UnitedHealthcare CEO killing latest: Suspect Luigi Mangione to fight extradition to New York
Jeff Swensen/Getty Images
(NEW YORK) — The suspect in the killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson plans to challenge his extradition from Pennsylvania to New York, where he faces a charge of second-degree murder in connection with last week’s high-profile fatal shooting.
The suspect, Luigi Mangione, 26, was arrested on Monday and charged in Pennsylvania for allegedly possessing an untraceable “ghost” gun.”
“He has constitutional rights and that’s what he’s doing” in challenging the interstate transfer, his attorney, Thomas Dickey, told reporters in Pennsylvania.
He also plans to plead not guilty to the charges filed against him in Blair County, Pennsylvania, Dickey said. A Pennsylvania judge ordered Mangione, 26, held without bail on Tuesday.
The Manhattan District Attorney’s Office said it will seek a governor’s warrant to try to force Mangione’s extradition. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said in a statement that she’ll sign a request for the governor’s warrant “to ensure this individual is tried and held accountable.”
Dickey said he anticipates that Mangione would plead not guilty to the second-degree murder charge in New York.
The attorney said he has limited information about the facts of the New York murder case but he conceded Mangione is “accused of some serious matters.” He added that Mangione is “taking it as well as he can.”
Mangione’s defense was on Tuesday given 14 days to file a formal challenge to the extradition. The suspect was shackled at the waist and ankles during the hearing at Blair County Court House in Hollidaysburg, Pennsylvania.
The judge ordered Mangione held without bail, returning him to the State Correctional Institution in Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, where he’s listed as inmate QQ7787.
ABC News’ Peter Charalambous and Josh Margolin contributed to this report.
(NEW ORLEANS, LA) — The suspect in a deadly attack on New Year’s revelers in New Orleans has been identified as Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a 42-year-old U.S. citizen from Texas, according to the FBI.
At least 10 people were killed and dozens injured after a man drove a Ford pickup truck through a crowd on Bourbon Street at a high rate of speed early Wednesday, authorities said.
Authorities are working to determine whether the deceased suspect had any affiliation with terrorist organizations after an ISIS flag was located in the vehicle, the FBI said.
After barreling through the crowd over a three-block stretch, the suspect allegedly got out of the truck wielding an assault rifle and opened fire on police officers, law enforcement officials briefed on the incident told ABC News. Officers returned fire, killing the suspect, police said. At least two police officers were shot and wounded, authorities said.
“This man was trying to run over as many people as he possibly could,” New Orleans Police Chief Anne Kirkpatrick said at a press briefing on Wednesday. “It was not a DUI situation. This is more complex and more serious.”
She said the driver was “hell-bent on creating the carnage and the damage that he did.”
Weapons and a “potential IED” were located in the subject’s vehicle, according to the FBI, which is leading the investigation.
“Other potential IEDs were also located in the French Quarter,” the FBI said in a statement. “The FBI’s Special Agent Bomb Technicians are working with our law enforcement partners to determine if any of these devices are viable and they will work to render those devices safe.”
New Orleans Mayor LaToya Cantrell described the horrific incident as a “terrorist attack” and the FBI said it was being investigated as an act of terror.
Investigators are probing whether the suspect acted alone or had help from others in planning and executing the attack, Jason Williams, the district attorney of Orleans Parish, which includes New Orleans, told ABC News.
The truck used in the attack appeared to be a Ford F-150 Lightning, an electric vehicle. It appears the truck was rented through the Turo app — a carsharing company, according to Rodrigo Diaz, the owner of the truck.
Diaz told ABC News he rented the truck to an individual through the app and is currently talking to the FBI. He declined further comment.
Diaz’s wife, Dora Diaz, told ABC News that she and her husband are devastated by the incident.
“My husband rents cars through the Turo app. I can’t tell you anything else. I’m here with my kids, and this is devastating,” Dora Diaz said.
Who killed JonBenét Ramsey? The all-new ABC News interview with JonBenét’s father, John Ramsey, airs during 20/20 – premiering Friday, Nov. 13th on ABC Network.
(NEW YORK) — Advancements in DNA technology and a surge of public interest are rekindling hope for breakthroughs in the long-unsolved murder of 6-year-old JonBenét Ramsey, a case that has remained a haunting mystery for nearly 28 years.
As new techniques emerge and fresh attention is drawn to the evidence, many are eager for answers that could finally bring closure to this tragic story.
JonBenét, who was found dead in the basement of her Boulder, Colorado, home in 1996, remains frozen in time. Her father, John Ramsey, has endured nearly three decades without justice, answers or his daughter.
“JonBenét’s still my 6-year-old blond-headed daughter who I love dearly,” Ramsey told ABC News. “I did run into one of her little friends on the street who is now, you know, 30 and an adult. And it was, it was a little bit of a shock. This little girl played with JonBenét at our house all the time. And that was a little bit of a jolt to think, wow, that could have been JonBenét.”
Ramsey, now 81 years old, has renewed hope that his daughter’s killer can finally be found. He is confident that advances in DNA technology, including genetic genealogy that has helped to solve several high-profile cold case, are the key to solving this mystery.
“Let’s do a reverse family tree and see if he had a relative living in Boulder in 1996. The interesting thing about these cold cases,” Ramsey said. “The ultimate first arrest came out of nowhere. They were on no one’s radar. They’ve done this horrible crime and nobody said that that guy’s a suspect. That’s what we’re asking the police to do.”
Over the years, Ramsey expressed frustration with the police for not solving his daughter’s case. He was unhappy with being a prime suspect for 12 years and that the department rejected offers of help to find viable evidence. He recently took part in a new Netflix docuseries, “Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenét Ramsey?” The series dives into lingering mysteries surrounding the tragic case, exploring evidence, interviews and theories that have emerged over the years.
Ramsey collaborated with director Joe Berlinger, who aimed to illuminate what he described as one of the most victimized families in American history.
“Obviously, he wasn’t legally wrongfully convicted, but he was wrongfully convicted,” Berlinger said. “And his wife Patsy — the family were wrongfully convicted in the court of public opinion.”
The popular docuseries ignited a new wave of interest among viewers.
Ramsey is hopeful that recent changes in the Boulder Police Department’s leadership and better communication with his family may lead to a resolution in the case.
The Boulder police department has addressed the recent scrutiny. Last month, the current police chief released a video statement.
“So much of how law enforcement works has changed in the last 30 years,” Stephen Redfearn said. “There are a number of things that people have pointed to throughout the years that could have been done better and we acknowledge that as true. However, it is important to emphasize that while we cannot go back to that horrible day in 1996, our goal is to find JonBenét Ramsey’s killer.”
That tragic day in 1996 began in the picturesque Boulder neighborhood where the Ramsey family lived. On Dec. 26, John and Patsy Ramsey woke up to find that JonBenét, a child beauty queen, was missing.
A handwritten ransom note demanding $118,000 — the exact sum of John’s bonus that year — was discovered on the kitchen stairs. Seven hours later, John found his daughter’s lifeless body in a small basement room.
An autopsy determined JonBenét was sexually assaulted and strangled, and her skull was fractured. Unknown DNA was found under her fingernails and in her underwear.
The Ramseys quickly became suspects, even though no evidence connected them to the crime.
The family has always denied any involvement in JonBenét’s murder. However, the Boulder District Attorney’s Office took 12 years to fully exonerate the Ramseys and their son Burke, who was 9 years old when his sister died.
As weeks went by without any arrests in the case, a media frenzy began to build, fueled by relentless tabloid images of JonBenét participating in beauty pageants.
A number of leads emerged, including a man named John Mark Karr, who confessed to the killing in 2006. However, his DNA did not match the evidence and he was not in Boulder at the time of the murder, so he was eliminated as a suspect. The case remained unsolved.
John Ramsey believes that a cloud still hangs over his family, as he thinks there are people in the country who think he and his late wife, Patsy, who died in 2006, are responsible for JonBenét’s murder.
Investigator Lou Smit, who was initially brought into the case by Boulder County District Attorney Alex Hunter, came to believe early in his investigation that the Ramseys were innocent. He thought that the police should be looking at the possibility of an intruder.“I’m not saying parents don’t kill their kids … parents do kill their children,” Smit said in his tapes. “But [the police] are trying to say Patsy did it. … Their actions before, during and after [JonBenét’s death] are all consistent with innocent people. … They didn’t do it.”
As the investigation progressed Smit became increasingly concerned that authorities had completely ruled out the chance of an intruder being responsible for JonBenét’s death. As a result, they weren’t searching for evidence that might support this possibility.Smit continued to maintain that an unidentified intruder was responsible for JonBenét’s murder. However, he was running out of time due to his colon cancer diagnosis in 2010.
Before Smit died on Aug. 11 of that year, he diligently compiled a detailed list of persons of interest, hoping that his years of investigative work would eventually pay off. Smit passed his files to his surviving children, including a spreadsheet with 887 names of potential suspects to be investigated.That list is extensive, but Smit’s family is determined to continue their search. Since his death, the team has cleared several individuals from that list, according to Smit’s granddaughter Jessa Van Der Woerd. However, the process is slow due to the time and costs involved in locating each person, obtaining their DNA and testing it.
“We’ve let the killer walk for more than 28 years,” John Ramsey said. “I think it’s imperative that we investigate every credible suspect that’s been provided.”
(NEW YORK) — In its first note of the day, the jury in Daniel Penny’s manslaughter and negligent homicide trial reported that it is “unable to come to a unanimous vote” on whether Penny committed second-degree manslaughter in the death of Jordan Neely, a homeless man, on the New York City subway.
“We the jury request instructions from Judge Wiley. At this time, we are unable to come to a unanimous vote on court one,” the note said.
Judge Maxwell Wiley gave the jury an Allen charge, which refers to the jury instructions given to a hung jury that encourages them to continue deliberating despite the deadlock. He is giving the lawyers time to consider the next steps.
Penny’s lawyer, Thomas Kenniff, unsuccessfully moved for a mistrial, arguing that the Allen Charge would be “coercive.”
Wiley disagreed, saying that it was “too early” to declare a mistrial before encouraging the jury to continue their deliberations.
Since the jury got the case on Tuesday, they have deliberated for more than 20 hours.
Penny, a 25-year-old former Marine, put Neely, a 30-year-old homeless man, in a six-minute-long chokehold after Neely boarded a subway car acting erratically, according to police. Witnesses described Neely yelling and moving erratically, with Penny’s attorneys calling Neely “insanely threatening” when Penny put Neely in a chokehold.
The city’s medical examiner concluded Penny’s chokehold killed Neely.
Penny pleaded not guilty to manslaughter and negligent homicide charges.
The verdict form asks the jury to decide the first count – second-degree manslaughter – before potentially moving to the second count of criminally negligent homicide. Only if it finds Penny not guilty on the first count, can it consider the second count of criminally negligent homicide.
The second-degree manslaughter charge only requires prosecutors to have proven Penny acted recklessly, not intentionally.
“It would be a crazy result to have a hung jury just because they can’t move on to the second count?” prosecutor Dafna Yoran said.
Yoran also told Wiley that a new trial would “ultimately [be] the case if they hang the case.”
Wiley left unanswered the question about whether the jury could move onto the second count if they are unable to reach a verdict on the first count. He said he believed the jury moving to the second count is possible but needs to find the legal authority to do so.
“I think ultimately we are going to have to answer the question of whether they can move to count two,” he said.
Twenty minutes after the judge encouraged them to continue deliberating despite their deadlock, the jury sent back another note requesting more information about the term “reasonable person” in their instructions.
“Ultimately, what a reasonable person is up to you to decide,” Wiley told the jury in response to their note, referring them to a two-part test in jury instruction.
To convict Penny of manslaughter, the jury must be convinced Penny acted recklessly and grossly deviated from how a reasonable person would behave, knowing the risk his conduct posed.
“Would a reasonable person have had the same honestly held belief as the defendant given the circumstances and what the defendant knew at that time?” Wiley asked, referring to the second part of the test.
Before the jury entered, Wiley noted how the “reasonableness” standard was established in People v. Goetz – another high-profile New York trial after Bernhard Goetz shot four teenagers on a New York subway in 1984 after they allegedly tried to rob him. A New York jury convicted Goetz for one count of carrying an unlicensed firearm but acquitted on the more severe charges, and the trial sparked a nationwide debate about race and crime that has echoed forty years later in Penny’s case.
