Defense attorneys for alleged UnitedHealthcare CEO shooter Luigi Mangione say prosecutors at the Manhattan district attorney’s office are violating his health privacy rights by accessing confidential medical information, according to a court filing Thursday seeking a hearing and sanctions.
“The District Attorney has subpoenaed Mr Mangione’s health insurer, and, if their account is to be believed, they partially reviewed confidential, private, protected documents that the District Attorney readily admits are protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. There is no question that the District Attorney has no right to possess or review these documents,” the filing said.
MORE: Prosecutors trying to ‘bias’ the public against Luigi Mangione, defense says
Mangione has pleaded not guilty to murdering UnitedHealthcare chief Brian Thompson on a Midtown street last December. Mangione was not covered by UnitedHealthcare.
Instead, prosecutors have said he wanted to send a message about corporate greed.
Curtis Means/Pool via AP – PHOTO: Luigi Mangione, accused of fatally shooting Brian Thompson, the CEO of UnitedHealthcare, appears in Manhattan state court in New York, Friday, Feb. 21, 2025.
His attorneys are now seeking access to information from prosecutors and from Mangione’s insurer, Aetna, arguing the subpoena was improper.
“There is no question that the People have violated Mr Mangione’s rights under HIPPA by possessing and reviewing the subpoenaed documents. However, the violation goes far beyond this. The violation also involves the intentional and knowing violating of his doctor-patient privilege,” the defense said.
MORE: Prosecutors detail how Luigi Mangione allegedly surveilled CEO: ‘Checks every box’
The district attorney’s office said it will formally respond in court papers.
However, prosecutors said they requested limited information from Aetna and Aetna sent them additional materials in error. Prosecutors said they deleted the materials as soon as they became aware of them and brought it to the attention of both the defense and the court.
The error was compounded by defense counsel resending to prosecutors the very same items prosecutors had already deleted, a source familiar with the subpoena said.
