What the judge’s evidentiary ruling means for the case against Luigi Mangione

Luigi Mangione appears at an evidence suppression hearing at the Manhattan Supreme Court in New York, on Monday, May 18. (Steven Hirsch/Pool/Reuters via CNN Newsource)

A New York judge issued a mixed ruling last week, tossing some items found in Luigi Mangione’s backpack from his upcoming murder trial. But crucial evidence will still be admitted, paving the way for a strong case against Mangione, legal experts say, and raising questions about the kind of defence he could mount before a jury.

The ruling Monday largely split the evidence into two categories: Items found in an initial search of Mangione’s backpack at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s days after the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, and those found in a later search of the bag at the Altoona Police station.

New York Judge Gregory Carro agreed with Mangione’s defence team the first search by local police was improper, and barred items seized at that time from Mangione’s upcoming murder trial. But the latter search correctly followed the department’s protocols, Carro ruled, allowing prosecutors to present evidence that sits at the heart of their case – the alleged murder weapon and a journal full of writings authorities have called a “manifesto.”

“If the prosecution had to pick and choose without regard to the law which evidence it would want to be admissible at trial, it would be the gun and the notebook,” Gary Galperin, a former prosecutor who spent over 40 years in the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, told CNN. “Those two pieces of evidence are so damning and so crucial.”

Mangione is charged with second-degree murder, possession of a forged instrument and seven counts of possessing a weapon in connection with the death of Thompson, who was killed the morning of December 4, 2024, as he walked to the Midtown Manhattan hotel hosting his company’s annual investor’s conference.

Mangione, 28, also faces a federal prosecution related to Thompson’s death, as well as state charges in Pennsylvania. The New York state case is slated to be the first to go to trial, with jury selection scheduled to begin in September. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Mangione’s defence argued all the backpack evidence should be excluded because Altoona police illegally searched his bag, prompting the judge to hold a nine-day suppression hearing late last year.

While mixed, Carro’s ruling Monday marked a win for the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, which appears to have a strong case, legal experts told CNN. And when coupled with statements Mangione is alleged to have made to law enforcement following his arrest, the strong physical evidence could narrow his defence options at trial.

“If the gun and notebook were suppressed,” Galperin said, “that would make for a very different case.”

What’s in – and why it’s so important

A gun

Carro’s ruling Monday will allow prosecutors to show jurors the firearm they say was used to shoot Thompson twice from behind: A 3D-printed, 9mm gun recovered from Mangione’s backpack at the Altoona police station.

Steve Wasserman, an adjunct associate professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, described the weapon as “very critical,” telling CNN, “It could actually remove doubt in the minds of some jurors.”

Indeed, prosecutors have said in court filings the weapon matches 9mm shell casings found at the scene – making it a pivotal piece of evidence that could tie Mangione to the shooting.

Prosecutors have said two shell casings and a live cartridge were found at the scene, each bearing a word that appears to reference a criticism of insurance industry tactics – “delay,” “depose,” and “den,” which is assumed to mean “deny.”

“If there’s strong forensic evidence linking this gun to the crime, (the defence has) got a tough job,” Wasserman said.

A notebook

The journal, meanwhile, contains several handwritten entries expressing animosity towards the healthcare industry and an intent to commit an attack, the DA’s office contends – writings that could help prosecutors illustrate Mangione’s alleged motive, according to Wasserman.

“So say you want to rebel against the deadly, greed fueled health insurance cartel. Do you bomb the HQ? No,” Mangione wrote in one entry dated October 2024, according to a filing from prosecutors.

Instead, one should “wack (sic) the CEO at the annual parasitic bean-counter convention,” he allegedly wrote, in what would appear to be a reference to the investor’s conference Thompson was set to attend when he was killed.

While motive is not an element prosecutors must prove to establish a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, it often gives jurors another reason to convict.

In Mangione’s case, Wasserman said, “it certainly lends a lot of credence and plausibility to why you’d go stalk and kill a total stranger.”

Prosecutors may also present other writings recovered from Mangione’s bag that were separate from the notebook, including a letter addressed “To the Feds” that they have deemed a confession, according to court filings.

“To save you a lengthy investigation, I state plainly I wasn’t working with anyone,” Mangione allegedly wrote in the letter, which again voiced frustration with the American healthcare industry.

“I do apologize for any strife or trauma, but it had to be done,” he allegedly wrote. “Frankly, these parasites simply had it coming.”

What’s out – and why it might not matter

With the DA’s presentation likely to focus on the writings and alleged murder weapon, Carro’s exclusion of other items from the backpack may not have a large impact on prosecutors’ case.

Prosecutors will be unable to show jurors a cellphone, passport and wallet that were all in a Faraday bag – which blocks cell signals – as well as a computer chip.

A loaded magazine found wrapped in a pair of underwear, according to police bodycam footage, is also inadmissible, per Carro’s ruling. That magazine is tied to one of the weapons charges in Mangione’s state indictment, raising the prospect that count could be dropped from the case.

Even with these items thrown out, prosecutors may still be able to present similar evidence to the jury, including electronic evidence, which Galperin said is a “fertile field in terms of building cases and proving cases.”

“If the prosecution independently, through other lawful process, acquired some electronic evidence, that remains viable,” the adjunct professor at Cardozo School of Law told CNN.

The DA’s office has said in court documents it has other electronic devices found separate from Mangione’s backpack, including a blue Motorola cellphone discarded by the shooter as he fled the scene and a USB drive Mangione wore on a chain around his neck at the time of his arrest. Officials have not released any information about the content found on those devices.

Prosecutors have also pointed to evidence outside the scope of Carro’s ruling Monday they say ties Mangione to the crime.

Investigators tracked the shooter’s movements using surveillance footage, which led them to a New York hostel where he checked in using a fake New Jersey driver’s license with the name Mark Rosario. Mangione provided a fake New Jersey license bearing the same name to Altoona police when they first approached him at the McDonald’s, officers testified.

Mangione’s DNA or fingerprints were also found on several items discarded by the shooter, including a water bottle, a cellphone and a snack wrapper, according to court filings. The water bottle and snack wrapper were found in a garbage can near the crime scene, prosecutors said.

What the ruling could mean for Mangione’s defence

Lawyers say typical defences may be unavailable to Mangione because of the apparent strength of the physical evidence against him.

Had Carro chosen to suppress the gun and notebook, it’s possible Mangione could have mounted a defence focused on a claim of mistaken identity, Galperin said. But with those items in play, he said it seems likely Mangione’s team may try to advance a psychiatric defence – arguing, for instance, he killed Thompson during an episode of extreme emotional disturbance.

Generally, under that defence, a defendant argues they committed a crime because they were suffering from extreme emotional disturbance for which there could be an explanation, such as finding one’s spouse in bed with another person. When successfully argued, the defendant is not acquitted of murder but instead found guilty of manslaughter, which carries a lighter sentence.

Mangione’s attorneys have not publicly said whether he will rely on a psychiatric defence. But last August, they asked the judge for additional time to notify the prosecution if they plan to do so. It is unclear where that stands.

But in Mangione’s case, the chance of such a defence succeeding is “close to zero,” said New York criminal defence lawyer Jeffrey Lichtman, who represented John Gotti Jr and Mexican drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman.

“He was so cogent before and after the crime,” Lichtman said of Mangione. “There’s nothing to suggest for a jury he snapped for a moment. There’s too much planning.”

Indeed, another subject of Carro’s ruling last week could offer prosecutors an effective rebuttal: Mangione’s alleged statements to Pennsylvania law enforcement officials.

Mangione’s defence team had pushed to bar his alleged statements to law enforcement between the McDonald’s encounter and his extradition on December 19, 2024, arguing police violated his right to counsel and failed to properly read their client his Miranda rights before questioning him.

The judge ruled most of the alleged statements are admissible, though he struck a handful of comments Mangione made during his arrest, including an acknowledgement that he’d given police a fake ID.

But Carro’s ruling will allow the Manhattan DA’s office to introduce other alleged statements at trial.

One corrections officer testified in last year’s hearing he had casual conversations with Mangione about a range of topics, including the differences between private and nationalized healthcare, as well as media coverage of the case. Another corrections officer said Mangione told him that he had a backpack with foreign currency and a 3D-printed gun at the time of his arrest.

“That’s part of the whole web of evidence against him,” Galperin said. “He was very matter of fact, he was very measured, he was not saying anything which really speaks to having killed under an extreme emotional disturbance.”

Mangione’s best defence may be to elicit empathy from jurors and create doubt in their minds about the veracity of the investigation, lawyers say.

“You’re going to have to challenge every witness. Sometimes people are telling God’s truth, and you can still make them appear as liars if their stories are inconsistent or they make mistakes in their testimony,” Lichtman said. “If you can show the jury the investigation was so improper or so riddled with incompetence, it could affect the government’s presentation.”

“I hate to say it as a defence lawyer … but I think it’s going to take a very creative and very persuasive trial lawyer” for Mangione to avoid conviction, Lichtman said.