Joker in New York?: The Conflicted Rise of Luigi Mangione and Vigilantism

On the evening of December 4, 2024, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was shot and killed in front of the New York Hilton Midtown Hotel. The masked assailant approached Thompson from behind, fired three shots, and fled the scene.

The three shell casings found at the scene bore the words “deny,” “defend,” and “depose,” leading many to interpret this as a message against insurance companies’ policies. Police, having reviewed footage of the incident, speculated that the assailant used a semi-automatic handgun equipped with a silencer. Thompson, who had been in New York for a meeting with investors, was CEO of UnitedHealthcare since 2021, a company ranked 8th on the 2024 Fortune Global 500 list.

The murder garnered significant attention, prompting the police to launch a large-scale manhunt the same day. Both the footage of the murder and alleged images of the assailant circulated widely on social media, attracting further public interest, fueled by the significant financial rewards offered by the NYPD and FBI for information leading to the assailant’s arrest.

Catching Luigi Mangione

Five days after the murder, police apprehended Luigi Mangione at a McDonald’s in Altoona, Pennsylvania, about 450 kilometers from the crime scene. The tip came from an employee who recognized Mangione from the shared footage.

Mangione was found in possession of a 3D-printed handgun and silencer (proving to police that the weapon functioned without jamming), several fake IDs, and a handwritten 262-word manifesto. Mangione’s arrest further captivated public attention due to his atypical profile compared to perpetrators of similar crimes.

Mangione came from a wealthy and well-known family in Maryland. A former valedictorian of a prestigious private high school, he went on to earn both undergraduate and graduate degrees in computer science from the University of Pennsylvania. He was athletic, enjoyed outdoor activities, and was described by friends as “normal” and “intelligent.”

Reports suggest that a serious surgery following a sports injury led to his isolation and deteriorating mental health, which may explain why he targeted the CEO of a healthcare company.

Mangione’s digital footprint

Mangione left behind a significant digital footprint. While it is still too early to speculate on the political motivations behind the murder, there are clues regarding Mangione’s beliefs. On his Goodreads account, Mangione had read Industrial Society and Its Future, the manifesto of Ted Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, who carried out bombing attacks across the United States for 18 years.

Mangione had reportedly expressed that “violence is necessary for survival.” Though some initially interpreted the murder as a left-leaning act, social media posts suggest he expressed concerns about “wokeism,” secularization, and inclusivity programs, and allegedly supported Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign after his appointment as health secretary by Donald Trump. Despite these speculations, this case appears more aligned with vigilantism than terrorism.

In pursuit of vigilantism

Vigilantism, at its core, refers to an actor outside of legitimate authority—namely, the state—taking justice into their own hands. Such acts often arise when institutional punishments seem unattainable, typically manifesting as executions.

A hallmark of vigilantism is its tendency to divide public opinion. In the case of Brian Thompson’s murder, we see precisely this dynamic. Amid widespread frustrations with the U.S. healthcare system—particularly insurance companies—many people, combined with Mangione’s personal charisma, sympathized with the act of vigilantism, as evidenced on social media.

However, this is not the first instance of a vigilante act dividing society. In 1984, Bernhard Goetz shot five Black teenagers attempting to mug him on a New York City subway. Four of the five died at the scene, while one was permanently paralyzed. The press dubbed Goetz the “Subway Vigilante.”

While some, frustrated by rising crime rates, supported Goetz’s actions as justified, others argued he should face harsher punishment. Goetz ultimately served only 8.5 months in prison, not for the killings themselves but for possessing an unlicensed firearm in New York. To this day, many believe Goetz had been looking for an opportunity to enact a similar vigilante act.

A comparable vigilantism case occurred in Japan in 1976 during the Lockheed bribery scandal. Mitsuyasu Maeno, an actor and far-right extremist, viewed fellow far-right figure Yoshio Kodama’s alleged acceptance of bribes from the U.S. company Lockheed as a betrayal of Japan’s values.

After careful planning, Maeno decided a kamikaze attack—an act deeply symbolic in Japanese culture—was the appropriate means of retribution. On the morning of the attack, Maeno posed in military uniform before flying a rented Piper Cherokee aircraft into Kodama’s home.

While Kodama, still under trial, survived unscathed, two of his employees were injured, and Maeno perished in the attack. As with other vigilantism cases, Japanese society was divided: some, mistrusting the independence of the judicial bureaucracy, legitimized Maeno’s actions, while others dismissed the attack as egocentric.

Reforming institutions

The murder of Brian Thompson stands as a stark reflection of contemporary tensions surrounding justice, equality, and individual rights. Yet vigilantism is not a new phenomenon.

In critical areas such as healthcare or judicial systems, institutional failures severely erode public trust—not just in institutions but in the “system” and the “state” itself. Historical examples demonstrate that vigilantism often exacerbates societal polarization and undermines communal trust.

Moreover, in today’s social media-driven world—where algorithms confine individuals to echo chambers—such acts of violence can garner troubling levels of public support.

While the murder may appear “authentic” or unprecedented, it is neither the first case of vigilantism nor, unfortunately, likely to be the last. These cases—and the public support they sometimes generate—should serve as a warning, compelling us to reflect on the systemic failures that foster such acts.

Ultimately, the murder of Brian Thompson underscores the urgent need for institutional reforms—not only to improve systems like healthcare or justice but also to restore societal trust in the social contract. Without collective resolve and dialogue to address these systemic flaws, the recurrence of such events remains inevitable.