Crime Fix with Angenette Levy - Luigi Mangione Expected To Make Bombshell Plea: Reports

Episode Date: August 13, 2026

Luigi Mangione, the Ivy League graduate accused of executing the CEO of United Healthcare, is expected to plead guilty in federal court, according to two reports. Mangione is set to go on trial in Manhattan in September 2026 for the murder of Brian Thompson. Thompson was executed in midtown on December 4, 2024. A guilty plea could result in Mangione's state trial being canceled. Law&Crime's Angenette Levy looks at the legal reasons why in this episode of Crime Fix — a daily show covering the biggest stories in crime.Host:Angenette Levy  https://twitter.com/Angenette5Guests:Dave Aronberg https://www.youtube.com/@MKTrueCrimeJonna Spilbor https://www.youtube.com/@MKTrueCrimeCRIME FIX PRODUCTION:Head of Social Media, YouTube - Bobby SzokeSocial Media Management - Vanessa BeinVideo Editing - Van DinhGuest Booking - Alyssa Fisher & Diane KayeSTAY UP-TO-DATE WITH THE LAW&CRIME NETWORK:Watch Law&Crime Network on YouTubeTV: https://bit.ly/3td2e3yWhere To Watch Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3akxLK5Sign Up For Law&Crime's Daily Newsletter: https://bit.ly/LawandCrimeNewsletterRead Fascinating Articles From Law&Crime Network: https://bit.ly/3td2IqoLAW&CRIME NETWORK SOCIAL MEDIA:Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lawandcrime/Twitter: https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetworkFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/lawandcrimeTwitch: https://www.twitch.tv/lawandcrimenetworkTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@lawandcrimeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Is accused assassin Luigi Mangione making a legal move that could turn his state trial for the murder of United Health Care CEO Brian Thompson upside down? We're looking at reports about a possible plea deal what could really happen and the chess moves Mangione's lawyers are likely making. I'm Annette Levy and this is crime fix. Luigi Mangione is weeks away from a trial in New York state court that could end in him spending decades in prison or possible. possibly being found not guilty. But the state case isn't the only legal jeopardy that Luigi Mangione faces. He also faces federal charges that could end with him spending the rest of his life in prison if he's convicted. A trial in federal court is a different ballgame from state court in New York City. But it's possible that Mangione's attorneys are trying to work out something with the feds that

could result in no trials being held at all. We're going to dig into that very soon. But first, let's look at the case quickly in case you're not up to speed. The DA in Manhattan charged Mangione with second degree murder in the December 2024 execution style killing of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. Mangione is accused of following Thompson's movements and tracking him to the Hilton in Midtown Manhattan early on the morning of December 4th, pulling out a ghost gun and shooting Thompson from behind. But there's also a federal case where Luigi Mangi faces an interstate commerce charge and two counts of stalking resulting in death. A judge dismissed a federal murder charge that could have resulted in Mangione receiving the death penalty had he been convicted. But is Luigi Mangione

looking to make a deal with the feds just ahead of his trial in state court on murder charges? A last-minute hearing has been scheduled for Friday, August 14th in federal court. The government and Mangione's defense requested this hearing together, according to this letter, post. on the docket. M.K. True Crime hosts and attorneys Dave Aaronberg and John S spillboard will join me in a bit to discuss the pros and cons of Luigi Mangione pleading guilty in federal court ahead of his state trial. What's the strategy here? Well, the New York Times and TMZ are reporting that Mangione will plead guilty in federal court to the stocking charges and then argue in state court that Mangione can't be tried for the same crime under New York's double jeopardy.

statute. That statute reads, a person may not be twice prosecuted for the same offense. A person may not be separately prosecuted for two offenses based upon the same act or criminal transaction unless the offenses as defined have substantially different elements and the acts establishing one offense are in the main clearly distinguishable from those establishing the other or each of the offenses as defined contains an element which is not an element of the other, and the statutory provisions defining such offenses are designed to prevent very different kinds of harm or evil. But here's the thing. Mangione is charged for the same offense in state and federal court, but the charges are different. He faces second-degree murder counts in New York State Court

and stalking charges in federal court, so it's the same offense but different charges, different courts. This is not unheard of, but the defense will make the double jeopardy argument in state court. The killing of Brian Thompson was an execution plain and simple, an assassination. There is nothing romantic or cool about it, but that hasn't stopped a movement of supporters from coalescing around Luigi Mangione supporting his killing of Brian Thompson as necessary to send a message to the health insurance industry. Brian Thompson, a husband and father, who also led one of the nation's largest health insurance companies was murdered in cold blood, shot from behind as he walked down the street. The shooter took off on a bike and escaped.

Surveillance images appeared during the manhunt for the shooter showing a masked man with full eyebrows, getting into a cab. Another image from a hostel showed a smiling man with full eyebrows. Then on December 9th, an employee at a McDonald's in Altoona, Pennsylvania called 911 because they thought the man sitting in the restaurant might be the shooter. Yes, sir. Thank you. What's your name? Yeah, sure.

Appreciate it. Thank you. What's your name? What is it? Mark? Mark what? Missouri. Someone called.

They thought you were suspicious. Oh, I'm sorry. Figure I, do you on you? Yes, sir. Thanks. I thought she looked like someone. Do you okay to run the other? 206, 27, 49 out of New Jersey.

6807-52100-0-0-07-9-8-2. She'll come back to a mark. Rosie, I know. If you love digging into the details of crime cases as much as I do, you have to download the Law and Crime Plus app. If you haven't checked it out yet, here are three reasons to jump on board today. Number one, you get complete access.

Watch the best shows from Law and Crime and court TV completely add free. Number two, the case files. Get deep dive access to raw trial evidence including body camera video, 911 calls, crime scene photos, and much more. And finally, it's free for 30 days. We are giving all of our viewers a full month to test it out completely risk-free. So head on over to law and crimeplus.com and our promo code crime fix and start exploring today. Police say they found Luigi Mangione with a backpack that contained a face. ID from Mark Rosario, a gun with a silencer, a laptop, a journal with writings about whacking the CEO at a health care investors conference and references to Ted Kaczynski, the Unabomber, and much more.

Luigi Mangione has pleaded not guilty to all of the charges in both state and federal court. Okay, so to discuss what could be possibly going on with the possibility that Luigi Mangione is going to walk into federal court, on Friday and plead guilty to some charges. I want to bring in two experts. Jonas Bilboor is the host of positively legal on the MK True Crime Network and Dave Ehrenberg, former Palm Beach County State Attorney,

now a defense attorney is the host of the MK True Crime show. So thank you to both of you for coming on. I appreciate it. Happy to be here. Dave, I'll start with you. Do you think Luigi Mangione is trying to pull

illegal maneuver here by walking into federal court pleading guilty to some interstate charges and stalking charges in order to try to upend his state case. Yes, I think it's a smart move by his really able prosecutor, excuse me, real able defense lawyers. They used to be prosecutors. Because what happened here is originally the federal government wanted to seek the death penalty in this case. And you had the federal government who stepped in front of the state. They wanted to take this guy down. And then they lost in court on the death penalty. It was taken off the table. And it looks like that they're going to allow Luigi Mangoni, perhaps a plea up to the court, which means that it's a plea deal where the judge will make the decision on the sentence.

And that could be less than life in prison. That's something they're seeking. And then the defense is going to use that as a way to say, all right, double jeopardy applies. And now the state case is gone because New York has more generous double jeopardy protections for defendants. We saw this in the Paul Manafort case. And so it is a really smart strategy. I'm actually a little surprise. I'd love to hear John's take on why the federal government is agreeing to that. Because, you know, if he went to trial, the argument about extreme emotional disturbance,

it wasn't on the right mental state, it's really not allowed in a federal trial. But you can argue it to a judge when it comes to the sentencing. So this, to me, in urge to the benefit. and on their fence here. So I'd love to hear what the prosecution gets out of this. Yeah. John, Dave has a good point there. You actually practice in New York State. You're in New York. So if I'm in Alvin Bragg's office, am I furious when I read this report about the feds, you know, coming in and big footing my case? Because typically they work together and you would have the feds acting as the backstop. Because let's not act like in Manhattan that you can't maybe get a jury where there might be jury nullification.

I mean, we see the fan girls outside of court. We see them dressing up and they don't care that he's accused of executing a man in cold blood. That doesn't matter to them. They are taken with this guy. So if you are in Alvin Bragg's office, are you livid? Because usually you would work with the feds and the feds would be like, you do what you got to. do. You take your state case forward. We'll be hanging out in the back and scoop them up if, you know, this isn't not guilty. I have a very different take on this. And, you know, I could be

wrong. I think Alvin Bragg's office is in on this deal. This is, this is sounding like a global deal to me where, you know, maybe behind the scenes Bragg's office and the feds are talking about this. why would it behoove anybody to do that? On one hand, I mean, obviously, the person who wins the most here is Luigi Mangione, because he's not, if this goes through, he's not going to face two separate prosecutions. However, I think the public also wins a little bit, and here's why. As a member of the public on this case, right, I'm not an attorney on either side in this case. I have been so offended by the fan club, by the,

Luigi Mangione fan club. We have to remember at the end of the day, I don't care how bad the health care system is in this country, how mad you are at. I don't give a ooh about that. He gunned down in cold blood in plain sight, the father of two children, regardless of what he did for a living. And the fact that mostly women, I suppose, are out there fan girling over this murderer is personally offensive. At least this way, as you mentioned, Anjanet, we no longer. We know have to worry about jury nullification, which was something that I was concerned about as a legal analyst just looking into this because of that factor. Now, not only does this eliminate that, but it gives the defense team an opportunity to argue for a sentence less than life in prison.

That is a boon to him, a little bit of a boon to us because there's not going to be jury nullification where he could walk on the state charges. That's why I think, the prosecutor's case, the Alvin Bragg's office is in on it. That's why I think this is going down precisely the way it is. Do you think Alvin Bragg is afraid

to try this case? I think Alvin Bragg if you put him in a skirt would be one of those fan girls. That's what I think about Alvin Bragg. Oh, wow. That's what I think about Alvin Bragg. So sue me. So I think

this is maybe a relief to him. Again, just my opinion, everybody, just my humble opinion. But that's why I think this state is like, okay, we can do this. It's a little interesting that they're doing it at the 11th hour. They've had ample time to maybe do it beforehand. But yeah, that's how I feel about Alvin Bragg. It'll be interesting to see if Mayor Mount Domney is out there tomorrow at federal court. Dave, as a former prosecutor, I feel like you're still a prosecutor.

I feel like you're still a prosecutor playing a defense attorney right now. Yeah. As a former prosecutor, is this deal unsavory to you? Because I look at it and I see, well, they at least get something. They get a guilty plea. But he gets, if this all works out the way the defense thinks it will, he gets to go to federal prison. That's going to be a little nicer than a New York state prison, I think. Is this, how? How does this sit with you as a former prosecutor? Well, Angelette, I don't know if the federal prison would be nicer because we're not talking about club fed. He's not going to go enjoy puppies with Glein Maxwell in Brian, Texas. He would go to, I would think, a very serious, maybe maximum security prison. I mean, some of those places are not pleasant. So I don't think that's good for him, but I think the gold at the end of the rainbow for him would be that he gets out of prison one day.

And I would think that the family of Brian Thompson, the victim here, would have been consulted. And perhaps they say, you know what, we don't want to go through a trial. Let's settle this. Get him what we can get him. So we'll see. I can see why the defense would do it. But for the prosecution, I think only if the family were urging it, that would be a reason to enter into this deal. Because otherwise, to me, it doesn't make a lot of sense.

I'm annoyed, too, by the fan girls out there. They're mostly women. And it's really just cruel that they just minimized the value of this man, Brian Thompson's life who had two small children. And they lionize this coward Luigi Mangione who shot a guy from behind and then ran away. Hid ran away. And he was a guy who was born in privilege, not his victim, who worked his way up through public education. So it does bother me.

We'll see. We'll see soon enough, I think, if Adam Bragg's office. office is part of it because if he's not, then this really does harm the state case because then they could argue the state case is precluded by double jeopardy. And I think there'll be some public pressure on Alvin Bragg's office to say, oh, why are you wasting our time and money? He's already been found guilty. He's already going to be in prison for the next several decades. Let's just end this. So this puts a lot of pressure on him if he's not part of this deal to begin with. You know, John, I want to go back to something you touched on. You know, my health care premiums,

haven't changed after this. You know, Luigi Mangione and his journal entries, allegedly, you know, we'll say allegedly right now, but, you know, these were his journal entries. He's talking about, you know, wanting to whack the CEO to send a message and talking about how like, hey, hey, FBI, I'll save you some trouble and he writes all this stuff. There was no point in this. As Dave mentioned, Luigi Mangione came from privilege. He had a name in his home state.

He is somebody, if he really wanted to force change in the health care industry, you could have gone about it the right way. He's a good looking guy. The women love him. So he could have possibly used his brains, his family's money, and their influence to force some change in the health care industry. Instead, he's sitting around reading the Unabomber's manifesto and cooking this thing up. So why, where, on what planet does anybody think, like, yes, he did something that good and he fixed it? Like, nothing has been fixed. Nothing has changed.

I'm still fighting with my insurance company about them covering an MRI that I had to get last year. And Luigi probably can afford his health care premiums, no problem, unlike much of Middle America these days. And what you just said, Anjanet, is a brilliant argument that should be coming out of either one of the prosecutors' mouths, right? In their closing argument, exactly what you said. And of course, nothing has changed. So he's not a hero. And the problem is when you take a jury in Manhattan, right, which is now governed by a socialist, right? And everybody thinks that everybody should have something for free.

And that's why he's a hero. because they don't think logically, they don't take it to that next step. They're probably, half of his fan girls probably aren't paying their own health insurance premiums. Anyway, so they have no idea what this actually costs, right? What people, real people pay. So that's that argument. But I also have to see, like, going back to something that Dave said, if we really pick this apart, and let's hypothetically say, wait a minute, all right, what if Alvin Bragg's

office isn't in on this? Why would the feds? If Luigi Manchioni went to trial in the state case first like he was supposed to, even if he were nullified and found not guilty, then the feds got him. The feds got him anyway, right? So he would have been caught in a net. He would have been the dolphin caught in the tuna net. So there has to be something in it for the, I think, for the state case.

And the state case might be behind the scenes saying, we're going to pretend to fight this. We're going to pretend that it's not a Paul Manafort. situation that our CPL section 40-20 doesn't apply, but we know it does, but we're going to go ahead and fight the fight. That could also be going on because I practice in this state. I know how it works. But again, we'll probably never actually know the true motivation and why these two legal titans, legal prosecutor's office are allowing this. We're going to dig into the double jeopardy statute in New York State in just a moment. But, Dave, do you think that politics could be at play here if Alvin Bragg's office is not in on this somehow?

Could this be Trump's DOJ wanting to get the scalp and undercut Alvin Bragg's prosecution? I don't think they would go lenient, go light on Luigi Manjone, just to mess with Alvin Bragg. I do think, though, that they are dismissive of him. I think they look down upon that office. Now, I worked for the feds a year at the Treasury Department, and it's true that many in the feds do think of the state system as the minor leagues. And when you're in the state system like I was for many years, you feel sort of like the feds look at you like the minor leagues. And so there is some truth in it. But I think that it's not a way to mess with Alvindberg.

I think it's dismissive of Alvin Bragg. I think if Alvindbragg's office is not part of it, I think the feds are there. We'll cut our own deal. We'll get our scalp. and who cares what happens with Alvin Bragg's office because I think they think the same way Johna thinks is that Bragg's office wasn't going to prosecute him to the full consent of the law anyway. So why should we care about him? Let's dig into this double jeopardy statute in New York State now.

The statute reads, and we're going to put it up on the screen, a person may not be twice prosecuted for the same offense. This is what the statute says. A person may not be separately prosecuted for two offenses based upon the same act or criminal transaction unless the offenses as defined have substantially different elements and the acts establishing one offense are in the main clearly distinguishable from those establishing the other. Or each of the offenses as defined contains an element which is not an element of the other. and the statutory provisions defining such offenses are designed to prevent very different kinds of harm or evil. Okay, so double jeopardy, you know, let's go back to ninth grade civics class. It just means you can't, the government can't or, you know, the state can't try you for a crime again once you've been acquitted of that crime.

So, John, in your view, does this apply if the feds get a deal and get him to plead guilty to stalking in this? state charge, does that actually mean that the state can't try him for murder? So here's the nuance. Normally, and this is where a lot of people who don't practice law get a little bit confused because they might say to themselves, wait a minute, he's being charged for murder in a state case and he's being charged for the exact same set of circumstances that led to the death of Brian Thompson in the Fed case. Why isn't that alone double jeopardy? And the reason why it's not is because the Supreme Court has long held that the states can do what the states want and the feds can do what the feds want. And even though it's the same transaction, for lack of a better word, the double jeopardy statute doesn't apply.

However, we're dealing with New York. And New York puts a further protection around a defendant and we'll say, okay, even though it can work the other way, you know, we can prosecute them here and the feds can still prosecute them there. if somebody is being prosecuted for the same transaction, we will not allow that person to be prosecuted on the state level unless it falls into one of our statutory exceptions. In this case, I'm going to be honest, you'd really have to split some hairs to find that the exception to the New York double jeopardy statute exists. Because look, this was one transaction. They might call it stalking leading to the death.

the federal side, but it's a murder there and it's a murder here and it was one transaction. We saw it on camera. He came out. He pulled a gun. He shot him in the back. He ran away. That was it. Same set of circumstances.

So Luigi Mangione, if he wanted to argue that the double jeopardy statute in New York would prevent a second prosecution following a federal prosecution, he would likely win that, which is why this is a little bit strange, guys. when we analyze it, he's poised to go to trial on the state case first. So this really would not have been an issue. Now the feds are like, wait a minute, we're going to make it an issue. You come over here. We're going to prosecute you over here and then we'll let New York deal with this. You know, that could be New York's excuse. Oh, sorry, we can't do it now because of the double jeopardy statue. Again, that feels to me like an excuse, meaning they're all in on this. You whip that curtain back. It's the Wizard of Oz and another Wizard of Oz all. conferring on this issue. Dave? Johnna lives up there. I'm the Florida law, man. So Florida makes it much easier to prosecute people for the same crime, dual sovereignties. But when it comes to New York, there is an exception. And John, maybe you can flush us out. There's a homicide exception. I looked it up. It's under a 40.202D.

So I thought that if one prosecution, the federal one, is about aggravated stalking, other things, that's not homicide, can't the state of New York claim, couldn't that be an argument for Alvin Bragg that says that they're prosecuting him for not homicide, we're prosecuting them for murder, second degree murder? Yeah, I think that that is the nuance, but I also believe that it would be a difficult argument to make successfully. And these powers that be know that. Otherwise, I mean, there's nothing stopping.

This state trial is scheduled to go ahead next month, right? So, I mean, and a judge doesn't have to. Let's better this out. He's plea. Rumor is that Luigi Mangione might enter a federal plea deal tomorrow. A judge doesn't have to let him do that. A judge doesn't have to take his plea tomorrow. A judge could say, you're picking a jury next month.

in Manhattan state court. Why is he doing that? That's a really good point. It's up to the federal judge. So we have a federal judge here, Margaret Garnett. She was appointed to the bench by Joe Biden. What is your take on that, Dave? I don't know much about this judge.

I know John, I will feel differently than I do because President Biden appointed her. But I just, without more, not, I don't think it's enough to just draw conclusions. on the fact that Biden appointed, she could be, she a former prosecutor? Is she someone who has a reputation of being good to defendants? I don't know. But I do think the fact that if they do plea up to the court, the defense lawyers certainly believe

that she would give a sentence that's less than life in prison because they're not playing up to the court if they think the judge is going to throw the book at Luigi. They're only playing up to the court, right? And putting in the hands of the judge and not the prosecutors because they believe that the judge would go like, than the prosecutors would.

Johnna, this judge used to be special counsel to the United States attorney. So she does have a prosecutorial type background. But we don't really know how she would sentence him, but Luigi Mangione in federal court would face up to life in prison. That is true. But here's the other thing. When you are going to offer up, both both,

both defense or the defense attorney and the prosecutor's office can't simply promise Luigi Mangione a particular outcome in whether he pleads in Fed Court and state court. They can't promise him that outcome. And when you offer up your defendant client, you either have to have some idea of what a judge is going to do before you can convince, cajole request that, you can either have to have some idea that your client do the thing you are asking him to do. So that means that these attorneys had to sit in somebody's chambers and say, okay, judge, if we plead in front of you,

will you let us make an argument for 25 to life instead of life without the possibility of parole, whatever it would be on the Fed side? And that judge has to sit back and go, well, let me think about it. Maybe. Okay. and give her wink and her nod, and then they're going to go ahead and do it. Or the judge is going to say,

I'm not going to be open to that. I mean, I'm not going to be open to it. I'm not going to make you any promises. So somewhere along this line, in the back channels that we are not aware of or privy to, these types of discussions are happening. I promise you. Because otherwise, what do you do?

You look at your client and go, okay, listen, you're about to get your day in court in Manhattan where you have a tremendous fan club and people lining up on the streets to get your autograph and a possibility of jury nullification. But you know what? We're going to skip that. And we're going to send you over here and you're going to plead guilty in front of this judge

that was appointed by brain dead Joe Biden and have at it at sentencing. What do you say? That's not happening. All right. It's not happening with that. With that predictions, guys. Dave, does the state case? Does the state trial happen?

I think the argument is going to be decided by the Court of Appeals. And they ruled for part. Paul Manafort and the law, to my knowledge, hasn't changed. But here, I do think the state has a better argument as to why they should go ahead with it. And if it looks like that Alvin Bragg was not part of this deal and the feds came in and undercut the state, I think the high court justices in New York will be more favorable to Alvin Bragg's position than they were to Cyrus Vance's position in the Paul Manafort case. So I will say this, 6040, if this deal happens and if Alvin Bragg is not part of it, I still say 60-40 that a state trial happens.

One of the reasons why I love lawman Dave Aaronberg is because he's got so much more class than I do. And I love the way he presented that argument. This is what I want to say to it, though. How come we haven't heard from Alvin Bragg? If Alvin Bragg weren't part of this deal, you guys, how come he's not out in the podium going, I don't appreciate these feds? What are they doing? This is our case.

We're scheduled for trial. How come Alvin Bragg isn't saying a darn word? Why? Because I'm going back to my unsupported theory that he's in on it. So does the state, does the state trial happen? Dave said, Dave, you said 6040 it does or 6040 it doesn't? 6040 it does. I'm going to go the other way.

6040, it doesn't. Okay. So, yeah. I love, give credit to Johnna, because when she has a theory, she says it's, unsupported, right? Who does that? That's great. That's honesty right there. Supported by my God. That's it. All right, guys. Dave Aaronberg,

John is Spillbore. Thank you so much. Appreciate it. Thank you for having that. Law and crime will be in federal court for the hearing on Luigi Mangione's case on Friday and we'll have complete coverage of it for you on this anticipated plea deal. So stay tuned. That's it for this episode of Crime Fix. I'm Ann Jeanette Levy. Thanks so much for being with me. I'll see you back here next time. I don't know.