When speaking of the day he committed the crime, Luigi Mangione said, “I shot Mr. Thompson and he died.”

He concluded, “I knew what I was doing was illegal.”

Mangione had just described the actions he took ahead of the killing, telling the court:

“In November of 2024 I traveled from outside of New York state to Manhattan. I then emailed UnitedHealthcare leadership, posing as an investor at a firm managing over $15 billion in assets and requesting information about the conference. Unlike my previous interactions with insurers, I received an immediate response within an hour,” Mangione said.

Luigi Mangione's push to livestream his murder trial isn't about transparency, it's a stunt designed to pressure jurors, a former federal prosecutor is arguing.

Lawyers for the accused UnitedHealthcare CEO assassin argued in a Friday filing that the media access rules for his state trial are unconstitutional, and said the proceedings should be livestreamed.

Karen Friedman Agnifilo, Mangione's attorney, said that her team wasn't consulted on media access for the upcoming September trial, and only became aware of a document titled "Media Access: PSNY v. Mangione" from an independent journalist on X.

Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani, president of West Coast Trial Lawyers, told Fox News Digital he believes Mangione's attorneys want all trial proceedings to be livestreamed to pressure jurors, noting it's unusual for defendants to want more publicity.

"The conventional wisdom is that the defense usually doesn't want high-profile cases broadcast. It can put implicit pressure on jurors to return a guilty verdict," Rahmani said. "Mangione is probably the most popular accused murderer that I've ever covered in the past 25 years. Has a fan base. There's upwards of 10 to 20 percent of the people who have been surveyed who believe that even if he did it, it was justified. And I think the defense knows this, and they know that more attention creates the possibility of jury nullification, or maybe even an acquittal."

Rahmani said the defense is counting on influencers to do what a courtroom sketch never could: keep the case viral.

"Obviously, those handwritten sketches, they're not as interesting as clips that you can post on TikTok or Instagram Reels. The defense knows this, and they want to take advantage of that influencer content and those viral videos," Rahmani said.

Rahmani's argument tracks with the behavior of Mangione's supporters, who have lined up outside federal and state courthouses for a chance to see the man accused of killing UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson. One woman, Ashley, part of a group calling itself "The Mangionistas," told the New York Post she camped outside the court in December, and said it wasn't her first time.

"I froze my a-- off last time so I brought a heater, a tent, everything," another individual said.

Rahmani said the strategy by Mangione's attorneys is to hopefully get enough influencers talking about the case to the point where it impacts jurors.

"Jurors are supposed to decide the case solely based on the facts and evidence in the case, and they certainly shouldn't be on social media or AI or Google getting information about the case. But jurors are ordinary people, and they can't help but be influenced by these outside voices," he said. "And the defense knows this, and they know that more media attention likely means pressure on the jurors or potentially people that may be stealth jurors that may want to get on the panel to actually free Luigi in this case."

While Rahmani said it's clear what the defense is trying to do, their entire argument for getting the trial livestreamed is a stunt because New York state law prohibits it.

"There's no world where the defense is gonna get its request unless New York law changes or the judge does something extraordinary," Rahmani said. "People will think that there's some sort of cover-up because they've seen other high-profile trials livestreamed and they think that people may think that Luigi Mangione is not getting a fair trial because there's a lack of transparency."

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

UnitedHealth is putting serious money behind AI at the exact moment patients, courts and regulators are asking whether insurer algorithms already have too much power.

UnitedHealth Group wants you to believe its AI spending is part of a turnaround. The numbers are big enough to deserve attention. According to Barron's, the company pointed to a $1.5 billion AI investment as part of its plan to offset pressure from Medicare reimbursement changes, while its first-quarter 2026 results gave Wall Street something it had been waiting for: proof that the business was stabilizing after a bruising year.

That is the financial story. The harder story is what happens when a health insurer uses automation in places where patients already feel they have little leverage. If an AI tool answers a benefits question faster, fine. If an algorithm helps route a claim or nudge a coding decision, you want to know who checks it, who can challenge it, and what happens when it gets the answer wrong.

UnitedHealth's first-quarter numbers were strong. The Wall Street Journal reported that revenue rose to $111.7 billion from $109.6 billion a year earlier, adjusted earnings reached $7.23 a share, and the company's medical-loss ratio came in at 83.9%, below analyst expectations. Stephen Hemsley, who returned as chief executive in May 2025, has been cutting, reorganizing and trying to restore confidence. The Journal also reported that UnitedHealth has replaced almost half of its top 100 executives and agreed to acquire Alegeus Technologies, a benefits-administration company.

AI now sits inside that reset. It isn't a side project. It is part of how UnitedHealth wants investors to judge the next version of the company, especially after a period that included earnings pressure, executive upheaval and intense scrutiny of its Medicare Advantage business.

Here is the thing: healthcare automation doesn't arrive in a neutral room. It arrives in a system where patients already fight denials, doctors already spend hours on prior authorization, and insurers already have more information and money than the people trying to appeal a decision. That doesn't make every AI tool dangerous. It does mean the burden of proof belongs with the insurer.

The warning signs are not theoretical. The Guardian reported in 2025 that a lawsuit against UnitedHealth alleged its naviHealth nH Predict tool had a 90% error rate, meaning nine out of 10 denials were reversed on appeal, while only a tiny share of patients appealed. UnitedHealth has denied that the algorithm is used to make coverage decisions. That denial matters, but so does the fact that families and lawyers are now testing these systems in court rather than debating them in a technology panel.

Medicare Advantage coding is another pressure point. The Wall Street Journal reported in early 2025 that the Justice Department was investigating whether UnitedHealth over-diagnosed patients to win higher Medicare Advantage payments. In January 2026, the Journal also reported that a Senate Judiciary Committee review of 50,000 pages of company records found UnitedHealth used aggressive tactics to collect diagnoses that boosted government payments. UnitedHealth has denied wrongdoing and has said its practices follow federal rules.

Frankly, this is why the AI pitch needs less sparkle and more audit trail. If UnitedHealth can use automation to cut prescription reauthorization delays, route calls faster, and reduce administrative waste, patients may feel the benefit. Nobody enjoys waiting on hold to be told a drug, referral or scan is still under review. Time is money in business. In healthcare, time is often pain.

But speed is not the same thing as fairness. A claim denied in seconds is not better than a claim denied in days if the patient still can't understand the decision or reach a human who can fix it. An AI assistant that explains coverage is useful. An opaque system that moves clinical judgment behind a model is a very different bargain.

For the broader technology market, UnitedHealth is becoming one of the more important enterprise AI tests because the company is not selling demos. It is spending real money inside a giant operating business and telling investors that the savings will show up. If the returns hold, other insurers, pharmacy benefit managers and hospital systems will copy the playbook quickly. You should expect that.

The question is whether regulators copy their own playbook just as quickly. UnitedHealth's AI spending may help the company repair margins and calm investors, but patient trust will not come from an earnings slide. It will come from appeal rights, human review, clear explanations and penalties when automated systems hurt people. Without those, the technology may work exactly as designed and still make healthcare feel worse.

Mangione’s “extreme emotional disturbance” defense will scrutinize the “why” behind Brian Thompson’s murder more than the “who,” according to New York legal experts.

MANHATTAN (CN) — What could have been a straightforward Manhattan murder case may now be confounded by the politics of the for-profit healthcare system in the United States, thanks to the revelation that Luigi Mangione will be mounting an “extreme emotional disturbance” defense at his upcoming state trial for the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

It’s a unique psychiatric defense strategy only available to murder defendants in New York. If successful, Mangione could have his top charge of second-degree murder, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, downgraded to first-degree manslaughter, a 25-year maximum sentence.

But the defense, which requires Mangione to prove that he greatly suffered and was not thinking in a rational manner, effectively forces him to admit that he was the man behind the gun, according to Mark Bederow, a New York criminal defense attorney and former Manhattan prosecutor.

“When serious lawyers put forth this defense, everyone understands what it means,” Bederow told Courthouse News. “They are going to argue that he absolutely committed the literal homicidal act, but that he did so acting under extreme emotional disturbance.”

State law requires a defendant to prove they had a “reasonable explanation or excuse” for the psychiatric distress. At Mangione’s trial, that could mean the broader politics surrounding the U.S. healthcare system are suddenly central to the case.

According to prosecutors, Mangione wrote in journals that UnitedHealthcare, the largest insurer in the country, is “a company that literally extracts human life force for money.” He called the company’s annual investor conference — where Thompson was headed when he was gunned down in Manhattan on Dec. 4, 2024 — “parasitic” and “embodies everything wrong with our health system.”

Prosecutors also claim Mangione etched “delay,” “deny” and “depose” on ammunition shells used in the shooting, referencing the infamous “delay, deny, defend” playbook critics argue insurers use to duck paying medical claims.

The swell of support for Mangione since the shooting exemplifies the attitude many Americans have about the for-profit healthcare system. That may have been completely irrelevant in a straightforward murder case, but it can suddenly be applicable here as the defense seeks to prove why Mangione was under such psychiatric distress.

“In a clean-cut murder case, the politics of that weren’t going to be admitted — it’s not relevant, the judge would have kept it out,” Bederow said. “But if the argument here is going to be an extreme emotional disturbance, where he was consumed by this obsessive hatred of [UnitedHealthcare], it does get some of that political stuff back in here.”

It’s not an insanity defense, in which a defendant argues they should not be held accountable for their actions since they could not comprehend them, and is institutionalized instead of imprisoned, if successful. Instead, Bederow said Mangione will have to prove that he was so upset that he “had to act under that extreme disturbance.”

“The classic example that they talk about in law school is a guy who comes home and finds his wife in bed with another man, shocks the hell out of him, and he just loses it in the heat of the moment, pulls out a gun and shoots him,” Bederow said.

Veteran New York City criminal defense attorney Ron Kuby has tried an extreme emotional disturbance defense three times. He was successful in each attempt, most notably in his 2014 defense of Gigi Jordan, a mother who admitted to poisoning her 8-year-old son because she feared her ex-husband would abuse him.

In each case, he said it was important to prove that a defendant — even if they’re capable of planning the act — was not acting rationally. This is particularly important for Mangione, since prosecutors say he meticulously planned Thompson’s murder and took decisive steps to evade law enforcement after the fact.

“You want to get to the point where jurors say, ‘What he did was wrong, and had I been in that situation, I don’t think I would have done it. But I understand,’” Kuby told Courthouse News. “You want to show a nexus between the person he killed and the suffering he endured, and you want to make the jury like your client.”

That means testimony from Mangione, himself, is more likely now than in a standard murder defense. But it’s not a foregone conclusion, Kuby said; of his three cases where this defense was tried, Jordan was his only defendant to take the stand.

Mangione’s dueling prosecution in federal court, where this type of defense doesn’t exist, complicates matters.

“In essence, this defense is a, ‘Yes I did it, but,’ defense,” Kuby said. “And as a defense lawyer, I don’t want Mangione saying, ‘Yes, I did it.’”

Such testimony could come back to bite Mangione in the federal case, where he also faces life in prison for Thompson’s killing. Critically, that case is set to go to trial in early 2027 — after the state case — so Mangione admitting to being the gunman in state court could kneecap his federal defense.

But that’s a problem for another day, according to Kuby.

“One murder trial at a time,” he said.

New York —  

The day after Luigi Mangione was arrested in connection with the December 2024 killing of a health insurance executive, a former prosecutor suggested his best defense might be claiming a form of insanity.

“There might be a not guilty by reason of insanity defense that they’re going to be thinking about, because the evidence is going to be so overwhelming that he did what he did,” attorney Karen Friedman Agnifilo, then a CNN legal analyst, told Anderson Cooper.

“You have someone who was a valedictorian of his class, he was brilliant his whole life, he comes from this great family. I mean, something changed, right? Significantly, something changed,” she said.

Three days later, CNN reported Mangione hired Friedman Agnifilo, a longtime member of the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, which is prosecuting the 28-year-old on murder and weapons charges for allegedly fatally shooting UnitedHealthcare Chief Executive Brian Thompson. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to the state charges, as well as federal stalking charges.

It is not clear whether Mangione will invoke an affirmative mental health defense – where a defendant admits to the alleged conduct but argues they should not be held fully liable due to psychiatric reasons – when his state trial begins in September.

But Friedman Agnifilo’s comments offer a window into what may now be playing out behind the scenes:

Last August, in a publicly filed letter, Mangione’s lawyers asked the judge for more time before informing the prosecution of their decision on a mental health defense if they planned to pursue one. There have been no subsequent public mentions of the issue. A court hearing earlier this month was sealed at the defense’s request.

Mangione is due to appear in state court this week.

Lawyers and forensic psychologists told CNN a mental health defense, while challenging, is likely Mangione’s best bet given the strength of the evidence against him. In a key ruling last month, the judge cleared the way for prosecutors to present the alleged murder weapon found in his backpack and writings expressing animosity toward the healthcare industry and a desire to “wack (sic) the CEO.”

A psychiatric defense could also offer a path for Mangione’s lawyers to try to make him sympathetic to the jury.

“There’s absolutely going to be a mental defense in this case,” predicted Kris Mohandie – a forensic psychologist who has worked with law enforcement for over three decades – pointing to what he called a “significant change” in Mangione’s behavior before Thompson’s killing.

Mangione’s arrest shocked people who knew him, while others looked for clues that might explain his alleged motive. Mangione underwent back surgery and posted an X-ray of his postsurgery spine online. In the months before the shooting, Mangione’s once active online presence stopped, and his mother filed a missing persons’ report.

“Jurors always want to understand why, and they want it explained, and this will help explain it,” Mohandie, who is not involved in the Mangione case, said of a psychiatric defense. “It will also, in the process, I believe, humanize what is a very predatory attack on this man.”

“They need to do it, and it will render him more sympathetic potentially, if done correctly,” he said.

Mangione’s lawyers have not responded to CNN’s requests for comment, but they have previously declined to comment on defense strategy.

A representative for the district attorney’s office declined to comment.

Extreme emotional disturbance

Thompson’s killing unleashed a firestorm of ire against the US healthcare industry and generated a wave of support for Mangione. Supporters lined up for a chance to see him at court hearings; donors have contributed more than $1.5 million toward his defense. Law enforcement officials have condemned the support for him as a shocking “celebration” of a cold-blooded murder.

A mental health defense could be a way for Mangione’s lawyers to tap into a juror’s potential frustration with the healthcare industry, Mohandie said.

“This gets you the ability to talk about a lot of this stuff if you introduce his thought process about it,” Mohandie said.

On the other hand, such a defense can give prosecutors more information to work with, lawyers say, allowing them to subpoena medical records and interview a defendant’s family members.

“It opens up the door to different types of evidence that would otherwise not be relevant,” said Gary Galperin, a former prosecutor who cowrote a study on mental health defenses.

“You can speak to employees, roommates, all the persons who might have had contact with the accused,” Galperin said.

“Psychiatric defenses are often defenses of last resort,” he added. They are rarely successful because a true insanity defense requires the accused to have not known what they were doing was wrong.

Another affirmative defense available to New York criminal defendants is that they were acting under the influence of an extreme emotional disturbance spurred by an event that made them temporarily lose control, legal experts said. If a jury finds a defendant has proved by a preponderance of evidence he acted because of an extreme emotional disturbance, or EED, the crime is reduced from murder to manslaughter, which carries far less prison time.

“It’s not a get out free (card),” Hermann Walz, an adjunct professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, told CNN. “It’s basically just saying, I’m reducing the crime.”

The EED defense is often used in cases where a defendant acts in the heat of the moment, such as finding their spouse cheating on them. It can also be put forward in cases where a person acts upon emotions that have been festering for a long time, such as abused women who kill their attackers after a “long-standing buildup of trauma,” said criminal defense attorney Earl Ward.

Still, some defendants have successfully applied an EED defense in cases that differ from these typical scenarios, including when the defendant was under the influence of drugs or acted based upon a mistaken belief.

Ward effectively presented the defense when he represented Gigi Jordan, a former pharmaceutical executive accused of killing her 8-year-old son Jude Mirra with a lethal drug concoction in a luxury Manhattan hotel.

“It wasn’t a question of if she gave her son these drugs – she clearly did,” Ward told CNN this month. “It really was about her mental state and what caused her to do something so extreme.”

During the 2014 trial, Jordan took the stand and portrayed her actions as a mercy killing, telling the jury she believed her ex-husband was going to kill her, which would have left Jude in the custody of a relative she believed had abused him.

The relative denied the allegations, according to CNN affiliate WCBS, and prosecutors said there was no evidence the boy was ever abused.

“Even if her belief was mistaken, as long as she reasonably believed that the child was in danger, she acted under extreme emotional disturbance,” Ward said.

The jury accepted Jordan’s claim and convicted her of manslaughter, the lesser charge to second-degree murder. At sentencing, she faced between 5 and 25 years in prison – a range far less than the 15 years to life in prison she would have faced if she were convicted of the murder charge.

In another high-profile case, Christopher Thomas stood trial for the so-called 1984 “Palm Sunday Massacre,” where he shot and killed eight children and two women in a home in Brooklyn, The New York Times reported at the time.

At trial, Thomas’s attorneys argued he was addicted to cocaine and had become infuriated by his wife’s alleged infidelity, leading him to commit the rampage under an extreme emotional disturbance, according to the Times. The jury agreed and convicted Thomas of manslaughter instead of murder, with some jurors emphasizing the role of his addiction.

“He had been free-basing for two years,” one juror told the Times after the verdict, referring to a method of taking cocaine. ”That would make anybody emotionally disturbed.”

Thomas was released from prison in 2018 after serving roughly 32 years, according to CNN affiliate Spectrum News NY1.

Mangione’s alleged statements could undermine mental health defense

If Mangione ultimately mounts a psychiatric defense, it could be complicated by his own alleged writings and behavior before and after the shooting, which experts say provide insight into his state of mind.

Authorities allege Mangione wore a hoodie to disguise himself, used a firearm silencer and had an escape plan to flee the city prior to his arrest five days later nearly 300 miles away in Altoona, Pennsylvania – behavior lawyers said would undercut any suggestion he didn’t know what he was doing was wrong.

Normally, someone who acted from EED “would be so distraught after the killing that you would want to talk about it. You would not want to flee. You wouldn’t try to hide your guilt,” Galperin, the former prosecutor, said. “What (Mangione) did after the crime seems to negate the psychiatric defense.”

Authorities also found a notebook in Mangione’s backpack containing handwritten entries that expressed frustration with the healthcare industry and an intent to carry out an attack, according to court filings. Prosecutors are expected to use the writings – some of which are dated months before the killing – to argue it shows Mangione’s “unambiguous” intent and motive to target the CEO of the country’s largest health insurance company.

“His journal entries will document that known process we see in people that actually pose a genuine threat, and it will underscore the predatory nature that was cooking all this time,” said Mohandie, the forensic psychologist.

“Prosecutors will grab a hold of that, but good defense attorneys and mental health people will be mining it to see if there’s any indicator of psychosis, delusion, or just a guy that is so depressed or disturbed that they can use that maybe for a potential defense,” Mohandie added.

“If you ask me whether it’s legitimate or not, I’m going to say I don’t know enough yet,” he said.

CNN’s Eric Levenson contributed to this report.

Insiders Speak Out About the Murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, Including Detectives & Friends of Thompson & Mangione 

Lester Holt Reports for a Special ‘Dateline’ This Friday, June 5 at 10 p.m. ET

June 2, 2026 – Friday’s all-new Dateline at 10 p.m. ET/9 p.m. CT will go inside the Luigi Mangione investigation, revealing exclusive new details and insight in the case that continues to captivate the world. For the first time, two NYPD Major Case Squad detectives who worked on the case take Dateline through the lead-up to the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson and the urgent manhunt that followed. 

Retired Detective Sergeant John Griffin tells Dateline anchor Lester Holt about his first reaction to seeing the weapon used in the killing: “It had something on the front,  like a homemade suppressor or silencer-type thing.” Asked by Holt whether that was common, Griffin responded: “No. In 25 years, I don’t think I’ve ever actually encountered a silencer before that.”

The one-hour special, entitled A Killing in Midtown, also features a member of Thompson’s inner circle speaking publicly about the case for the first time. Jeff Alter, a friend and former colleague, tells Holt about the social media reaction to Thompson’s death. “Social media is fast and cruel, people posting, you know, smiley faces that — that somebody was murdered just — it’s just beyond me,” Alter explained. He added that the response was “really cruel,” particularly for those who knew Brian personally.

A Killing in Midtown also features interviews with people who met Mangione while he traveled, including a pro soccer player in Thailand and a yoga teacher in Hawaii. Mangione has pleaded not guilty to the murder. 

One of the ghoulish Luigi Mangione fangirl “journalists” is herself the relative of a health care insurance executive, The Post has learned.

Lena Weissbrot, a member of the twisted trio hopelessly devoted to the accused assassin of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, is the daughter of Reina Natero, who oversees prescription drug insurance coverage rules at CVS Health, according to a review of public records and Natero’s online resume.

Lena Weissbrot is one of the three Mangionistas.fellatiag/Instagram

Natero, 57, a trained pharmacist, has worked for big pharma for more than two decades, according to her LinkedIn profile. 

Weissbrot, 32, unleashed her fury at the healthcare industry Monday, when she coldly proclaimed outside the New York State Supreme Court where Mangione is on trial that Thompson’s grieving kids “are better off without him.” 

Natero meanwhile is the lead director of medical affairs for the Formulary Clinical Analysis team at CVS Health, where she’s worked since October 2021.

Luigi Mangione appears at a hearing in Manhattan Criminal Court in New York, Monday, May 18, 2026.Jeenah Moon/Pool Reuters via AP

She formerly held director roles at insurance companies Centene, WellCare and Providence, and kicked off her career making drugs for Bayer Healthcare, per her LinkedIn profile.

The Portland, Oregon, resident was listed as a speaker at prestigious Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research 2026 conference, and was wedded to David Weissbrot, according to a marriage certificate, though no professional information could be gleaned about him.

Weissbrot herself obtained a coveted Fullbright-MTV fellowship in 2015 after she graduated with a Bachelor of Fine Arts from Florida State University, where tuition costs $6,500, when the family lived in the Sunshine State.

The grant sent her to study “South African artists identifying as feminists who use Hip-hop music as a form of activism” at Rhodes University in South Africa, where international tuition and residence is $10,500.

Weissbrot starred in a rap video proclaiming her love for Luigi and hatred of Thompson.Fellatia G/ Vimeo

“This has become an archetype at this point, when activists become defined as the ‘anti’ of what their parents were,” Stu Smith, an investigative analyst with conservative think tank The Manhattan Institute, told The Post. “There’s no self-awareness.”

Weissbrot, a game developer, rapper and maker of erotic art who goes by Fellatia G, made a splash Monday when she and two other fan girls got City Hall-approved press passes to cover a pretrial hearing for Mangione.

The shocking revelation comes as The Post discovered a music video she wrote and starred in posted on Vimeo in June.

The trio made a splash Monday when they got City Hall-approved press passes to cover a pretrial hearing for Mangione.

“The CEO’s a parasite and now they getting shot up,” she mocked as guns and guillotines flashed on the screen. 

“While I’m looking cuter, you be looking deader, the kind of hit that makes you wish for universal healthcare,” the bikini-clad self-proclaimed rapper shamelessly ang in her disturbing “Toolie Toolie” video.

She rallied Mangione “copycats” to “put billionaires in body bags” during the 1:40-minute clip where she wore a green beret with an “L” on it – and which included a disclaimer that she doesn’t “promote, condone or endorse violence.”

“Uzi, uzi, toolie, toolie, blicky, blicky, chopper. I’m mogging like a model but I whack them like a mobster.”

Contacted by The Post, Weissbrot, whose full name is Lena Natero Weissbrot, denied Reina Natero was her mother but dodged follow up questions about the relationship when confronted with the records, only claiming her mother was unemployed and that they were “rather estranged.”

“That’s not my mom,” she wrote in an email, promising to “assemble the information,” about her mother, but never followed up.

By the next morning, Natero edited her LinkedIn profile to remove her last name.

The trio of fangirls is planning to attend every Luigi Mangione court date.LP Media

Natero was listed as Weissbrot’s mother in public records, and the two are the only in the United States to hold their respective names. They lived at the same address in Saint Petersburgh, Florida, Weissbrot’s hometown, before she went off to college in Tallahassee in 2012, according to records.

Natero and David Weissbrot got married in March 1993, according to the certificate, five months before the Mangionista was born.

Multiple calls to Natero and David Weissbrot went unanswered.

Rios was the content creator for the Hot Girls 4 Zohran.

Another Mangionista, Abril Rios – the content creator for the Hot Girls 4 Zohran campaign to boost the socialist – also has capitalist bonafides.

The nepo-baby grew up in a stunning $1 million home in the idyllic suburb of Hopewell, New Jersey, and was a child model-actress, according to her IMDb and LinkedIn pages.

Rios, 27, jet-sets around the world, studying at the University of Amsterdam and even scoring a modeling stint in Seoul, South Korea, according to her social media pages.

Rios’ mother is with award-winning British special effects producer Julian Parry.Julian Parry/Facebook

She has worked on visual effects for Netflix shows including “The Witcher” in London in 2019, according to LinkedIn.

It seems like she may have gotten a boost from her award-winning stepdad, Julian Parry, who was special effects supervisor for the dark fantasy franchise.

Parry lives with the blond Mangionista’s mother in a house in Princeton, according to records. The couple is pictured on social media together, with mother Monica Martinez adopting her beau’s surname on her Facebook profile.

The trio isn’t shy about proclaiming their love for Mangione.agoraangel/Instagram

Neither returned calls, and Rios lashed out at The Post for calling to seek comment from her relatives and her and went on a bizarre rant accusing the paper of somehow having caused her to lose her housing.

“I’ve never taken a dollar from my parents since I was 17 years old. You should genuinely be ashamed of yourself,” she lambasted in an email.

Her biological father meanwhile, Andres Rios, rakes in at least $280,000 as the Chief Enterprise Security Architect at Valley Bank, according to his LinkedIn profile and Glassdoor estimate.

The third Mangionista, Ashley Rojas, 24, a native New Yorker, had a sales associate floor job at Banana Republic and worked a baker at Whole Foods until last year, and is currently earning a Modern Journalism certification from NYU, according to her LinkedIn.

Weissbrot is a game developer and rapper, according to her Instagram bio.

Ashley Rojas is the more mysterious of the group.agoraangel/Instagram

“F–k Brian Thompson,” she said in front of the courthouse this week. “That’s all I want to say. F–k Brian Thompson. F–k his mom.”

Smith called the trio “incredibly cruel.”

“I’m certainly open to independent journalists getting a fair shot, but who is a propagandist — and arguably in love with Luigi — versus a voice that can provide some non-biased commentary and make a strong argument?” he said.

This article does a good job of breaking down and explaining the defense/prosecution arguments on suppression issues. Highly reccommend reading it to get a good understanding of what Judge Carro is going to be ruling on, and if you don't want to read through 100+ pages of legal arguments.

I'm soooo curious and anxious to see what decision he made. Monday cannot come fast enough.

my apologies if this has been asked before.

I have seen many people in this sub share experiences with their health insurance company, and I follow this case because I have a mother who has cancer and constantly deals with insurance, but I also wonder about other people that no doubt lurk on this sub, don't comment as much, and have an interest in the case.

for example, is there anybody who has been affected by a crime in any way, whether it be serving jury duty on a case, being a victim of it, or working a government job that involves the law in some way? I know there's a possibility of people who knew LM or his family lurking in here as well, but also, are there any people in here that knew BT or his family personally? or have friends that do?

those that have followed this from the very beginning, how has your opinion/stance on the case changed in anyway since pretrial motions, the suppression hearings, more evidence that has come out, etc...?

I'm asking this because i'm genuinely curious and would like some refreshing conversation. also, since it's been pretty quiet in the case these past few weeks I think this could give us more to discuss, until we know the decision on the evidence on the 18th, which may very well change the direction of the trial greatly.

greatly appreciate any input!