What People Are Getting Wrong This Week: CEO Shooter Conspiracy Theories
To say that Luigi Mangione has captured the public imagination is an understatement—when an Ivy League-educated member of the upper class allegedly murders the CEO of a widely criticized health insurance provider, people are going to be invested. But with that interest comes the expected flood of conspiracy theories and misinformation. Let's unpack, discuss, and debunk.
Did the police arrest the wrong man?
Within hours of his arrest, posts started appearing online questioning the circumstances of his capture and disputing whether the cops got the right guy. This video, from TikToker ThePrincessAndThePopper, sums up the supposedly suspicious circumstances of the arrest.
"If I shot and killed a CEO and successfully got away with it, I'd totally walk into a McDonald's five days later with no face covering or disguise carrying the backpack, the murder weapon, and a three-page manifesto describing my motives," says Poppers, "I think it's a plant because the government doesn't want us to think we can get away with doing things like that."
Rebuttal: Mangione had to eat. And he was wearing a mask. As for carrying the evidence of his crime on him, it doesn't seem strange that a high-profile fugitive would carry everything he owned with him. Maybe he didn't want to risk leaving incriminating evidence wherever he was staying? Maybe he wasn't staying anywhere and had no place to store his stuff. Maybe he kept the gun because he was planning on shooting other people?
The part about him being a plant can't be disproven, exactly, but it's unlikely enough to dismiss. If the authorities were trying to pin the crimes on a "had nothing to do with it" rando at an McDonalds, they picked the worst patsy on earth: Mangione is from a wealthy, well-known family, which means he most likely has access to good lawyers. If he's unconnected to the crime, the law firm he's already hired likely won't have a lot of trouble clearing him, and what "message" does that send? This would mean the real killer is still out there, too, and what happens to the "message" if he murders someone else?
This is not to say that the cops arresting Mangione means he's guilty—only that the authorities almost certainly believe he did it and think they have enough evidence to prove it. Mangione's lawyer says he hasn't seen any evidence against his client yet, but I bet he will soon.
Do the photos prove Mangione isn't the killer?
When Reddit and X's "experts" start analyzing photographs, things are going to get very stupid. This highly upvoted comment sums up the Mangione-truther photo argument:
"They are flooding the images of this guy because he doesn’t match the original images of the shooting suspect. It’s a completely different looking person. The shooter looked Germanic and this guy is obviously Italian," posts Redditor FriendOfDirutti.
I'm not sure what looking "Germanic" means, but a lot of people are pointing at supposed differences in eyebrows and other features in the official photos, adding helpful circles to highlight supposed discrepancies between the released pre-arrest photos and the mugshot.
This Tweet is currently unavailable. It might be loading or has been removed.
It's hard to even counter these arguments because they're so dumb, but here goes: Sometimes people look different in different pictures.
Photos of Mangione were shot with different lenses, at different resolutions, from different angles, and the subject had different expressions on his face, so he looks different. As an illustration: Here are two photos of the same person, shot with the same camera, the same lighting, same background, and same facial expression. The only difference is the lens:
But even given all the visual difference photography can create, it looks like the same guy, or a very, very similar looking guy, in the pictures! Do better, conspiracy theorists!
Is the manifesto genuine?
The cloud of suspicion around the supposed killer's supposed manifesto is the most interesting aspect of the Mangione conspiracy-verse to me because it's a real gray area (at least for now). So let's start with the facts: According to authorities, Mangione was captured with a three-page, handwritten “claim of responsibility." The cops did not publicly release the contents of this "manifesto," except these lines: "These parasites had it coming," and "I do apologize for any strife and trauma, but it had to be done."
Not long after that, a manifesto appeared online that is definitely fake: It was on a Substack that wasn't launched until after Mangione was arrested and in jail. But a second manifesto is harder to disprove. Independent journalist Ken Klippenstein posted the pages, saying he had "obtained a copy of suspected killer Luigi Mangione’s manifesto—the real one," and that "Major media outlets are also in possession of the document but have refused to publish it and not even articulated a reason why." Does this mean it's genuine? No.
An "independent journalist" coming up with the document that everyone on earth wants to read is immediately suspicious to me, as is Klippenstein's implication that the "mainstream" news won't publish the manifesto for some fill-in-your-own-bias reason. He doesn't come out and say it, but the message seems to be, "the fix is in, guys, and someone is pressuring the press not to publish." It's classic conspiracy theory stuff, but maybe the "mainstream media" won't endorse the manifesto because it can't be verified as genuine? Maybe establishment media are working on verifying it, but won't publish until they're sure? Bottom line: The Klippenstein manifesto might be the real thing, but it might not be. We don't know. And until there's more than an unnamed source from one guy with no backing, we shouldn't believe it's real.
Did the cops write the manifesto?
While we can't say for sure, we can still speculate based on the contents of the manifesto, just for fun. This TikToker says she's a lawyer. She's come to the conclusion that Mangione's manifesto was written by the police. (Her TikTok on that topic has since been taken down, which she's drawn conclusions about, as you can see here.)
Anyway, I don't know if she's right, but it wouldn't be the first time the police fed misleading information to a credulous source in media like Klippenstein for their own reasons. Read the manifesto and judge for yourself whether it seems like it was written by an Ivy League-educated, well-read (judging by his GoodReads account) person or a "cop trying to write like an educated person." But don't imagine your conclusion is the truth, because we don't know.
There is nothing special about Mangione conspiracy theories
Conspiracy theories all work the same way:
Start with a conclusion, in this case "something is not right about this Mangione case," and work backwards.
Immediately reject official explanations, no matter how logical they might be, as "propaganda" or "more media lies."
Identify or invent small "inconsistencies" in a complex situation and use them to make great logical leaps: "The eyebrows look different in these different photographs, therefore Luigi Mangione is being set up" or "The cops said he threw his jacket away, and now he has his jacket? It's not the same person."
Hand-wave away any logical problems with your theory ("Why set someone up instead of just catching the real killer?") by saying something like "the corporations are trying to control us!" or "the government/CIA/reverse-vampires are covering up the truth!"
Spread it all on X, TikTok, or NextDoor and enjoy feeling special because you know something that everyone else doesn't, or you're courageous enough to face the truth.