Original article (with video) here, copying text for legibility

Fox news article had a ton of ads and links that made it annoying to read

https://preview.redd.it/xqdfnko7qaah1.png?width=1534&format=png&auto=webp&s=c84f15ce9cf090c79739027767be21f42fabd862

Former federal prosecutor warns of 'unprecedented' Mangione jury threat

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani sounded the alarm on jury nullification ahead of Luigi Mangione's federal trial, warning that Mangione is "probably the most popular accused murderer" he has seen in 25 years of practice.

A deadlocked jury for the man accused of sparking the inferno that led to the Palisades Fire has fueled fear that ideology is making its way into the jury box, with one former prosecutor concerned that it could impact Luigi Mangione's trial.

A federal judge on Friday declared a mistrial for the man accused of deliberately causing the Palisades Fire, Jonathan Rinderknecht, after jurors failed to reach a unanimous verdict. He was arrested in October 2025 and charged with destruction of property by means of fire, pleading not guilty after he was charged. Ten of the California jurors thought Rinderknecht was not guilty, while two thought he was.

A woman who identified herself as juror number four spoke to media outlets after the mistrial was declared, saying there was "no proof," adding that a retrial, which the government plans to do, would be a "waste of our American dollars."

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Fox News Digital this could be a case of jury nullification, but gave another reason why members of the jury may have been hesitant to convict Rinderknecht.

*"*This could be a case of jury nullification, or it could be a case where the jurors are blaming other people, or government, folks like Karen Bass, the Los Angeles FireDepartment," he said. "In this particular case, it took nine months for the Department of Justice to arrest and charge Jonathan Rinderknecht. And during that time, many Angelenos who lost their homes, and there are 12 people who died, were pointing the finger at our local officials saying that they were not prepared for the high winds and ultimately the most devastating fire in California hit his."

While the Rinderknecht deadlock may have been driven by anger at local officials, Rahmani said the Mangione case presents a far more direct nullification threat. Mangione is accused of assassinating UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompsonoutside a Manhattan hotel in December 2024, a killing that drew widespread public sympathy toward the alleged gunman.

With Rinderknecht's retrial set for mid-October, around the same time Mangione's federal trial could get underway, Rahmani warned prosecutors have little time to prepare for what he called an unprecedented jury threat.

"I do think the prosecution should be concerned about jury nullification in the Luigi Mangione case. He's probably the most popular accused murderer I've ever covered in my 25 years of practice," Rahmani said. "And depending on the surveys that you read, anywhere from 10 to 20% of people believe that he was justified in what he did."

He pointed out that Mangione just needs one person out of a 12 person jury to be sympathetic, and the numbers are in his favor.

"The reason why that's an important number is that you just need one out of 12 jurors if you're the defense. That's 8%. Mangione is a good looking guy, he is smart, he comes from a wealthy family and there's a line of people outside that courtroom every time he makes an appearance*,"* Rahmani said. "Both the feds and the Manhattan DA's office has to be very careful during jury selection and make sure that they remove any sympathetic Mangione jurors from the panel."

Even if the feds and Manhattan District Attorney's Office successfully remove sympathetic Mangione jurors from the panel, a different threat is still present, the former prosecutor said: stealth jurors*.*

Stealth jurors — those who hide their true biases to influence a verdict — could pose a serious problem for prosecutors in either of Mangione's cases, Rahmani said.

Luigi Mangione appears at a pretrial hearing in Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City on June 17, 2026. Mangione is accused of murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson in December 2024. (Pool via Barry Williams for New York Daily News)

"Stealth jurors are a huge problem and it is not easy to identify people that want to get on the panel. Most people don't want to serve as jurors," he said. "So when a juror actually wants to be on the panels, it's one of the most difficult jobs of an attorney to try to ferret them out."

For Mangione, Rahmani said his case differs from Rinderknecht because there may be some jurors who "want to put our health insurance industry on trial."

A sketch shows Jonathan Rinderknecht inside federal court in Orlando, Fla., on Oct. 9, 2025. He faced charges for allegedly starting a New Year's Day fire that killed 12 people in Pacific Palisades, Calif. (Neftali Melendez/Unknown)

Ultimately, the former federal prosecutor says the problem expands beyond any single case.

"I do believe jury nullification is more of an issue now than the past for two reasons. The country is more polarized and with social media, you have everyone following these trials in a way that you didn't have before when there was local media coverage only. Now people all over the country are following every single case, especially these high-profile true crime cases," he said.

Fox News Digital reached out to Mangione's defense team for comment.

Sorry if this is random but I'm fucking furious and want to vent.

I have hormone issues related to long term health problems. My testosterone fluctuates and the medication I'm on for it doesn't work effectively.

My doctor contacts me about it and we discuss options.

The first option he gives is TRT (testosterone injections) and he says the main drawback of this is if you use it long term you'll lose the ability to have children. (Your body detects the testosterone and stops triggering your testicles to produce it. Over time your testicles atrophy)

I like my testicles and the ability to have children so I ask for alternatives.

Doctor says there's something called HCG (Human chorionic gonadotropin) which triggers your testicles into producing testosterone. This ensures you keep your fertility while stimulating natural testosterone and circumvents the hormonal systems bottlenecking it.

>Me: "Great! Let's do HCG."

>Doctor: ::Looks at papers:: "So your insurance requires you to explain why you want to have children if you want this."

>Me: ::Stares at him waiting for the joke::

>Doctor: ::Stares at me waiting to see if I understand::

>Me: "...Are you telling me I have to "argue my case" to my insurance for wanting a treatment that won't sterilize me?

>Doctor: ::sighs::: "So TRT is cheaper than HCG. Your insurance plan requires you to validate WHY you want kids if you want it covered. I apologize but it's not me, it's them. I can help you paperwork wise but this may take a while."

These dirty motherfuckers would willingly sterilize me in order to save a buck on medication costs. I'm genuinely losing my fucking mind over how insane this is.

_____

Edit: Formatting

I don't know if this is a problem with Proton VPN, but I suspect it might be.

I've been getting endless captchas even when I have it off, which is most of the time. I don't think I've turned it on in the past week or two.

Yet, yesterday, my twitter account was locked due to "suspicious activity", and I had to verify my email address. Then just this morning it was suspended:

Specifically, for:
Violating our rules against inauthentic behaviors.
You may not use our services to engage in inauthentic activity that undermines the integrity of X.

The only cause I can think of is having Proton VPN sitting dormant in my applications. Has anyone else experienced this?

I'm looking for studies to explain this. Or even just a popsci article

For example, some of the harshest critics of "illegal" immigrants are legal immigrant Americans. Rather than feeling solidarity with them, they seem to want to create distance from themselves and those that share a similar identity with them but have a worse reputation.

During Weinstein's most recent trial, the jury's verdict was deadlocked: 9 women voted "not guilty", and 3 men voted "guilty". One lawyer commenting on the case said women are often more critical of women on the stand than men are.

Political Leftists often devote far more time criticizing those they deem not sufficiently left-leaning enough than they do towards those they are inherently ideologically opposed to.

My theory is that you are more likely to be harsh towards those who resemble you or share your identity but are transgressing in some way, than to those who don't resemble you, partially to protect yourself/your in-group. I swear I've read articles about this before but I can't find anything, only more studies on in-group solidarity.

I've heard this phenomenon referred to as "purity culture", but that term also refers to sexual or moral purity standards in Christianity, which has dominated search results.

The Wikipedia pages for intragroup conflict and Narcissism of small differences are very limited (and the latter isn't quite what I'm referring to.) Jehn's Intragroup Conflict Scale mostly deals with intragroup conflict arising from differences in completing tasks specifically and there aren't really any plain language explanations of how this appears in real world contexts either.

The closest I found was this, but the study appears to be limited to religion.
"There is little research examining in-group versus out-group transgressions of harmless offenses, which violate moral standards that bind people together (binding foundations). As these moral standards center around group cohesiveness, a transgression committed by an in-group member may be judged more severely."

I'd really appreciate any insight!