Luigi Mangione’s defense has unleashed scathing accusations against law enforcement, claiming in a recent court filing that police “created the air of terrorism” around his case to sway public opinion as his death penalty trial speeds ahead.

The motion, tied to Mangione’s high-profile murder trial, accuses officers of misconduct ranging from Miranda violations to bodycam tampering—and alleges a calculated campaign to paint Mangione as a domestic threat.

Mangione, 27, is accused of fatally shooting UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December 2024, a killing that quickly became a flashpoint for public outrage over health insurance industry practices.

Coerced Before Miranda and Warrantless Backpack Search

Multiple officers questioned Mangione before being read his Miranda rights—a fundamental Fifth Amendment protection—nearly 20 minutes after his initial detention, the filing claims. His lawyers argue that officers asked Mangione for his real name and why he allegedly lied about it, pressing him for answers before advising him of his rights.

The defense also alleges that police rummaged through Mangione’s backpack after cuffing him at a Pennsylvania McDonald’s, despite having no search warrant or immediate safety threat. Officers claimed the search was conducted to look for explosives, but Mangione’s lawyers argue this was a flimsy after-the-fact justification.

“This made-up bomb claim further shows that even she believed at the time that there were constitutional issues with her search forcing her to attempt to salvage this debacle by making this spurious claim,” the motion asserts.

Bodycam Blackout Sparks 20-Second Mystery Outside McDonald's

The defense claims that while speaking with another officer outside McDonald's, Patrolman Detwiler “covered his body-worn camera with his hand to prevent the camera from recording twenty seconds of his conversation.”

The filing points to this unexplained blackout as a critical lapse—occurring during a key exchange tied to confirming Mangione’s identity.

The motion argues that this footage gap leaves the arrest record incomplete and casts serious doubt on the transparency of the police procedure.

Notably, the lapse came at the moment of Mangione’s on-the-spot identification, a detail the defense says could carry significant weight for the case.

Weaponizing Fear with a Fabricated Terror Narrative

Mangione’s legal team says this case isn’t just about legal missteps—it’s about a calculated effort to brand their client a terrorist. The motion accuses police and prosecutors of stoking fear to build a sensational narrative.

Authorities, they argue, leaked buzzwords like “manifesto” and spotlighted bullet inscriptions—“DENY,” “DELAY,” “DEPOSE”—to paint Mangione as a domestic threat.

“It was law enforcement that created the air of terrorism surrounding this alleged crime and who now seek to blame Mr. Mangione for the hysteria and fear they created,” the motion contends.

The defense also claims law enforcement “strategically leaked this information to the public causing any fear they are attempting to attribute to Mr. Mangione.” This, they argue, unfairly escalated the case—paving the way for terrorism charges and the looming threat of the death penalty at the federal level.

Double Jeopardy Fight over One Crime and Two Trials

The defense blasts what it calls a “legal tug-of-war” between state and federal authorities, slamming Mangione’s high-profile perp walk and spotlighting the dual prosecutions he now faces—one in New York State court, the other in federal court—for the same alleged crime.

His attorneys argue this dual-track strategy risks violating double jeopardy protections and undermines his right to a fair trial.

“By charging Mr. Mangione in both state and federal courts, prosecutors are trying to get two bites at the apple to convict Mr. Mangione,” the motion states.

“Even more troubling is that the two bites the prosecutors are seeking are for the death penalty and life imprisonment. This is what the Fifth Amendment’s Double Jeopardy Clause is meant to prevent.”

Citing Justice Neil Gorsuch’s dissent in Gamble v. United States, the defense adds: “A free society does not allow its government to try the same individual for the same crime until it’s happy with the result.”

The filing also warns that running both cases simultaneously could obstruct Mangione’s ability to mount a full defense:

“By prosecuting both cases at the same time... the state and federal prosecutors are in essence colluding to obstruct Mr. Mangione’s ability to meaningfully defend himself—a right guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.”

What’s Next

The next key date is June 26, 2025, when the state court will hear motions, including high-stakes suppression requests. Federal proceedings kick off in December, where Mangione’s fight for his life—and against the death penalty—will take center stage.