Altoona officials are refusing to release records tied to four police officers at the center of misconduct allegations in Luigi Mangione’s high-profile murder trial.

The city withheld any background on the officers, including prior complaints or disciplinary actions that could shed light on their credibility — and we're appealing the silence.

Why It Matters

This is about transparency in a trial where the state is seeking the death penalty.

Mangione’s latest defense motion alleges officers delayed Miranda rights, conducted a warrantless search, and blacked out bodycam footage during key moments. It argues Altoona police “created the air of terrorism” to sway public opinion and poison the jury pool.

Those claims—detailed in our original investigation—are serious. And yet, the city says no internal records about them exist.

The Backstory

Hot Take Times submitted a public records request asking for:

• Complaints, investigations, or disciplinary actions involving Officers Detwiler, Frye, Fox, and Wasser
• Internal communications and reports tied to Mangione’s Dec. 2024 arrest
• Any official comment on the April 30 defense motion

What we got back: a link to the Altoona Police Department’s Facebook page — which contains no statements addressing the defense’s allegations — and confirmation that all four officers are patrol officers, along with their start dates:

• Patrolwoman Christy Wasser — hired 8/1/07
• Patrolman Stephen Fox — hired 6/10/19
• Patrolman Tyler Frye — hired 1/2/24
• Patrolman Joseph Detwiler — hired 6/28/11

What Altoona Said

The city cited Section 708(b)(7) of Pennsylvania’s Right-to-Know Law, which exempts certain employee records—such as written criticisms or disciplinary actions—from disclosure, unless they reflect a final agency decision resulting in demotion or discharge.

They wrote:

“Information regarding discipline, demotion or discharge contained in a personnel file... shall not apply to the final action of an agency that results in demotion or discharge.”

But they never confirmed whether such final actions even exist.

As for internal reports or responses to this defense motion detailing misconduct allegations?  “No records exist for motions filed in New York State.”

Even though that motion is publicly available online.

Why We're Appealing

The law is clear: final disciplinary actions must be disclosed. Blanket denials aren't allowed when records can reasonably be redacted to protect exempt information, per 65 P.S. § 67.706.

The city’s assertion that no internal records exist referencing the April 30 defense motion is difficult to reconcile with the case’s prominence and raises further questions about whether officials are meeting their obligations under public records law.

In a capital case of this magnitude, there is a compelling public interest in transparency.

What’s Next

We submitted an appeal to the Pennsylvania Office of Open Records following the denial of our public records request. The review process typically takes up to 30 days.

Mangione’s suppression hearing is scheduled for June 26. What remains unknown — is whether the officers' records contain additional evidence that could impact the trial.