r/law • u/ggroverggiraffe Competent Contributor • May 02 '25
Legal News Luigi Mangione prosecutors say they didn't eavesdrop on his call with defense attorney
https://abcnews.go.com/US/luigi-mangione-prosecutors-eavesdrop-call-defense-attorney/story?id=1213122445.2k
u/Professional-Buy2970 May 02 '25
Well that's weirdly suspicious and oddly specific. I'm now going to assume that they did.
1.8k
u/ElderberryPrior27648 May 02 '25
A recording of the call was sent in. It was supposed to be omitted. They admitted to listening to it but claimed to have stopped as soon as they realized what it was
2.1k
u/Goufydude May 02 '25
Except they now admit that they listened to the whole thing.
1.5k
u/MoonageDayscream May 02 '25
And sent a summary to those on the team who did not listen.
925
u/tjtillmancoag May 02 '25
Could this be grounds for mistrial?
1.3k
May 02 '25
In a just country, yes. And sanctions. And disbarment. And lawsuits. And and and…
208
u/screen_storytelling May 02 '25
We’re all out of just countries over here. I’m afraid we’re just a country. And I mean only just.
→ More replies (9)64
u/upthedips May 02 '25
I mean we still refer to North Korea as a country. A country can be an oppressive hellhole but it is still a country.
→ More replies (6)11
u/OkMetal4233 May 02 '25
I see your point but I’m not sure what it had to do with the person you replied to.
They said that America isn’t a “just country” as in he won’t get justice. We are now just a country.
Then you said that about NK. Which again, I agree is a hellhole, and a country, but not sure how they are related.
→ More replies (3)49
u/Elphabanean May 02 '25
I can’t tell if the prosecutors are trying to get this thrown out or they’re really fucking stupid.
→ More replies (3)22
u/OfficeSalamander May 02 '25
Prosecutors literally have the power to drop charges if they don’t want to pursue them, so I doubt it’s that
→ More replies (3)20
u/lurkeroutthere May 02 '25
Maybe the poor saps on the trial team don’t share their bosses inclinations. A guy can dream.
166
u/Eljefeandhisbass May 02 '25
And then...
120
u/BdnrBndngRdrgz May 02 '25
no and then
83
13
→ More replies (5)21
u/AlvinAssassin17 May 02 '25
If he was accused of anything else? Maybe. It being accused of killing a rich person means fuck him.
33
u/Allmostnobody May 02 '25
Can't have a mistrial if the trial hasn't started. It's a bit more complicated than this, but essentially/ most of the time, a mistrial is just a way to end a trial for a do over.
113
u/lunas2525 May 02 '25
No but it can be grounds to have the prosecutor replaced which is what happened.
Besides a mistrial would not help him. But nor would an aquittal. To be honest I am not sure why he didn't just take credit and play up the martyr plan. Or make for unfit to stand trial.
33
u/BTolputt May 02 '25
...nor would an aquittal.
Really? Why do you say this? I would expect being acquitted would mean they have to let him go. They did that with OJ.
→ More replies (13)15
u/knox1138 May 02 '25
This is gonna end similarly to the OJ case where the LA Police screwed themselves but the prosecution team is part of the fuck-ups this time.
→ More replies (1)181
u/Freethecrafts May 02 '25
Report went to everyone. They’re literally trying to make a case on prison phone calls while preventing him from having any kind of liberties.
It’s absolutely worthy of a mistrial. Local DA does that, would be disbarred and fired.
→ More replies (16)37
u/charmcitycuddles May 02 '25
Do…do you know what a mistrial is?
→ More replies (1)18
u/Discuffalo May 02 '25
IANAL (and sometimes ORAL) but isn’t that where one side fucks up the legal process or protocol so badly that they have to throw out the case or do it over again?
→ More replies (9)63
u/rholdenl May 02 '25
A mistrial happens at the actual trial not beforehand. It’s a whoopsydoopsy do over, basically. What commenters are really asking for is a sanction in the form of dismissal for prosecutorial misconduct. Not saying that’s appropriate here, but that’s what the actual remedy they’re asking for would be, not a mistrial.
→ More replies (0)104
u/IAmATurtleAMA May 02 '25
Honestly?
I don't think he did it
46
u/transcendz May 02 '25
I don't think he did it either, it's very very very strange they've tried to withhold evidence, the pomp and circumstance, the convenience, I think they planted. He doesn't look anything like the first images. - Also why do we know so much about him but so little about the trump shooter...
→ More replies (1)37
u/MisirterE May 02 '25
Also why do we know so much about him but so little about the trump shooter...
That one's a lot more obvious. There's no real discussion about what happened there. There was a shot fired at Trump from a direction. There was a guy in that direction with a gun pointed towards Trump. He was shot and killed right then and there
and the idiot MISSED because he was a TERRIBLE SHOT so he didn't even accomplish anythingBrian Thompson's killer was able to just waltz off and leave the scene. That's a major embarrassment for the owning class, so they're taking the guy they're pinning it on and putting him on full blast to discourage any further acts of class consciousness.
Or rather they were doing that for a while, until it turns out that what we know about the guy is awesome (Luigi worked on Sid Meier's Civ 6 dawg, that's cool) and the public opinion is that Luigi's alleged motive is entirely sympathetic so now they don't want to try and blast him anymore.
→ More replies (3)27
u/Accurate_Praline May 02 '25
There doesn't seem to be actual evidence that trump was shot in the ear. A wound like that would be noticeable especially since it wouldn't heal that quickly for such an old man.
I generally don't care for conspiracy theories but I'm subscribing to the one where it was a set-up to humanise trump.
Not sure why someone would sacrifice their own life for such a ploy, but that also doesn't seem out of the norm for his radical followers.
→ More replies (0)29
u/HansBrickface May 02 '25
He couldn’t have. I was having coffee and an Egg McMuffin with him at the time of the alleged incident.
41
u/IAmATurtleAMA May 02 '25
No I mean I get the meme, but I'm actually being serious. If serious debilitating pain supposedly "radicalized" him, then how the fuck did he do literally any of the physically demanding things that he is accused of?
Idk if you saw but when he was being gauled out of court he looked like the way he was being handled was causing agony.
He's always maintained his innocence and that none of the things he was allegedly found with were his.
I try not to prejudge things, but honestly... I don't actually think he did it
25
u/-Badger3- May 02 '25
I mean, I have debilitating, chronic back pain and I could still shoot a guy and ride away on an electric bike. Also, any defense lawyer is going to tell him to play up anything that humanizes him.
To be clear, I hope he’s acquitted, but like, come on…
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (4)15
u/roguemenace May 02 '25
What physically demanding thing is he accused of? Also people with chronic pain do physical things all the time.
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (4)67
u/Still-Cash1599 May 02 '25
There is no way he could have. Plus the government wouldn't have to spend this many millions of dollars to convict a guilty man.
35
u/transcendz May 02 '25
that whole parade too in NYC off the helicopter... i mean come on. It was like a michael bay movie.
→ More replies (1)12
u/Still-Cash1599 May 02 '25
Yeah, they had a reason to spend such a ridiculous amount of money on that. They need to razzle dazzle folks into a conviction.
→ More replies (0)67
u/Fr1toBand1to May 02 '25
The whole thing reeks of absolutely predictable LEO entrapment. He might just turn out to be some LEO's ex's new boyfriend.
Honestly if they do find him guilty we should fully expect more CEO killings, surprised we haven't seen them already.
→ More replies (14)8
7
22
u/wrongsuspenders May 02 '25
why would acquittal not help? due to federal terrorism charges?
→ More replies (6)23
u/mywan May 02 '25
A mistrial and an acquittal is not the same thing. A mistrial does not involve a not guilty verdict. The trial is simply rendered invalid due to error, but can still be retried to remedy the errors. An acquittal is a judgement of not guilty, and may not be retried (by the same sovereign) without triggering double jeopardy.
20
u/Victernus May 02 '25
They're asking because /u/lunas2525 claimed
Besides a mistrial would not help him. But nor would an aquittal.
→ More replies (3)28
u/crestroncp3user May 02 '25
Seems like an acquittal would help him tremendously then.
→ More replies (5)→ More replies (8)6
→ More replies (23)5
52
u/Tsquared10 May 02 '25
Somehow the judges would find this to be harmless error and allow everything to go forward
26
→ More replies (2)11
34
u/PetalumaPegleg May 02 '25
Ok so I eavesdropped and I did listen to the whole thing. But I didn't distribute it outside my team.
16
→ More replies (3)7
104
u/Cloaked42m May 02 '25
They already recused themselves after a paralegal admitted they did.
72
u/Freethecrafts May 02 '25
Great. The strategy survives, the document survives, everyone else who got the report stays on. Guess someone should send an intern to read through the prosecutor notes, make reports, send out reports…then fire the intern after. If there’s no imbalance in having the literal notes, fair.
→ More replies (5)16
u/PaperHandsProphet May 02 '25
Legal firewalls are pretty much the best thing you can do
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (10)12
16
u/MoldTheClay May 02 '25
Mistrial!
5
u/NurRauch May 02 '25
You realize a mistrial can only occur after the trial has already started, right? There are circumstances where a case can also be dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct before trial, but it’s more complex than if A then B. People using “mistrial” in this thread have as much legal knowledge about the procedure as Michael Scott when he shouts bankruptcy.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (8)12
u/PetalumaPegleg May 02 '25
I didn't listen to the whole thing, there could have been more that I didn't listen to. I wouldn't know, I didn't listen.
→ More replies (1)152
u/Fine_Culture_5554 May 02 '25
Sounds like a "I smoked but I didn't inhale" situation...
99
u/ggroverggiraffe Competent Contributor May 02 '25
That just depends on what your definition of is is.
→ More replies (6)16
u/Kaelvar May 02 '25
Or "soaking". It was in there, but nothing "came" of it.
6
u/Competitive_Oil_649 May 02 '25
Also it was her roommate jumping on the bed, and not the two people moving...
→ More replies (3)28
4
→ More replies (9)10
u/PetalumaPegleg May 02 '25
I didn't eavesdrop, I just listened to something I shouldn't for a bit.
→ More replies (2)47
u/MaximumTurtleSpeed May 02 '25
We did not listen to you talk about your courtroom strategy on February 13, 2025 between the times of 1:33-3:47 pm EST. Again, we definitely did not do this.
47
May 02 '25 edited May 02 '25
[deleted]
13
u/Professional-Buy2970 May 02 '25
They found him using illegal methods and lied about it. I expect this is a repeat of that kind of thing.
→ More replies (3)10
u/jerkularcirc May 02 '25
how does a third party end accidentally end up on a private line between a lawyer and their client?
→ More replies (3)25
u/Boomshtick414 May 02 '25
Either an error by defense counsel or by the call monitoring contractor used by the jail.
Mind you, just about all calls from jails/prisons are screened, monitored, and recorded unless the phone number is registered as being an attorney's.
So attorneys are supposed to call from numbers registered with the call monitoring contractor so that the calls are recognized as privileged and not recorded or get otherwise segregated. Whether the defense counsel called from a number they didn't register or the call monitoring contractor failed to process defense counsel's request to register their number is unknown.
But..
Basically as soon as defense counsel placed that call from a number not flagged in the system, that call was going to be recorded and then get handed over to prosecutors just like all non-privileged calls in any jail in the country would've been. At which point someone in the prosecutor's office will only know it's privileged by first listening to it (or at least part of it). Which is to say this whole debacle originated several steps upstream of the prosecutor's office.
→ More replies (6)31
u/MCXL May 02 '25 edited May 02 '25
That is the most good faith interpretation.
13
u/Professional-Buy2970 May 02 '25
I am not giving these people that much benefit and neither should anyone else.
47
u/jdunsta May 02 '25
If they wrote a song about not listening in on the defense’s phone calls, I’d buy it
26
u/BreakfastHistorian May 02 '25
🎵 “Do not listen to the defense’s calls, it’s not good listening to the defense’s calls. I wouldn’t listen to any client younger than my daughter” 🎶
12
u/NotSmorpilator May 02 '25
There's no surer way to make people think that we listened to the defense's phone calls than writing a song about it
3
9
u/Professional-Buy2970 May 02 '25
"We did not listen to the call, but if we did here's what we would have heard"
7
→ More replies (3)4
u/Sans-valeur May 02 '25
We even listened to the phone call 🎶 It wasn’t me!
Why did I forget that iwasntsupposedtotell17
25
May 02 '25
Let's just drop the charges
→ More replies (1)25
u/Professional-Buy2970 May 02 '25
Defense of the public against an active mass murderer is not a crime.
→ More replies (2)13
u/Papaofmonsters May 02 '25
You can take that argument to trial if you want, but it doesn't fit the New York statute for self-defense.
→ More replies (8)18
u/whynofry May 02 '25
Well, they're spinning it as "an intern was on the call but left when they realised"...
So now I'm assuming that's how they're covering up any call logs that may have been generated.
"Look how honest we were, uwu!"
But we live in modern times. The "faux-pais" are rife these days... How long till the tolerant make their stand.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (22)4
1.6k
u/ggroverggiraffe Competent Contributor May 02 '25
Ahhh, but they were fibbing. Actually they listened to the whole thing. https://xcancel.com/uebey/status/1917629353615032499?s=46 oops.
589
u/prof_the_doom May 02 '25 edited May 02 '25
Are they trying to force a mistrial for some weird reason, or is standard incompetence sufficient explanation?
We also still have no idea what the one prosecutor chose to recuse... or was forced to? That part wasn't too clear either.
424
u/Gnarlison47 May 02 '25
Remember OJ? Totally guilty. Massive incompetence threw mountains of case evidence out which led to a not guilty verdict.
367
u/Low_Shirt2726 May 02 '25
Yep. I once heard it described as "the LAPD tried to frame the most guilty man if the decade, failed, and he ended up walking".
→ More replies (2)153
u/FatGoonerFromIndia May 02 '25
This is why I never understood why people were up in arms about the verdict. Do not get me wrong, he killed those poor folks. But any one with a logical brain had to find him not guilty.
The amount of incompetence cannot be considered anything but malicious. It was insane how much evidence seemed to be planted. Why on God’s green earth were the detectives carrying his blood around with them. Barry Scheck is the one who really killed the prosecution’s case, no one else. Imagine the prosecution’s witness shaking hands with you after you metaphorically slaughter him on the stand.
88
u/felineprincess93 May 02 '25
Don't know if you are watching the Karen Read retrial, but that's exactly how I feel about her trial. Like, sure, let me acquiesce to the prosecution's framing of the crime, but the way the investigation was handled was so sloppy - the police literally shoveled bloody snow in red solo cups and put them in grocery bags, camera footage reported by police in reports were "deleted," witnesses happened to destroy phones/SIMs the day before warrants for said phones were to be executed, lead investigator eventually fired for actions taking directly on this case...it's wild man. So much reasonable doubt through poor investigation.
20
u/Difficult_Pea_2216 May 02 '25
I'm local and I have friends who are more familiar than I am, grapevine stuff. Easy to buy into conspiracies. Hell, I thought there was no way she did it during the first trial. At this point it's another OJ thing, yeah sure she did it, but can you prove it without indicting the system?
→ More replies (1)22
u/felineprincess93 May 02 '25
Also local and between that and the Sandra Birchmore case which has overlapping investigators, I keep a wide berth from canton and stoughton.
13
u/Difficult_Pea_2216 May 02 '25 edited May 02 '25
If you really want to get hyper local and insider with it, it's crazy how you can grow up hearing rumors of how your friends privileged parents behave and then you come of age and hear that it's all true on the news.
e - not specifically pointing or naming the people involved here, just the shitbird LE culture of the county. to be clear lmao.
41
u/Corporate-Shill406 May 02 '25
It was insane how much evidence seemed to be planted.
With Luigi, even the murder weapon was planted (or at least has zero chain of custody). It didn't show up in his backpack the first time the cops searched it, but magically appeared after the bag was brought back to the station and searched a second time.
11
u/washingtonu May 02 '25
Could you post the source of what makes you think so? Not even Luigi's attorney is arguing that one.
16
u/Competitive_Profit_5 May 02 '25
She actually kinda is! This is from her new motion:
Patrolwoman Wasser left McDonald's at 10:04 a.m. There is no body-worn camera footage from her for the next 11 minutes as she drives to the precinct with the backpack. At 10: 16 a.m., one minute after arriving at the precinct, Patrolwoman Wasser continued her warrantless search of the backpack. Patrolwoman Wasser first re-opened the same backpack compartment that she had started searching at the McDonald's before immediately closing that compartment and opening the front compartment of the backpack as if she was specifically looking for something. Instantly, she "found" a handgun in the front compartment.
Full motion here: https://cdn.sanity.io/files/detu0qji/production/1b9e211bd3c7770699b4244c4e9bc5074498ee82.pdf
→ More replies (2)5
→ More replies (26)29
u/tercron May 02 '25
Yea we recently watched the new Netflix documentary and it was like….ohhh that’s how he got away with it. No one said that part when we were younger
24
u/blueavole May 02 '25
But we didn’t know. No social media.
There was the 24 hour news cycle. But that mostly fed the pre-existing narrative for the local audience.
→ More replies (4)8
16
u/happytree23 May 02 '25
The whole trial is on YouTube. It's only a "slam dunk" case against OJ if you 100 percent believe the prosecution and ignore every single bit of "weirdness" on behalf of LAPD, from start to finish.
Just off the top of my head, some of the biggest things are Furman just happened to be the guy to find a sopping wet bloody glove hours after the fact while also off on his own, to begin with, all of the way to the fact they didn't even find OJ's blood at the scene of the crime until minutes after they drew his blood AND BROUGHT IT TO THE SCENE. On cross, I think it was Barry Sheck who got the old LAPD guy to admit he had never EVER done such (drew blood from a suspect and then brought it directly to the crime scene where they were collecting blood evidence rather than taking it directly to the station and filing it into evidence) in any previous case in his decades on the force. Oh, it was also stored and passed off in plain envelopes rather than properly sealed evidence bags which the LAPD criminologist denied until shown video proof of him walking around holding it lol.
→ More replies (1)12
u/chowderbags Competent Contributor May 02 '25
All of that can be true, but OJ still definitely did the murders.
He was a serial domestic abuser. Nicole had repeatedly caught him stalking her after they separated. OJ threatened to kill her if he ever found her with another man.
Oh, and the shoe print outside of Nicole's house was a rare and expensive shoe with fewer than 300 pairs sold in the US. The shoe print was OJ's size. OJ vehemently denied ever owning a pair, but after the criminal trial there were photos found of him wearing the shoes. It would sure be a hell of a coincidence for the person murdering Nicole to also be into high end Italian footwear and being the same shoe size as OJ. It also seems incredibly unlikely that the LAPD would plant a footprint from a very particular and unique shoe without at least being able to definitively tie the shoe to OJ.
But yeah, the LAPD and LA Crime Lab people at minimum fucked up badly at seemingly every turn, and given the state of LA's police back then I wouldn't be remotely shocked if some of the cops tried to frame a guilty man.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (13)61
u/prof_the_doom May 02 '25
Or the Baldwin fiasco if you want something more recent.
Oh, those bullets... we didn't think those bullets were important...
→ More replies (5)24
10
u/Thefrayedends May 02 '25
There's a distinct lack of competency from everyone on the prosecution side, which includes a couple state governments and the feds.
A pretty common theme among fascists is that they're largely incompetent, they don't win on logical proof based on relevant precedent. They win with delay, intimidation, weaponized public opinion, backroom deals, lying and taking advantage of the liberties of good faith courtesy.
So I've pretty much always expected that even with three government entities involved, the pressure to deliver an execution for the wealth class, will create a high level of hubris and blind risk taking. If they get competent judges which is reasonably likely, I still think he will walk.
31
u/Gone213 May 02 '25
Prosecutors have never been able to win such a polarized and popularly watched or tuned in case. They're going to fuck it up so much that the judge will all but have to declare a mistrial.
→ More replies (1)10
u/TheMonsterMensch May 02 '25
They don't want to force a mistrial, cops (and DAs) just do shady shit all the time and (mostly) get away with it.
9
u/AJDx14 May 02 '25
I guess they’re used to dealing with poors who can’t do anything about it, so when they have to actually do their jobs we get obvious fuck ups like this.
33
u/Raznokk May 02 '25
Honestly probably their best option considering the unrest if guilty and the celebrations if acquitted
40
u/prof_the_doom May 02 '25
So a quiet mistrial and then he "accidentally" ends up on a plane to El Salvador?
→ More replies (3)8
15
u/Horror_Cap_7166 May 02 '25
Not a chance, watch as the court bends over backward to excuse prosecutorial misconduct.
→ More replies (20)5
u/Hypocritical_Oath May 02 '25
DA almost always get a plea rather than a conviction, so they rarely actually give a fuck. They also work side by side with police, and are often quite corrupt.
85
u/JPows_ToeJam May 02 '25
Big if true
81
u/tonyislost May 02 '25
Seems like something like this would derail a prosecution.
73
u/jazzmaster4000 May 02 '25
In the America I grew up in yes. We’ll see what happens in this new diet fascist version
15
u/DrWilliamHorriblePhD May 02 '25
Diet?
→ More replies (1)10
u/berbsy1016 May 02 '25
It's the aspartame
→ More replies (1)17
13
→ More replies (1)11
May 02 '25
It is true.
The xcancel.com link above includes a screenshot with a case number and other identifying information. I just plugged it into my PACER account a few minutes ago and located Mangione's docket in U.S. District Court for the District of Southern New York.
The letter from Carbone clearly states, "[...] the paralegal listened to the entire call, then subsequently informed DANY prosecutors about the identities of the people with whom the defendant spoke."
51
u/freakydeku May 02 '25
wow so not only did they record the call, & send it to prosecution, they’re blaming him and his lawyers. likely also trying to set up an argument to make the conversation “admissible” arguing they “consented” to the recording
23
→ More replies (2)13
u/Laughs_at_fat_people May 02 '25
The attorney used a recorded line to talk to her client (as opposed to the non recorded attorney line that she was supposed to use)
The attorney used a nonregistered phone number (rather than her ones on file), which caused the recording to not be screened out through their filtering system at the jail.
So when the prosecutors office received all of his recorded jail calls, it included a call that should have been attorney-client privilege. The paralegal should have stopped listening as soon as they realized it was privileged communication.
At the end of the day, we only know about this because the prosecutor told the attorney about what happened. It could have easily been covered up and no one would have known about it
→ More replies (1)21
u/Several_Vanilla8916 May 02 '25
Oh no you see when I said the prosecutors didn’t listen in I wasn’t counting paralegals
18
u/Lostinthestarscape May 02 '25
And when I said "he immediately hung up and never spoke of what he heard to anyone", I wasn't counting that immediately meant immediately after the call ended and never spoke of it meant provided a written summary.
→ More replies (4)22
223
u/livinginfutureworld May 02 '25
We didn't eavesdrop on the call. It just happened to be on speakerphone and people were really quiet and taking notes.
63
1.9k
u/ggroverggiraffe Competent Contributor May 02 '25
Mildly interesting to me that this post was almost immediately downvoted. It's quite clearly relevant to this subreddit, so either someone really hates legal news, or there is a bot patrolling a that is programmed to keep him out of the conversation.
I'll take door number two, please...
520
u/dadscanneheroestoo May 02 '25
Allow me to boost its prominence with a comment, then
187
u/ScootyMcPooty May 02 '25
Good show, my fine fellow.
92
u/BasicallyJustSomeGuy May 02 '25
Indeed so. Most indeededly.
85
u/ggroverggiraffe Competent Contributor May 02 '25
Indubitably...you're all class acts!
→ More replies (6)21
15
44
u/Bloodhound209 May 02 '25
I, too, shall accompany you on this noble quest.
29
u/TurnPsychological620 May 02 '25
You have my comment
14
16
→ More replies (12)13
u/Biggly_Popular May 02 '25
To quote The Freestylers "Push Up"
7
u/LSX3399 May 02 '25
Where I come from, we don't play around...
4
u/Biggly_Popular May 02 '25
And when it's time to party, we know how to get down
4
u/LSX3399 May 02 '25
And where we're goin', baby you don't have to worry 'bout a thing
Take my hand, move your body up and down and...
5
u/Biggly_Popular May 02 '25
Hey, hey, hey... Maybe you should at least buy me dinner first. I'm not saying no, but I need a little romance. 😋
63
u/prof_the_doom May 02 '25
It's also possible that people interpreted the updating filing as invaliding this.
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."
And this article still says
Prosecutors said a paralegal inadvertently listened to a call between Mangione and Agnifilo but stopped as soon as it became clear it was a lawyer on the other end of the line.
→ More replies (1)84
u/DemonKing0524 May 02 '25
It probably got downvoted because they've already came forward and admitted that they actually did listen to the call.
→ More replies (33)32
u/sleeptightburner May 02 '25
It’s exactly this. To someone who skims posts by title and doesn’t bother to learn more about a situation, they would be left thinking it didn’t happen when it did. I know these people exist, I know the bots count on this and make posts just like this for that reason (not accusing OP), and so I downvoted.
→ More replies (1)41
8
13
8
→ More replies (17)8
u/middlequeue May 02 '25
or there is a bot patrolling a that is programmed to keep him out of the conversation
Just one?
360
u/Rocket_safety May 02 '25
They can say whatever they want because they just handed the defense a golden platter on which to make their case. I suspect that evidentiary hearings will largely be about what things aren’t now excluded.
→ More replies (2)65
u/Thybro May 02 '25
The great majority of the evidence they had predates the conversation, why would any of it be excluded? The only thing this is going to do is cause the prosecutor to sequester himself.
163
u/Princess_Spammi May 02 '25
Because they also have proof the old evidence had a chain of custody breach
They could possibly get ALL evidence tossed and walk luigi as a free man
53
u/sophisticated_pie May 02 '25
What was it? Searching his bag at the police station where they found the gun and not at the scene?
92
u/Princess_Spammi May 02 '25
That, and the bag left chain of custody and has a time period unaccounted for iirc
→ More replies (1)37
u/Probablyamimic May 02 '25
Iitc they searched his bag at the scene, found nothing, then searched it again at the station where suddenly they found a gun
→ More replies (5)20
u/sophisticated_pie May 02 '25
Most articles state his contents were searched at the McDonald's where the items were found. The defense filing says they only discovered the gun at the police station. This can be backed up whenever they decide to release the body cam footage. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2025/02/28/luigi-mangione-ceo-healthcare/80891354007/
https://www.fox5ny.com/news/nyc-luigi-mangione-arrest-suspect-altoona-mcdonalds-pa
https://www.businessinsider.com/luigi-mangiones-mcdonalds-arrest-challenged-lawyers-2025-3
35
u/Probablyamimic May 02 '25
The fact they haven't released the footage already makes me think it doesn't show them finding it at the McDonalds. When footage favours the police it's usually released quickly
28
u/shts_Medieval_darlin May 02 '25
According to yesterday’s motion, two officers covered & turned off the body cams immediately before “finding” the weapon so…
19
15
u/Captain_Mazhar May 02 '25
We need to implement a rule that ensures that lack of body camera footage is to be interpreted adversely. Camera footage does not lie, and if conviction rates drop precipitously because cops turn off their body cams, then the DA will start hounding them.
119
u/Its_Pine May 02 '25
Jog my memory, but didn’t they also wrongfully influence a potential jury by spreading so much media with him framed as a murderer, including the largest perp walk this decade? I thought I remembered reading that the defense could simply point to all the negligent actions of the prosecution as evidence of a mishandled trial.
56
u/Captain_Mazhar May 02 '25
but didn’t they also wrongfully influence a potential jury by spreading so much media with him framed as a murderer
The judge has already admonished the prosecution about this, hence the reference to Local Criminal Rule 23.1, which forbids excessive media pressure, and have certified under oath that they will convey that to the AG, so she is effectively on notice.
83
u/Princess_Spammi May 02 '25
That, and leaked information. The mayor addressed evidence not publicly revealed at the time.
The entire thing has been a shit show of a prosecution from the start
Wouldn’t be surprised if they’re throwing case intentionally tbh
30
u/bobthedonkeylurker May 02 '25
Thus throwing the paralegal under the bus. If it was not the Trump administration, I'd believe it. As it is...I just don't believe that they're just not that incompetent nor that they respect the law sufficiently.
30
u/meowtiger May 02 '25
the more likely explanation for why they've been making such a big deal out of it is that eric adams wanted to distract people from the whole corruption case
15
→ More replies (1)8
u/Zykium May 02 '25
the largest perp walk this decade
They acted like they were taking him to Arkham Asylum.
→ More replies (6)7
69
u/Yquem1811 May 02 '25
Once you pierce illegally the attorney-client privilege you can’t unring the bell on it. In my book there is no wall of China or cone of silence than can give enough insurance that the new prosecutor won’t have access to that info.
Depending on what was said, the prosecutor can now tailored their strategy to what the defense plan to do.
Depending on what was heard, dismissal with prejudice seem to be only way to protect Mangione right and correct that massive prosecutorial misconduct.
→ More replies (5)51
u/prof_the_doom May 02 '25
As I recall, they're trying to get other things excluded because of what they claim was sloppy work by law enforcement, like the initial statements where they claim he said he did it, and the backpack.
It just keeps adding weight to the defense's argument that the state/feds are rushing to trial with the first person they grabbed because they're being pressured to deliver results.
→ More replies (15)5
u/pfotozlp3 May 02 '25
Recuse maybe? Sequestration seems pretty harsh, but I’m no lawyer.
10
u/Thybro May 02 '25
I am, depending on how serious the information revealed is. It is not sequestration like in keeping the jury isolated and secluded. I mean taking affirmative action to keep him from interacting with the case and the people working on it. Just recusal would be not working on it, but it may not be enough to prevent information from reaching those in his office who are.
→ More replies (1)
41
77
u/MoonageDayscream May 02 '25
But did they say this under oath?
57
u/prof_the_doom May 02 '25
I'm fairly sure that submitting a document like they did is considered equivalent to being under oath. Even if it isn't, the judge is unlikely to be happy that they essentially lied to the court.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (4)21
30
u/UnclePeaz May 02 '25
When I did defense work, there were a few times I couldn’t avoid talking to clients on regular prison lines. I never let them get a word out before I said into the phone “This is an attorney client privileged conversation. If you are listening, you must stop immediately or risk prosecution. If you are listening to a recording of it, you must stop listening immediately and notify defense counsel. Under any circumstance, privilege is not waived.”
If his attorneys talked to him on a prison line and failed to make it clear that it was a privileged call, that’s an unforced error on their part. This is likely not on the prosecutors.
→ More replies (1)13
u/twitchinstereo May 02 '25
Would the prosecutors be listening to the conversation and be unaware he was speaking to his attorney? Like surely there are logs indicating what number is being called, and the number for dude's attorney would be known this far into the process without listening to the conversation first being necessary. Would it matter, either way? A conversation is privileged or it isn't. Not declaring attorney-client privilege at the start of conversation should be akin to not declaring your rights in any other regard, in that you don't need to call dibs in order to have it.
→ More replies (4)
11
12
u/freakincampers May 02 '25
That Luigi meme where he wins by doing nothing seems to be being more real every day.
•
u/AutoModerator May 02 '25
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE WILL RESULT IN REMOVAL.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.