Jury Nullification: Could Mangione Be Found Not Guilty Despite the Evidence?

The “frightening, well-planned, targeted… [and] cold blooded” killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in Manhattan on 4 December 2024 and arrest of Luigi Mangione five days later was met with mixed feelings in the United States.

Mr Thompson was a husband and father of two boys. Shortly prior to his funeral, the Thompson family issued a statement expressing:

“We are shattered to hear about the senseless killing of our beloved Brian.

“Brian was an incredibly loving, generous, talented man who truly lived life to the fullest and touched so many lives.”

Most shared the sentiment, expressing that the person responsible for the murder should be brought to account. But not everyone is of that view.

A December 2024 Economist/YouGov Poll found that 21% of adult US citizens viewed Manigione favourably or very favourably. This figure increased to an alarming 39% for those aged between 18 and 29 years. Mangione’s legal defence fund raised US$950,000 from about 27,000 people as of 25 April 2025 and protests have been held with placards reading “Free Luigi!” and “Not Guilty”.

Interestingly, Mangione’s supporters are not asserting that he did not commit the crime. Rather, the sentiment is that Magione should be set free despite perpetrating the murder, as the organisation headed by Mr Thompson had been engaged in the wholesale killing of sick Americans by denying their insurance claims. They see the incident as justice, as justified, as ‘chickens coming home to roost’.

As one Mangione supporter put it:

“They’re putting all of this effort and the death penalty behind one person who allegedly killed one CEO who is responsible and profiting off of the death of thousands upon thousands of sick people and bringing people into financial ruin as well as death”.

The fact that a significant proportion of Americans support Mangione, who has pleaded not guilty to charges of capital murder (which attracts the death penalty) and stalking, raises the possibility that not all 12 jurors will find him guilty of the crimes – even if they form the view the evidence establishes the offences beyond a reasonable doubt.

This situation is known as ‘jury nullification’, and is generally where a juror or jurors find a person not guilty on moral or ethical grounds despite the evidence establishing otherwise.

In the United States, all jurors must find an accused person either guilty or not guilty before the according verdict can be entered. This is called a unanimous verdict. If all jurors cannot reach a particular verdict, a hung jury will be declared and a decision then be made by prosecutors as to whether a retrial will be ordered.

The situation in several Australian jurisdictions, including New South Wales, is different, as ‘majority verdicts’ can be reached in criminal cases in certain circumstances.

Mangione case

26-year old Luigi Mangione is a former employee of UnitedHealthcare, the organisation of which the deceased was CEO. 

The evidence against Mangione, which includes CCTV, fingerprints as well as a 260 word note in which he allegedly states that it “had to be done” and “these parasites had it coming”, has been described by prosecutors as “overwhelming”.

Police say Mangione was motivated by his hatred of the greed of healthcare and insurance companies, after attempting to seek help while suffering from crippling back pain. His case has garnered significant attention due to its unique circumstances and the potential implications for the death penalty.

Mangione has been charged with 11 crimes, including terrorism and murder in the federal courts, and carrying firearms without a license, tampering with identification, possessing instruments of crime, and providing false ID to the police in the Pennsylvania state court system. 

Despite the overwhelming evidence, such as Reddit posts, conversations with his friends, and physical evidence, that Mangione is arguably guilty of the charges, there is a strong public sentiment in favor of “Free Luigi”. People are rallying behind his ‘moral’ cause to challenge the perceived greed in the US healthcare system. This public support is not just a show of solidarity, but also a reflection of the societal implications of this case. 

Even with the legal evidence that could see Magnione behind bars for years, or possibly on death row and executed if Trump has anything to say about it, this case could represent the clashing of two significant facets of the legal world — jury nullification and death row. 

Not guilty? Jury Nullification is Why 

As stated, a significant proportion of Americans believe Mangione should be found not guilty despite overwhelming evidence of his guilt. 

Even though the general public often believes that juror members are informed to make the correct decision in accordance with the law, those selected for jury duty are not above their own personal biases and viewpoints — all of which can lead to jury nullification.

Jury nullification occurs when jurors find a defendant not guilty of a crime despite ample evidentiary strength against the defendant. This could be due to misinformation, media, or anti-establishment groups that try to use affable jury members to contest morally disagreeable legislation. 

There are two legal reasons why jury nullification is possible in the Australian and United States court systems: double jeopardy and jury secrecy. Jurors have no legal liability to explain their decision-making or are punished for choosing a specific side. Even if their conclusion does not follow the evidence or take into account the defendant and prosecution’s sides, they only have to explain why they chose a Guilty or Not Guilty verdict. 

The lack of juror accountability, combined with the rule against double jeopardy, which prevents an accused from facing a second trial for the same crime, leads to the possibility of jury nullification.