By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Shopping Trends team, separate from CTV News journalists, researches and identifies relevant products for consumers. This team may earn commissions through affiliate links when users make purchases. Further information regarding the team’s structure and practices can be found via the provided links. Transparency regarding commissions earned is an important aspect of their operation.
Read the original article here
Luigi Mangione’s attorneys are alleging some pretty serious misconduct by the prosecution. The crux of their argument centers on how the District Attorney obtained Mangione’s medical records. According to the attorneys, the DA went about this in a rather unorthodox and, frankly, questionable manner.
Essentially, the claim is that the DA concocted a fake court date – May 23, 2025 – and then created a fraudulent subpoena. This subpoena was sent to Aetna, the insurance provider, demanding documents. What’s really striking is the way they allegedly bypassed the court. Instead of having Aetna submit the records to the court, as a legitimate subpoena would require, the DA instructed Aetna to hand over the documents directly to the District Attorney’s office. The attorneys argue this was a deliberate attempt to circumvent the court’s oversight and secure Mangione’s confidential medical information improperly.
If the attorneys’ claims are true, this is a major problem for the prosecution. No judge is likely to look favorably on such actions. You certainly don’t want to upset the judge, especially when you’re the one trying a case. It raises serious questions about the prosecution’s ethics and their adherence to legal procedure. It’s almost as if they are making it easy for a mistrial to happen, with the only outcome being that he is a martyr to the cause.
The implications of this are significant. This alleged misconduct could potentially lead to several outcomes. One possibility is that the evidence obtained through this questionable method could be deemed inadmissible in court. Another is the possibility of sanctions against the prosecutors involved, potentially including disbarment. It could even trigger a criminal investigation.
It is important to note that the trial itself hasn’t even started yet. So, while there can’t be a mistrial, the defense could try to get his medical history not admitted as evidence, which would be a win. The attorneys’ actions, if proven, could seriously undermine the prosecution’s case. It could even be seen as a deliberate attempt to get a mistrial, which is not the way to go about it. The DA seems to be taking short cuts when trying to get Mangione guilty.
The situation also raises questions about the pressures faced by prosecutors, especially in high-profile cases. Sometimes, prosecutors can feel pressure to secure a conviction, which can lead to shortcuts and questionable tactics. In the case of Luigi Mangione, his attorneys claim that there is no evidence he committed the crime. The District Attorney may have taken this course of action because of the money he receives from wealthy donors, and they need to make an example of him. It’s like the prosecution is trying to overreach and cut corners to try to secure a conviction in a case.
It is concerning if they are also dealing with an increased caseload because of the cases against Trump. The trial in this case has not started yet, so no ruling can be made. It would be in the best interest of the case for the prosecution to do things legally.