The indictment against Luigi Mangione claims him to be a cold-blooded murderer of a helpless victim named Brian Thompson, in the early morning of December 04, 2024, as Mr. Thompson was about to enter a midtown Manhattan Hotel. Mr. Mangione allegedly approached the healthcare executive with a homemade 9mm Glock19, shot and killed the victim. A hotel video of the homicide reveals Mr. Mangione wearing a dark hoodie to conceal his face as he quickly scurried away.
The defendant was nonetheless easily identified by the now-ubiquitous videos in place all around the city. The ensuing manhunt located Mr. Mangione in a Pennsylvania McDonald’s restaurant, where he was arrested. Criminal charges brought against him by the New York District Attorney’s Office include murder, stalking that resulted in death, and the use of a silencer to commit a crime. Additionally, the Trump administration has directed the Justice Department to move posthaste and is seeking the death penalty.
Mr. Mangione has pleaded not guilty. The evidence against Mangione is compelling. Besides all the video evidence, the defendant’s DNA was found at the crime scene, as was fingerprint evidence. The weapon found on Mangione at the time of his arrest matched the shells recovered at the scene of Thompson’s murder.
Far from being universally viewed by the public as a reckless and dangerous villain who committed a bodacious and violent act, a large swath of the public has rallied behind Mr. Mangione. A GoFundMe page has raised a substantial amount of money to support his defense. He might not even need financial assistance, as he comes from a wealthy Pennsylvania family and is a graduate of the engineering program at the Ivy League University of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Mangione’s family has noted that he suffered from chronic back injury and severe pain. His condition and treatment outcome seem to have created a rather intense animus towards the healthcare industry, which appears to be a major factor that prompted the assassination of the insurance company executive.
The outcry of support, especially on social media platforms, revealed that Mr. Mangione is perceived by many as a folk hero of sorts who is idealized, even fawned over by throngs of women who seem captivated by his boldness and good looks. The wellspring of such admiration is found in his motivation for the killing, which became obvious in a missive found in his possession when arrested. He expressed deep animosity against the healthcare system in America, especially corporate healthcare. Apparently, he wrote this after the killing, as he mentioned that “these parasites simply had it coming.”
Figures on both the political right and left of the political spectrum condemned Mr. Mangione’s assassination of Mr. Thompson, such as Attorney General Pam Bondi and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. Many were also critical of those who have supported his violent behavior, including religious figures.The Jesuit journal America reported on the reactions of Catholicethicist in the days following the attack. While acknowledging the legitimate grievances that people have with the healthcare industry, they unequivocally condemned vigilante violence and its support.
Though many have expressed support for Mr. Mangione and the killing, a majority of Americans condemmed the killing. For instance, an Emerson College poll revealed that 68% of American voters found Mangione’s actions unacceptable.
As it stands, Mr. Mangione cuts a provocative and contentious cultural figure. His alleged offenses have been widely exposed by the media, with just about everyone having a personal opinion on the righteousness of Mr. Mangione’s behavior. The day will come when a jury is empaneled with twelve citizens who will be faced with the challenging task of rendering a legal verdict on the defendant’s guilt or innocence.
The publicly available evidence summarized above lays the groundwork to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, Mr. Mangione appears guilty+ of the actus rea of murder, that is, of his homicidal behavior. To be guilty of murder that is premeditated requires evidence of mens rea, or of a guilty mind. A jury would have to conclude that, at the time of the killing, Mr. Mangione had the full mental capacity to act willfully and with unimpeded intentionality.
As a forensic expert, I see no evidence from the extensive public record that an insanity plea is possible. That would require Mr. Mangione to have had a break with reality and have been in the throes of a psychotic thought process, which is not in evidence. Mr. Mangione’s lawyers will more likely claim a diminished capacity defense, which is recognized in New York. Such a defense asserts that the defendant, due to a mental impairment, could not form the required mens rea for the specific intent required for the murder allegation. His lawyers might argue that his intensely chronic pain and suffering impaired his mental capacity and judgment, and thus interfered with his ability to fully control his behavior and reflect on its consequences. Note that diminished capacity is only partially excusing in that he could still be found guilty of the killing, with a less onerous form of murder than premeditated murder, which would affect sentencing.
The Federal Government does not have a diminished capacity statute, but the defendant’s mental state might nonetheless lead to a lessening of his punishment, if found guilty.
With the Rorschach inkblot technique, those famous inkblots are fairly ambiguous, prompting the examinee to form perceptions based, in part, on prior experience. The task of the jurors is quite different. They are to examine all the evidence – that which is publicly known and what might be revealed at the trial – and to form opinions based on factual evidence, and to consciously bracket out predilections, preconceived notions, or feelings about the health industry while reaching a decision.
During the trial of Luigi Mangione, the jury’s capacity to contain their own emotions and evaluate the facts presented to them during the trial will no doubt prove to be especially challenging.
