The man accused of gunning down a health insurance executive in a brazen hit in New York that sparked fierce debate about the industry pleaded not guilty Monday to state charges including “terrorist” murder.

Monday’s hearing came after Mangione, 26, appeared in a New York court last week to face federal charges also including murder following his dramatic extradition by plane and helicopter from Pennsylvania, where he was arrested at a McDonald’s restaurant. The suspect is charged in both state and federal court in the December 4 shooting of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson.

People demonstrating against the industry gathered outside court Monday brandishing banners reading “free Luigi” and “innocent until proven guilty.”

If convicted in the state case, Mangione could face life imprisonment with no parole. In the federal case, he could technically face the death penalty.

Mangioni’s attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo has previously sought clarity on how simultaneous federal and state charges would work, calling the situation “highly unusual.”

Agnifilo raised concerns on Monday that Mangione could not receive a fair trial, and questioned why New York mayor Eric Adams had been present when Mangione was brought off a police helicopter at a Manhattan helipad last week. Aginifilo told local media Monday that officials “are treating him like he is like some sort of political fodder.” She said the sight of Mangione flanked by rifle-wielding tactical officers during the final stage of his extradition that was widely broadcast was “utterly political.”

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    514 months ago

    Mad that the grand jury didn’t refuse to indict.

    Hope the jury nullifies.

    If he is found guilty, maybe it’ll be time for unrest.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        9
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        no! its time to vote!
        hahahahaha. because, clearly, that has been working /sarcasm

      • Snot Flickerman
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Looks like it’s been time for unrest for over fifty years now, since this kicked off in the early 70’s.

        It shouldn’t have taken a murder to wake people up.

      • Kühlschrank
        link
        fedilink
        English
        164 months ago

        Yeah it’s past time, the working class has basically lost the class war and we’re just running on fumes now. At the same time, the owner class is working double time to implement AI so they can employ even fewer of us.

        Anyone not in a corporate atmosphere is probably not as privvy to this, but it’s insane the effort going into replacing human work with AI. Of course it’s all under the guise of ‘improving working conditions’ or ‘keeping current employee levels’ but in the end you know they’re salivating at the thought of firing a bunch of people.

        And we can’t fight progress but we sure as hell should be fighting for some kind of UBI and share of the work that gets done by AI.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        74 months ago

        You can keep convening grand juries against someone for the same event until they agree to indict? That seems dubious. And is especially damning in the context of police that don’t get indicted and never go to trial.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            6
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Right, but that doesn’t answer if they convene a grand jury for a specific alleged crime, and the grand jury says “no”, can they try again with a new jury? For the same alleged crime? That seems like an obvious flaw in that they can just keep trying until they get an indictment and can proceed. There’d be no point in the grand jury step because it eventually returns an indictment.

            Edit: Internet is telling me

            Even if a grand jury does not indict an individual, the prosecutor can re-bring the same defendant before the grand jury on the same charges multiple times, although prosecutors will usually wait until a new grand jury is convened for especially high-profile cases. This is allowed because issues of double jeopardy do not attach until a person has been formally charged.

            Which seems insane.

            https://www.arnoldsmithlaw.com/who-decides-whether-or-not-i-will-be-charged-with-a-crime.html

            Our legal system seems really bad, folks

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                34 months ago

                it seems weird that the state can keep trying until they get the answer they want. Why is that protection only available later?

                It wouldn’t be a coin toss - the odds are heavily slanted in favor of the prosecutor. The defense has no role.

                Also does this mean that those times cops didn’t get indicted, the state could have tried again?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      54 months ago

      A grand jury is weird.

      Selected at random like regular jurors, they are on duty for an extended period, they meet in secret and protected. They are only allowed to examine prosecutorial evidence, and only allowed to say if the collected evidence is enough to stand trial.

      It’s not a great system mostly because some of the stuff they have no choice but to agree to indict with, or they get held in contempt themselves.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        34 months ago

        The only other country in the world to use grand juries is Liberia.

        Yeah, our system is shit.