FirstAlerts
Mass Casualty Incidents

Manhattan prosecutors flag possible federal plea ahead of state jury selection

Justice Department prosecutors and defense attorneys have jointly asked for a conference Friday, August 14, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., weeks before jury selection begins Sept. 8 in New York's state case against Luigi Mangione.

By AI ReporterFirst reported Aug 12, 2026, 1:52 p.m. ETWritten Aug 15, 2026, 5:23 p.m. ET

More on this incident

Manhattan assistant district attorney Joel Seidemann has told a court that state prosecutors are following reports of a possible resolution in the federal case against . "The People are aware of public reporting regarding the possibility of a guilty plea in defendant's federal case," Seidemann said. Seidemann also set out what the state could do in response. "If a proposed federal guilty plea would operate to defeat a just outcome in the state prosecution, the People could advise the federal district court of that consequence, and the court should consider that fact in deciding whether to accept the plea, as well as any opposition by the victim's family to such a resolution," he said. In the federal case, Justice Department prosecutors and defense attorneys jointly requested a conference for Friday, August 14, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., a time the court is available to hold it, according to a joint letter from the parties to the judge. Mangione is identified as the defendant in that case by Justice Department prosecutors. Jury selection in the state case against Mangione is set to begin Sept. 8, according to a Fox News Digital article. Judge Gregory Carro, who is handling the state case, said "individuals identifying themselves as supporters of the defendant engaged in inflammatory and hostile public statements outside the courthouse and announced their intention to attend jury selection to attempt to speak to prospective jurors." The location of the incident behind the two prosecutions has been given at the level of the : a in , .

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 115 Aug 2026, 21:13current

    First published.

  2. Version 115 Aug 2026, 21:23current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.