningless embellishment or are they intended to provide additional meaning, and if so, what?

            • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              13 days ago

              Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof; a supposition.

              This means it’s being regarded as true for the purposes of a context. “Hypothetical” is another term which would be useful here. But you’re being probably needlessly pedantic about this. I think everyone can agree that there are millions of people his company has harmed who thus have motive to do this, and at the same time other motives are quite possible. Maybe he broke up with the guy who shot him. Maybe he was part of an international zebra smuggling ring. Maybe it was just completely random, but fate just happened to land on someone who really deserved it. Maybe the total lack of accountability in our justice system finally drove someone over the edge.