The top federal prosecutor in Manhattan has been recused from Luigi Mangione’s case.
“The Government also writes to inform the Court that United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jay Clayton, is recused from this matter,” attorneys from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York said in a letter to Judge Margaret Garnett on Wednesday.
Newsweek has contacted the district for comment via email. Mangione’s attorneys have also been contacted for comment via email. Luigi Mangione in court
Mangione, 26, is facing federal and state charges in the fatal shooting of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson outside a New York City hotel in December.
He pleaded not guilty to a federal murder charge last Friday. Federal prosecutors have declared their intent to seek the death penalty. Mangione pleaded not guilty to state murder and terrorism charges in December.
The letter did not explain why Clayton recused from the case, but said that Perry Carbone, the district’s criminal division chief, will serve as the attorney for the United States in the case.
“Mr. Carbone has conveyed the same to the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, which confirmed that it will in turn notify the Attorney General,” the letter said.
President Donald Trump announced in April that Clayton, a former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, would serve as interim U.S. attorney for Southern District of New York while the administration pursues Senate confirmation for him to serve in the role full-time.
Wednesday’s letter also amended an earlier letter to Garnett that described the handling of a recorded jail call between Mangione and his attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo.
The earlier letter has said that a paralegal at the New York County District Attorney’s Office (DANY) had “immediately stopped listening” to the call after recognizing it as an attorney call.
“In fact, the paralegal listened to the entire call, then subsequently informed DANY prosecutors about the identities of the people with whom the defendant spoke,” Wednesday’s letter said.
“DANY thereafter handled the matter as described in our previous letter. Moreover, DANY notified defense counsel of these facts in an email, dated April 22, 2025, thus, counsel was aware of this information prior to arraignment.”
Mangione is next due in federal court on December 5. His next appearance in the state case is set for June 26.
No trial date has been set in either case, but his defense team have said they want the federal case to take precedent because it involves the death penalty.
A Trump appointee is now the prosecutor? Excellent. Based on his previous legal picks, we can expect some significant legal errors and hopefully a full acquittal.
From what i read Clayton, the guy recused was appointed by Trump.
he needs to be freed. that would kickstart the revolution. we need victories.
People need to be going to the courthouse and protesting and advocating on his behalf. Send the signal that in a society where CEO’s can kill indiscriminately with decisions they make without repurcussions, this is self defense.
If you let the revolution be dependent on one guy, we’ve already lost.
Bullshit. Absolute bullshit. You need at least one leader. If every time there’s a beacon and you snuff it out, you’re never going to have a revolution. This is why the left fails so often. Every time there’s a beacon, the left tears it down. The right has spent the last decade building up their beacons, while we’ve been busy dismantling ours.
I’m not saying the murderer CEO is the right choice but he isn’t the worst. This is the same toxic mindset behind the saying, “Don’t wrestle with pigs.” That mentality has driven leftist ideas and causes so far underground online that we may never recover. But it sounds clever enough that people keep repeating it until it’s embedded in the zeitgeist.
Are you telling me we can’t OJ this guy. We can’t at least rally for a guy that maybe did or did not do the thing. The rules are out the window right now. We have criminals and thugs running government and business. One fucking guy stands up and we say “thoughts and prayers dude”.
God damn it, just find at least one fucking person to lead. Enough of this nonsense that’s actively toxic to basic movement-building.
Find any guy, just one, FFS the right lifted up Dan Bonginio and he’s now in a government position. The left is busy jerking off and ripping down anything that actually unites and excites them.
We can rally behind him as a comrade, but not as a leader. We need independent, cooperative cells. Not leaders who can be taken down.
The right elevates demagogues because they’re fascists, and obsessed with the myth of individualism. I will not be a party to fascism or demagoguery, even if it’s a leftist flavor.
You need to expand your ways of thinking beyond what you’ve been propagandized to believe is necessary or possible.
Yes sorry, leader is not what I meant. I’m not sure what the word or concept would be. A rally. Something that acts like a beacon to draw in the troops that we can all enjoy and get excited about.
The right does it because it works. They’re playing chess while we’re playing checkers. Leaders can only be taken out if we allow them to be exposed. We have to turn on them otherwise as long as we rally, they exist.
You need to expand your ways. You advocate for what we have always done without recognition of how badly it has failed. The Fall of leftist values is one of the biggest losses I’ve ever witnessed. And at every turn we never learn any lessons.
Fact is, what the right has done was successful. It’s time you accept that we failed to adapt while they did.
It also makes sense why they succeeded. They have funding. They have the think tanks. They had people behind the scenes organizing and strategically building personas and ideologies. Rejecting that as some moral stance is needless and foolish.
So we might not have the same resources. But we can be copy cats. It’s still much cheaper
You understand that you’ve just told the Trump Regime that revolution wouldn’t start without Luigi Mangione?
I know the trump admin probably has pretty poor reading comprehension, but that isn’t what he said at all. He said it would kickstart the revolution, not that it is the only thing that would.
Luigi is not the shooter.
Why?
He was hanging out with me that entire week.
The photos they have with Luigi’s face exposed were taken 3 miles from the shooting. His jacket doesn’t match what the shooter was wearing. His backpack doesn’t match the shooter’s backpack. His eyes and eyebrows look nothing like the shooter’s. Luigi was framed. My opinion is that after the shooting, the cops had AI look for a matching image on all the cameras they had access to. Luigi’s clothes looked similar enough for the AI and the cops just rolled with it. NYPD and prosecutors are well known for framing people. Look up the Central Park Five.
Every PD and prosecutor is well known for framing people. Look up: (you’re gonna need a while)
FTFY.
The pictures from the hostel check-in, with his face, were taken almost 2 weeks before the shooting, which leaves plenty of room in the prosecution’s timeline for a change of jackets.
Also leaves plenty of time for him to have left town. The only pictures they have of the man’s face are from weeks before the shooting.
Eh. I think Luigi probably did it and the sketchiness around his arrest is because the cops found him with a real time facial recognition tracking system they don’t want the public to know about. You might be right though, I support him even if he’s innocent 😉
You can cover 3 miles in a few minutes in NYC.
He could have changed his backpack.
His face wasn’t visible in the pictures of the shooting, the ones I saw at least.
NYPD might be famous for framing people, but they also catch real murderers sometimes, in high or low profile cases.
Occam’s razor says he did shoot the guy.
Yes you can cover 3 miles and he could have changed all of his clothes. He also could have been still 3 miles away when the shooting happened and not changed any of his clothes. If the police want to use the photo evidence they have NOW as evidence, they need a video of Luigi changing jackets and backpacks. Without it, they are just using a crappy AI match to target an innocent man. Did he also shave off his eyebrows just before the shooting and grow them back in a couple of days? He probably switched his Sicilian eyes for some Slavic eyes while he was at it.
Bringing up Occam’s razer when it’s clearly 3 different people is crazy work.
I mean, what else was he supposed to shave his eyebrows off with so the photos match up?
You know what, at this point I’m starting to believe United Healthcare’s CEO wasn’t even killed, it’s a setup. Think about it: the guy was divorced, probably with large sums to pay each month for his ex-wife and children who didn’t like him. He made decisions that killed people, he knew about growing anti-healtcare / anti-billionaire sentiment in the US and felt his life was at risk. What better plan than faking your own death, especially in a high profile case like this when you’re guaranteed that NYPD would frame someone who would take all the attention away from you while you’re quietly fleeing the country. 4d chess right there.
deleted by creator
He was hanging with me that afternoon, there’s no way it could’ve been him
And right after he left your place we spent some time together drinking coffee and fiddling around with classic video games.
So far there isn’t any proof that he is.
If I understand the judicial system, the prosecution has to make that proof. So yeah as long as the trial hasn’t started there shouldn’t be any proof.
Yeah, them making the proof sounds right up their alley.
And until that happens, he isn’t the shooter.
For the same reason United Healthcare didn’t murder sick people
And what’s that reason?
I saw a lot of comments saying Luigi didn’t do it, but no convincing argument. Personally I think he shot the guy (but I’m open to change my mind) and that he’s some kind of hero for it.
I think Mojo’s comment is meant sarcastically. I.e. UCH does murder sick people.
But to your question: the presumption of innocence. You’ve got the burden-of-proof backwards; it’s not “prove he didn’t commit murder” but rather “prove he did”. What I’ve seen is: some blurry pictures of a white man with brown hair in NYC, security footage of a white man with brown hair doing the killing, and the police say that they found a confession-manifesto and a ghost-gun on Mangione when they arrested him.
As a white man with brown hair who doesn’t trust the police, I feel concerned about this standard of evidence!
The physical evidence would seem pretty strong but: a manifesto is something you mail, not carry around with you waiting to be arrested. And a ghost-gun is something you throw away immediately, not hang on to across state lines.
My main point here isn’t that it’s a slam-dunk “no possible way he could have done it”. But that it’s just not a ton of evidence. And the pressure to get a conviction and execute someone is incredibly strong. I’d say there’s decent evidence that the NYC cops are corrupt and setting up an innocent man to make themselves look good. If we’re going to jump to a verdict before the trial, what made you pick the one you picked?
I agree with your point, I’m not really convinced he’s the shooter but the general feeling I have, from my limited knowledge of how the police, the judicial system and murderers work, the pictures that everyone saw and all, is that there’s a real possibility he’s the shooter. But of course we have to let the courts decide.
I’m just tired of everyone saying he didn’t do it based on nothing more than anecdotal evidence and a general hatred for anything that looks like a cop.
I’m old enough to have known a time when online discussion was mostly rational and respectful, and it bothers me how it has slowly become so polarized and emotional.
I don’t disagree with you, but I don’t put a lot of value in that judgement. Like, if I was the VP of Denying Claims at UnitedHealthcare, I guess I would avoid being in a room with him and a gun just to be safe? I donno…
When I see people saying he’s definitely innocent, I mostly read that as a reaction against the media which portrays all suspects as 100% guilty. And that’s a pretty fucked-up thing, right? Like, suppose there’s a real trial and we all get to see that the evidence against Manione is garbage and that he’s clearly innocent and he gets correctly exonerated. Even still, he’ll spend the rest of his life as “Luigi, that dude who killed the CEO!” because that’s what people saw on TV long before his trial.
The eyebrows aren’t the same, he couldn’t have grown eyebrows that quickly.
Also, the burden of proof is on the prosecutor, how can we prove he’s innocent? It’s up to them to prove he’s guilty. And there’s no proof that it’s him, only a motive.
Okay… seems like you need some help. Commentors are suggesting that it wasn’t Luigi because they don’t want him imprisioned or executed if he’s found guilty. That’s why people are claiming “Luigi was hanging out with me during the murder” or “that’s not Luigi in the photos, eyebrows don’t match” and etc. Even if you disagree with those statements, you should play along if you think Luigi is a hero of sorts.
deleted by creator
It’s very weird to see people say they love this guy for being such a revolutionary action based chad sticking-it-to-the-man straight shooter. And then you ask “Because he shot a CEO of an Insurance Company?” and they say “No.”
At least with OJ, the premise of his innocence was that he actually didn’t shoot Nicole Brown Simpson and the police were just being racist against a black celebrity. But juggling the contradiction on Luigi is just mind numbing.
First of all, I think Luigi is innocent. Honestly, and also due to the way we SHOULD think about this, innocent until PROVEN guilty.
However I also feel 0 sympathy for the CEO. Did he deserve to die? Who knows, probably. The shit insurance companies profit off of is disgusting. There’s I think an actual case for “self defense” if they ever find who actually shot him, because of the death toll that private health insurance has contributed to.
In my own experience, these are two different people.
One who hasn’t thought about the actual evidence or legal burden. They just saw on the news that the suspect is definitely guilty and their reaction is: “yeah, guilty of killing someone who deserved to die. Rock on murderer-dude.”
The other person is thinking about the law and the evidence presented so far and finds it pretty thin. They might or might not feel like healthcare CEOs should be executed, but I have not heard this type of person lauding Mangione for the killing because they are skeptical that he had anything to do with it.
It may be that your friends are less internally-consistent.
I mean I’ll say it, yeah it’s because he (whoever he was) shot someone that indirectly killed thousands upon thousand for money. Am I supposed to feel bad for that? Is killing one person with a gun somehow worse?
He did not shoot the guy, but he has a recognizable face, name and background so we just roll with it. It doesn’t matter if he’s the shooter or not, the shooter is a hero what the internet calls Luigi isn’t the individual anymore, but the idea behind him.
next due in federal court on December 5. His next appearance in the state case is set for June 26.
And no trial dates set at all. They keep him in solitary and in straight jackets all day. This dude has got strength if he isn’t going mental yet. Fucking hell.
They are caught in a no-win scenario.
If they hadn’t found someone to prosecute, they would have been better off, but now that they do, they are absolutely fucked.
They can’t lose the trial. It will become open season on the rich. They can’t win the trial and execute him, it will start a holy war against the rich.
I think they want to delay as long as they can and hope the public forgets. Then they can deny him his rights, and dispose of him when the timing is better.
Maaaybe using a term other than “holy war” is wiser. 😬
They can’t lose the trial. It will become open season on the rich.
That’s absurd. If there was going to be a rash of copycat shootings, Luigi’s enormous internet celebrity would have incentivized it already. The NYPD can’t afford to look like incompetent assholes, because they have a fiduciary responsibility to their paymasters on Wall Street. But whether or not Luigi is convicted will have no influence on the number of attempted CEO assassinations in the next decade.
will have no influence on the number of attempted CEO assassinations in the next decade.
I’m not sure that’s true, honestly. 😅🤞🏼
It would be AMAZING if they set the precedence that Luigi is not guilty. The US would become the happy hunting grounds … with a reverse “Most Dangerous Game” happening everywhere.
One could dream.
#myteam
Precedence that someone that wasn’t involved at all is not guilty?
Or, are you assuming he is guilty already?
they are stringing along until they find a jury that is ignorant of the news to convict him.
So, old AF bluehaired MAGAts?
They’ve managed to crack open the human psyche, a couple of tiktok videos about how he’s lame and it’s cringe to k the rich and nobody will care the state executes him.
If it were that simple they would have done it by now
They’ve convinced all the muslims that Donald would save Gaza and they convinced all zoomers that voting is useless. Mark my words, that was the last voting you were able to participate in
If you ever find yourself making a statement about how “all the muslims” are idiots, maybe stop and reconsider. Do you see a distinction between a complaint about “all the muslims” and a complaint about “all the jews” or “all the blacks”?
edit: other than one of those being more socially acceptable to be used as a target of ridicule
Citing the fact that the Muslim voters chose to vote on vibes about the Gaza situation doesn’t make them idiots. And raising this issue doesn’t make one a bigot
The fact that women voters chose against reproduction rights doesn’t make them fools either, but raising the issue doesn’t make one a misogynistic.
A lot of people I spoke with, living and working in Dearborn, saw it as a moral line for them and wouldn’t vote for either major candidate. Misrepresenting that position as something very obviously nonsensical and attributing that idiotic belief as being a muslim thing, that is bigotry, whether or not you want to pretend the idea of Trump saving Gaza is a perfectly reasonable thing that perfectly reasonable people might believe. No one believed Trump would be good for Gaza, and thinking it’s realistic that that muslims as a group really are that dumb and you won’t get pushback for saying that out loud, that says something about you.
You’re writing it as “all the muslims” have been brainwashed into believing in something that you see yourself as not stupid enough to fall for. It’s trash-talking muslims by imagining they share a common belief in something obviously stupid.
And again, ask yourself whether you would be comfortable attributing, out loud, a belief you think is stupid to “all the blacks” or “all the jews”. If there are any situations where you would feel comfortable using those phrases in a sentence, out loud. If not, what makes your use of “all the muslims” different enough to not count as bigotry? If one of these phrases just slips out, there’s a deeper problem than simply saying the words. Introspect on that.
We need to remember the billionare plants in this case and make sure they will be at the upcoming Nuremberg Trials 2.
Wednesday’s letter also amended an earlier letter to Garnett that described the handling of a recorded jail call between Mangione and his attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo.
The earlier letter has said that a paralegal at the New York County District Attorney’s Office (DANY) had “immediately stopped listening” to the call after recognizing it as an attorney call.
“In fact, the paralegal listened to the entire call, then subsequently informed DANY prosecutors about the identities of the people with whom the defendant spoke,” Wednesday’s letter said.
What is all this about listening in on calls between defendant and lawyer. Sounds very sus but im not knowledgeably enough about legal stuff to really understand it.
Phone calls in prison are recorded. Luigi needs to use prison phones to talk to his lawyer. So his phone calls with his lawyer were recorded. The content of those calls is guarded by attorney client privilege, and the prosecutor can’t legally access them… Except the prosecutor 100% accessed them, and listened in.
As soon as the prosecutor fessed up to knowing anything about the content of those calls, it threw a giant wrench in the works for the courts, because everything the prosecutor has done so far (or does in the future) is potentially tainted by the knowledge from those calls. Luigi could 100% use that to try and appeal if he’s convicted, citing the fact that his attorney client privilege was breached. And if that appeal works, then any evidence gained as a result of that privileged info would also be tossed out. So the prosecutor was recused, meaning they’re basically being removed from the trial.
It also confused me at first. Here’s what i (not an expert) make of it: sounds like mangione and his lawyer had a phone call which should have been private. The district attorney probably was listening to mangiones other calls, and this attorney call was recorded or handed over to district attorney in error. The district attorney initially said they immediately stopped listening once they recognized it was an attorney call, but they actually listened to the entire thing which is a huge violation of attorney-client privilege
Stuff like that should be grounds for a mistrial
“In fact, the paralegal listened to the entire call, then subsequently informed DANY prosecutors about the identities of the people with whom the defendant spoke,” Wednesday’s letter said.
“DANY thereafter handled the matter as described in our previous letter. Moreover, DANY notified defense counsel of these facts in an email, dated April 22, 2025, thus, counsel was aware of this information prior to arraignment.”
Mistrials aren’t generally automatic. One side or the other has to submit a motion. I’d guess the defense doesn’t want a mistrial because that would only delay things even further and it’s already going to drag on forever.
The defense attorneys would know that Mangione’s personal calls are being monitored by default. They’d also know that even if the prosecution intentionally listened in to their privileged conversation, which they’re not supposed to do, nothing they hear can be used or submitted in court.
Edit: I haven’t been following this case but apparently they haven’t empaneled yet so I don’t think they can even motion for a mistrial. Maybe this would be prosecutorial misconduct and that’s why there’s the change in prosecutor?
The defense attorneys would know that Mangione’s personal calls are being monitored by default. They’d also know that even if the prosecution intentionally listened in to their privileged conversation, which they’re not supposed to do, nothing they hear can be used or submitted in court
That is not the problem here. The problem is that they could come up with things they “had an idea” to investigate and claim it didn’t come from the call. It also means that they cannot speak openly with each other, which inhibits their defense and thus infringes upon the right to due process.
I understand why it’s not good that a paralegal made a mistake and overheard a privileged conversation. I was offering a potential insight into rationale the defense maybe applied in deciding not to motion for a mistrial.
I’m not an attorney myself but I have to believe any attorney willing to take this case would be smart enough to be very cautious about their phone conversations with anybody incarcerated.
a paralegal made a mistake
haha good one
If only the system wasn’t completely corrupt in favor of the kind of people Luigi definitely didn’t shoot.
“In favor”? It’s their system. 😅
He needs to be acquitted. Cops/prosecutors can’t illegally collect evidence (in theory). Charges are dropped when it’s proven in court.
What is all this about listening in on calls between defendant and lawyer. Sounds very sus but im not knowledgeably enough about legal stuff to really understand it.
I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but due process has been thrown out the window in the United States.
Also, Mangione has committed the most terrible of all crimes: he attacked corporate America. He will be spared nothing.
Allegedly. Also he’s a hero
Allegedly
Yeah… That’s cute, but if people truly believed there was any doubt that he did it, there wouldn’t be the wave of support and enthusiasm he unwittingly created.
The general public aren’t investigators. The burden of proof is pretty low when you’re looking for someone to rally behind. People would rally behind anyone the government dragged out, regardless of how legitimate the case was. Even if he turns out to be innocent, he’ll still be a symbol because of his association and how the government has gone after him.
Agreed.
All I was saying was, no need to say Allegedly here. People who patronize Luigi Mangione forums have a pretty good idea who they think did it, they actually agree with what they think he did, and there isn’t much point in reminding them that Luigi is technically innocent until proven guilty.
Oh well… At least Luigi will have his day in court, unlike the poor sods who were shipped off to Salvadorian concentration camps without due process by the Trump regime. In this weird day and age, Luigi might be luckier than most in that his constitutional rights will be respected.
We say alleged because in civilization, you’re innocent until proven guilty.
Which civilization is that, exactly? How long ago are we talking here?
Only because they want to make an example of him. The immigrants they just don’t care about at all, all they want is them dead or gone, whichever comes first.
People don’t seem to have much actual doubt he did it, but that doesn’t actually mean those people are correct in their certainty. I’m not sure how strong the actual evidence involved is, but it’s been very widely reported that he was responsible, and that’s going to make him seem guilty to the average person regardless of if there is enough evidence to warrant that or not.
It’s not that he didn’t do it, it’s that what he did, is not, and should not be considered a crime. He protected his own life, and the lives of countless others by eliminating a serial killer. Not only that, but he did it in a manner that was relatively humane and didn’t put bystanders or public property in danger.
Self defense is not a crime. Saving another person from an unjust death is not a crime.
He knew exactly what he was doing. The next revolution wont be televised, it will be live streamed. If they convict him, NYC, DC, and Palm Beach will burn to the ground, to name a few
The turtles’d appreciate that, no lie.
Palm beach if not only for the insurance money lmao
There’s a little thing called “attorney-client privilege” which is something that is supposed to be honored. I was curious and looked up the docket entries. So I guess the recorded call was on the regular line for the detention center where it does warn users it’s a pre-recorded line. MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center) is supposed to filter out any numbers that are identified in advance as attorney numbers, but allegedly this number was not identified ahead of time as being an attorney number and thus the recording inadvertently provided to DANY. There are also other ways inmates can communicate with attorneys via non recorded lines, one involves filling out a form the other is through reserved rooms. Who knows though if those are readily accessible or atleast as easily as the monitored lines.
The only shocking thing here is that the prosecution fessed up to listening in.
Something tells me that info was leaked and the prosecution rushed to get ahead of it.
They think they have a slam dunk case, and don’t want to risk it. Better that it comes out now. If it came out during the case, it could be grounds for a mistrial; if it came out afterwards, it could be the basis for an appeal.
It’s already grounds for a mistrial. Tell me if Alvin Bragg had been caught listening to a call between Trump and his defense attourny, it wouldn’t have resulted in an instant mistrial.
Probably said that the federal case is flimsy, because well, it is.
What are the odds that this is a red herring to switch up who is prosecuting the case?
if they declare a mistrial they can try again.
Wtf does this mean. Eh maybe I’ll read it later cause I don’t understand it
a paralegal was listening to the whole mangione-lawyer conversation on thier phone, which broke defendant-lawyer priveleges.
Thanks man
The surprising thing here is that someone attached to Trump is still following the rules around recusal.
Wow.
That is all.
