I’m no lawyer. Here’s a question. Would the federal case a jury trial?
I’m trying to figure out if there’s an advantage to futzing the state case. Corporate America wants this man’s blood.
this post was submitted on 19 Jul 2025
835 points (99.4% liked)
News
31214 readers
2724 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I am not United Statesian and it feels like they change the rules every time I blink, but I think a trial with a death sentence as a possible outcome does require a jury. And if I am wrong, some vulgar good samaritan of the Internet will swoop in to politely call me a pig fucker.
Am unitedstatesian (one word, uncapitalized), not legaeseian.
Constitution does state though, defendants have the right to a trial by a jury of their peers. Sixth Amendment
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jury_of_one%27s_peers
Criminal trial for sure falls in this category. Regardless of if death penalty is on the table.
ABC is greatly, greatly softening the severity of what the Prosecution is alleged to have done.
It is much, much worse than just 'Prosecution accidentally violated his HIPAA rights'.
“The district attorney falsely made up a court date — May 23, 2025 — and drafted a fraudulent subpoena that if Aetna did not provide documents on that date, it would be in contempt of court,” Mangione claims in a New York Supreme document, filed Thursday.
(In legalese, 'Mangione claims' means that his lawyers claim this in an exhaustive report/complaint to the judge of this case.)
The Prosecution appears to have served Aetna with a literally fake, fradulent subpoena.
That subpoena included a court date which was never actually scheduled in the court system.
...
You cannot do this.
Any request for a subpoena like this has to go through and be approved by the judge.
Circumventing the judge and essentially falsely acting on a fraudulent representation of their authority is actually potentially a crime, bare minimum, something a lawyer can be disbarred for.
And this is the District Attorney of New York leading the legal team against Mangione, whom Mangione's Defense Counsel has now formally accused of doing this.
Mangione's counsel has requested to the Judge that, bare minimum, whoever on the Prosecution team is actually responsible for this be removed from the rest of the proceedings, ideally, have the entire trial be dismissed as a mistrial.
...
Here is the entire complaint to the Judge from Mangione's Defense Counsel:
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/mangione-hippa-defense-filing.pdf
...
This could actually blow up at least this New York State level case against Mangione.
...
There are currently two simultaneous cases going on, one at the New York State level, one at the Federal level, all of this is irt the NY case.
Place your bets about how AI was involved now!
Holy shit, this should be huge news being seen everywhere! Instead, the bought media will distract us with more circus sideshows.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(22 replies)
Let's not forget that Mangione looks nothing like the guy in the original mugshot.
However, prosecutors said they requested limited information from Aetna and Aetna sent them additional materials in error. Prosecutors said they deleted the materials as soon as they became aware of them and brought it to the attention of both the defense and the court.
The error was compounded by defense counsel resending to prosecutors the very same items prosecutors had already deleted, a source familiar with the subpoena said.
When prosecutors can't take any responsibility for their own stupidity, implicating others is always their go-to.
This is where i see additional problems. Govt or no, Aetna should have been way more diligent in addressing any requests for info, and in providing more than what was explicitly requested they are also committing a HIPAA violation. Any counsel for Aetna should have been well aware of the risk of sending health records out and been very, very specific on what was to be sent and not to avoid a compliance issue.
If i was on Mangione's legal team I'd be preparing a civil case and HIPAA violation claim against Aetna in addition to seeking removal of the prosecutors involved. (I'm not a lawyer but worked in health insurance for several years managing patient data.)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Mangione's lawyers are going to grind the DA office into burger at trial. Fucking morons.
In that case all we have to hope for is a fair trial.
And that the judge isn't compromised at some point, either by ideology, financial obligation or fear.
How is this not an instant mistrial?
Because they've never even tried to bother to pretend this is going to be a fair trial.
Which tells me that they have no evidence whatsoever and he is innocent.
He's actually innocent. But they need a scapegoat to make the rich class feel safe.
There is no reason to believe he's innocent. I hate rich people that kill people with their disgusting and shitty decisions too but I don't think he is literally innocent of putting holes in the CEO's body.
I feel like there is hokey in how they caught him. Its still odd that he was "reported by a mcdonalds worker" that doesn't seem to exist.
Where are you getting the idea that the person doesn't seem to exist?
Media crews can easily isolate both the mcdonalds in question and anyone working there. 911 calls are usually recorded. None of that info hit the public afaik.
Why would it when it would surely lead to harassment which would interfere with a witness
I'm not sure thats ever stopped the media before. The case gets eyeballs, sells ads. Its not like they're putting people in witness protection for this.
The real problem here is I think there wasn't a call. I suspect he got caught in some kind of illegal surveillance net.
The regular media often declines to publish such information. The government often keeps such info private. The fact that tabloids haven't dug it up doesn't make it real.
Fortunately this is not how criminal courts work. Or at least not how they're supposed to. You don't have to prove your innocence, they have to prove that you are guilty.
If you think he put holes in that CEO, prove it.
You are owed a day in court and all due process before the government punishes you.
You aren't owed an unlimed presumption of innocence by the general public who can and do read and come to reasonable conclusions in their own time.
Everyone knew that the Menendez brothers did it before the trial and everyone knew OJ did it after the trial even before he wrote a book about how he did it entitled "if I did it"
It's weird that you can't distinguish between what you are owed morally in the court of public opinion and what you are owed legally in criminal court.
I'd like to wait and see what happens at the trial before declaring him innocent or guilty. Just like any conspiracy theory in the past there are plenty of reasons to believe he is innocent. It does seem that he is probably the person but what I've seen and read hasn't convinced me beyond a shadow.
The liars in charge of our government keep saying this is the guy, and we should kill him. I find that super suss.
It's not weird that I'm waiting for more info before forming an opinion.
It is much more weird that you're taking the word of police at face value. If you want to kill him so badly, prove it.
He was photographed both at and near the scene and found with the gun. His innocent plea is pro forma because it is their job to defend him and there is always hope of creating reasonable doubt in the mind of the jury even when its not at all reasonable. There is no reason for us to be stupid about it. There are not in fact "plenty of reasons" there are no good reasons at all. Again we are bound by law to give him every benefit of the doubt AT TRIAL. We can entirely reasonably conclude amongst ourselves that he is guilty as sin and still let the trial play out properly.
The liars in charge of our government keep saying this is the guy, and we should kill him. I find that super suss.
It's not suss at all. He killed an important person who made their living screwing us. If people copy him a lot of very important very rich, and very harmful people who count themselves the modern day nobility are in danger. They collectively own the fucking nation. It's not weird to see societies moral immune system inflamed at all. If a liar tells you it's raining the fact that they are dishonest doesn't mean its dry out.
...34 count felon awaiting sentencing is president, alleged shooter in jail...justice?....
There's many parts of the dictionary that could be replaced with a pic of him. But I think the US justice system is ironically solidfying "martyr" as the top pick.
At this rate, they're striving for Joan of Arc levels of history.
I hope he knows everyone is truly grateful of the impact he has made and is continuing to make.
view more: next ›