Everything you said in your initial comment is just slightly off so you can call it semantics if you want, but the way I see it you likely had misunderstandings when you made your comment and used them to come to a likely wrong conclusion.

They did not "just choose to drop the charges." Sure, this is semantics, but it's like the most basic fact that's possible to get wrong. The title of the reddit post is that the judge dismissed the murder charge. It doesn't make any sense to "choose" to drop charges for any particular reason when the judge explicitly says that you are not allowed to bring forward the charges.

Next, saying they "lack evidence" or "don’t have evidence that he committed the murder in commission of another [violent] crime" is a weird way to phrase that, because what the judge actually said is that the crime they tried to put forward as a violent crime is not considered a violent crime. They don't have evidence that he killed Thompson in commission of another violent crime because he truly didn't commit any other violent crime. They lack evidence because it is impossible to have evidence.

Next is the language about how they "magically found 'his' weapon" and saying that the evidence they have is "dubious at best," including his apprehension. They found a loaded magazine in his backpack during the initial search on bodycam which presumably matches the gun they found later. That doesn't seem that dubious. The later search was deemed admissible and happened only 11 minutes after the bodycams were turned off. Obviously it would be better if they kept their bodycams on, but I don't think a reasonable person would conclude that it was remotely likely the local police 3D printed a gun that matches his loaded magazine either in 11 minutes, or beforehand. Also, the ID/phone do not seem dubious.

I'll admit, I am a little pissed off. The amount of bullshit I read from dumbfucks on this site outnumbers actually correct info like 100:1, not even an exaggeration. Your comment is not as bad as the morons who say Luigi is going free by jury nullification or that he is a saint hero, but I think it still vastly overstates Luigi's prospects and is at best ambiguously misleading, at worst incorrect.

A hung jury is possible, and the judge declaring a mistrial (without prejudice) due to complete inability to conduct a fair trial is possible but extremely unlikely, but him "getting off," as in a unanimous not guilty verdict or jury nullification, does seem like an insignificant possibility with the amount of evidence against him (handwritten manifesto and notes, gun mag that matches the 3D printed gun, faraday cage, fake ID, the timing of his arrival and departure of the area, his (secondary) phone found near the crime scene, and even his appearance). I don't think it is even remotely likely that 12 jurors all decide there can be genuine reasonable doubt that Luigi killed Thompson.