Lawyers representing Luigi Mangione, a Maryland man accused of the murder of health care CEO Brian Thompson, claim that the Manhattan District Attorney’s office violated federal privacy laws by improperly subpoenaing the defendant’s medical insurance records. This assertion emerged in a court brief filed on Thursday.
Mangione, who is charged with murder as an act of terrorism and additional related charges, allegedly shot Thompson in December on a busy Manhattan street. He is also facing federal charges for stalking and murder, and Attorney General Pamela Bondi has indicated that she will pursue the death penalty in this case.
In the legal filing, Mangione’s defense attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, argues that veteran prosecutor Joel Seidemann misled Aetna Insurance, Mangione’s provider, into believing that the company would face contempt of court if it did not provide the requested records by May 23. The defense claims that Aetna ultimately handed over more than 120 pages of sensitive medical records, which they contend is a violation of doctor-patient confidentiality and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) protections.
The brief states that Seidemann directly instructed Aetna to submit information to his office instead of using a court-ordered subpoena, which would have informed Mangione’s legal team about the access to his medical files. “This maneuver effectively eliminated the court’s role in safeguarding privileged or HIPAA-protected information,” Agnifilo argued in her letter to Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Gregory Carro.
Previously, the defense accused the Manhattan District Attorney’s office of infringing on Mangione’s right to counsel by monitoring a phone conversation between him and one of his lawyers while he was at the Metropolitan Detention Center.
On Thursday, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office indicated that they would respond to the defense’s letter in subsequent court filings. The defense is requesting that Judge Carro order prosecutors to hand over all communications related to the case between Aetna and the District Attorney’s office and is seeking a hearing to assess the legality of how the medical records were obtained.
Despite the serious allegations surrounding this case, the pursuit of legal rights and the emphasis on privacy protections reflect a fundamental aspect of the judicial system, underscoring the importance of confidentiality in legal proceedings. This litigation could serve as a reminder of the delicate balance required in handling sensitive information in criminal cases.