New York judge warns DOJ over public statements in UnitedHealthcare CEO murder case
Judge Garnett says comments about Mangione facing the death penalty may violate local rules; defense sought dismissal and removal of death-penalty considerations.
A New York judge warned on Wednesday that public remarks by Justice Department officials about the prosecution of Luigi Mangione could violate a local court rule and invite sanctions, as Mangione faces federal and state charges in the December shooting of UnitedHealthcare chief executive Brian Thompson.
Judge Margaret M. Garnett in Manhattan issued an order saying statements by government officials about Mangione possibly facing the death penalty may have violated the rule designed to limit pretrial comments and preserve a fair trial.
Defense lawyers for Mangione had argued that such comments, and related actions surrounding the case, should lead to the dismissal of federal charges and the removal of the death penalty from consideration, contending they poisoned the proceedings and biased jurors.
Mangione has pleaded not guilty to both state and federal charges in the fatal Dec. 4 shooting as he arrived at a Manhattan hotel for his company’s annual investor conference. In the federal case, he is charged with murder through the use of a firearm, which carries the possibility of the death penalty, along with stalking and gun offenses.
Authorities have said Bondi declared in April that capital punishment was warranted for what she described as a premeditated, cold-blooded assassination that shocked America, a statement the defense says tainted the proceedings ahead of Mangione’s April indictment.
Her remarks, along with a highly choreographed perp walk that saw Mangione led up a Manhattan pier by armed officers, and what the defense calls the administration’s broader handling of the case, are cited by Mangione’s lawyers as evidence of prejudicial conduct.
In her order Wednesday, Garnett said it appeared that multiple Justice Department employees may have violated the rule limiting public statements about a case before trial, noting the statements appeared to have come from two high-ranking department staffers.
She directed the department to explain how the violations occurred and what steps are being taken to ensure that future statements do not unfold in similar fashion.
“Future violations may result in sanctions, which could include personal financial penalties, contempt of court findings, or relief specific to the prosecution of this matter,” Garnett wrote in the order.
A Justice Department spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
This is not the first time a Manhattan federal judge has rebuked government lawyers for public statements in a criminal case. In 2015, Judge Valerie Caproni accused then-U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara of straying “so close to the edge of the rules governing his own conduct” when he announced a corruption case against former Democratic New York Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver that Silver had a legitimate complaint that the “media blitz” surrounding his arrest was prejudicial. Silver was eventually convicted on corruption charges and was sentenced to more than six years in prison.
In January 2022, the federal Bureau of Prisons announced that he had died in federal custody at age 77.
A request for comment from the Justice Department was not immediately returned, and the department has faced similar admonitions in previous high-profile cases.