How Improper Evidence Collection in The Luigi Mangione Case Led to a Controversial Indictment
Examining the flawed investigative procedures and legal implications surrounding the evidence used against Luigi Mangione.
The Luigi Mangione case is one of the most famous in the United States, if not the world. That’s not by mistake. Powerful people in the Department of Justice and other areas of the government needed someone to take the fall for the murder of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson in New York City.
With every new piece of evidence that was found, authorities shared it with a famished press. The media, as is typical behavior for them, followed law enforcement’s unfolding narrative with nary a question contradicting it.
But if they had done even a modicum of investigating or actual reporting, they would have found a story worth more than the weight of the White House pressuring them to cave. An actual story worth reporting and looking into, one that makes one wonder why investigators really settled on Mangione as a killer. And what led them to that conclusion.
An uncomfortable truth that Mangione’s lawyers have been pointing out in court documents is that the evidence that is being used against him was collected illegally.
And the official story from authorities seems to back up their claims.
A New York State judge recently dismissed two terrorism charges against Mangione. His rationale was that prosecutors had not presented enough evidence to the grand jury to support their claim.
It also stands to reason that they did not present the journal entry where it said that while a bomb was considered, the culprit was concerned about terrifying people.
Why mention this?
It goes back to the improperly collected and used evidence. All in the name of indicting someone, anyone, for the murder of Brian Thompson. Law enforcement and prosecutors needed a fall guy, so any worries about the Constitution and a person’s rights were tossed out the window.
When talking about the journal, the way that it was collected needs to be addressed, along with a few other things that make the collection of this evidence shady. Some have argued that the law enforcement agents on the scene may have violated Mangione’s civil rights.
On December 9, 2024, Luigi Mangione was arrested in an Altoona, Pennsylvania McDonald’s about 275 miles away from Manhattan. They claimed one of the employees called to alert them that the Thompson killer was in the restaurant.
Officers surrounded him and would not allow him to leave. They searched his backpack and gathered a lot of the evidence being used against him during this time. There’s just one issue with how they went about this.
Mangione was never read his Miranda Rights.
The reason it is imperative to make a suspect aware of these is to reinforce the Fifth and Sixth Amendments of the Constitution. Not doing so will often see charges being dismissed.
Why? The Fifth Amendment says that a suspect does not need to incriminate themselves in a crime. And the Sixth Amendment revolves around the perp being allowed to have an attorney present.
Since law enforcement did not deem it necessary to read Mangione the Miranda Rights, they may have put the entire case into jeopardy. They went through his bag and detained him illegally.
But that’s not all they did.
Once Mangione was in custody and being questioned, the officers offered him a snack. On the surface this may seem like a good-natured way of helping the person being questioned. However, there was an ulterior motive for the nicety; they wanted to collect his DNA.
They did it without justification or a warrant. Mangione’s lawyers are arguing that this was a manipulation tactic and therefore the evidence is poisoned, which means it should be tossed out.
Believe it or not, there is more bad behavior on the government’s side.
During the manhunt for the person who killed Brian Thompson, police talked to the media about a few things. Each press conference came with breathless updates and pleas for help from the public.
One of the key components of their talk was how the culprit left his backpack and jacket in Central Park. Allegedly the bag was filled with Monopoly money. Authorities believed that the murderer was trying to taunt them.
Strangely, when Mangione was caught, one of the ways he was identified was because he had the same backpack and jacket. For an alleged smart guy, that doesn’t seem to fit the MO.
Or perhaps this was all the start of political theater.
Nothing about the murder of Brian Thompson or the criminal indictment of Luigi Mangione has been typical. Government officials and law enforcement seem to have a need to send a message to the masses. That communication might as well come from their billionaire overlords themselves.
The message: we are in charge, and a strike against us will result in the full weight of the government coming down on you.
Proof? New York City Mayor Eric Adams joined Mangione and an army of law enforcement officers on a perp walk to his preliminary hearing in December 2024. Ironically, Adams himself was under indictment but was trying to present a tough-guy-on-crime persona.
Even more telling that this is a political witch hunt more than a serious criminal trial are the actions of Pam Bondi. She informed the press that the federal prosecutors would seek the death penalty. The problem is that she used the media to send the message rather than filing court papers or telling the defense.
Further, she admitted in the press release that she was seeking the death penalty, not because the punishment suited the crime, but because it furthered Donald Trump’s political agenda.
Luigi Mangione is not on trial for murder. He’s on trial for not being of the right political affiliation. And the evidence that has been collected was not done so properly.
But that’s the thing about political trials: the evidence isn’t really for the courts. It’s for the people. It is used to send a message that the elites are still in charge and we should fall in line with them.
Luigi Mangione hasn’t, and he is facing a very serious trial as a result. Or perhaps not, since those who are in charge have bungled the investigation so badly.
I'm actually cynical of this case, given that there have been so many false flags. As always, we need to see who benefits and why. This case clearly has a political agenda rather than an objective investigation of the facts, a key indicator of a false flag. So it wouldn't surprise me. Especially given the lack of evidence that could easily overthrow it (i.e., no Miranda rights). Other signs include the unexplained anomalies and convenient flaws, and the targeted media reports playing on our emotions - like the 'perp walk' which echoes, for instance, the (staged) 'fight fight fight' picture of DJT after the 'attempt' on his life (who really believes that actually happened). The same happened with the Dahmer case (and much more besides). Luigi is one to watch closely. It will be interesting to see what happens. Just my two-pence worth.