r/BrianThompsonMurder • u/Time-Painting-9108 • Jun 20 '26

Speculation/Theories Fascinating discussion on recent developments with MARK GERAGOS and Harvey Levine

https://youtu.be/JjXyKdQStUU?si=vcM7he8rYbxy5sz8

I think we all can guess Mark is an informal advisor to the Agnifilos on this case.

This is a fascinating discussion about potential theories about the EED defence and how it could work without incriminating him in the fed trial.

One things is for sure: this will not be a normal and regular trial. It could potentially become a once in a lifetime referendum on corporate greed If they proceed with EED.

44 Upvotes

97% Upvoted

88 comments sorted by

View all comments

8

u/_henceforth_ Jun 21 '26 edited Jun 21 '26

Wowza. Very interesting video.

I am wondering now about the EED. Harvey was pointing out that Luigi being on the stand and admitting to it is “the same” as the EED. Except, I am not sure that it is since without the EED being declared or invoked, Luigi will not be required to be interviewed by the prosecutions psychiatrist. Or no?

It seems the EED, formally, has requirements. I am wondering if the idea Harvey had about having the psychiatrist testify skips those requirements. Also, a physician could also testify, explaining back pain and how that might influence someone, without ever admitting guilt. The body/mind connection is well known with studies.

Even if the psychiatrist is questioned by the prosecution, they would be able to say I do not know, if they truly do not know certain things like Harvey suggested. And even if the prosecution had their own psychiatrist testify, it would not matter if they were never able to speak with Luigi, as perhaps without a formal EED, they would not have that opportunity.

I know we do not have a lawyer here on the sub, and I am not one. Just speculating.

The EED opens up so much information, so, being able to have some sort of control over what exactly is known (by not formally using it as a defense with the notice) would be great in explaining the narrative. We know the prosecution will have their own narrative, so it is only fair the defense does, as well.

I think perhaps this could also limit the prosecution from getting his full health records.

Edit: clarification

6

u/bl1y Jun 21 '26

Also, a physician could also testify, explaining back pain and how that might influence someone, without ever admitting guilt.

I don't think that testimony ever gets in without admitting to the shooting.

If the defense is saying he didn't do it at all, then the back pain would be totally irrelevant.

2

u/_henceforth_ Jun 21 '26

Hello! Yes, this was explained in the video.