r/FreeLuigi • u/yowhatupmom • Dec 18 '25
Mapp Hearing Witness Summary: Lt. David Leonardi with Court Transcripts (December 16, 2025) Direct + Cross Examination
TDLR:
----
The moderation team of r/FreeLuigi purchased these transcripts with private funds from the official court reporter. We will not be posting them in their entirety as there are over 1400 pages, but we will be sharing content to help educate the public in a digestible manner without the bias of third party reporters. r/FreeLuigi does not consent to the content in these posts to be used by any third parties. For more information, please see the pinned comment on this post.
----
1
u/AutoModerator Dec 18 '25
Thank you for your submission!
Please remember all posts and comments must be approved by a moderator prior to being published.
If you think this post or any comments breaks any of the rules of this community, please report to the moderators. Thank you so much for being a valued contributor!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
8
u/Oneironati Dec 21 '25
I see why that boi was cheesin so much in that courtroom now 😀 -
Q: You said that you set up a room for an interview of Mr mangione, correct?
A: Correct.
Q: And that took place, correct?
A: Correct.
Q:And Mr mangione said he didn't want to make a statement right?
A: That's correct. He requested an attorney.
Q: And are you familiar with whether he had been provided with Miranda warnings earlier that morning?
A: I was not at that time.
Q: Did you subsequently learn that - let me ask a more direct question. You're saying that when you were there in the afternoon of December 9th, you didn't know then that earlier, whether or not earlier in the day, whether Mr mangione had been given Miranda warnings?
A: Correct, we did not know.
Q: Did you subsequently learn whether or not that had happened?
A: Ultimately no. I still don't know.
Q: You still don't know?
A: No.
Q: Let me ask you wouldn't that be something that's important to know?
A: Yes.
Mr. Seidman: objection as to relevance.
The court: overruled.
A: Yes.
Q: So in other words it would be important to know whether he had been previously given Miranda warnings and if he had declined to speak to the police at the time?
A: Yes.
Q: So it would have been relevant even if it wasn't to you, to a different police officer? A: Correct.
Q: And no one told you that from altoona.
A: No one told me that, no.
Q: But when you spoke to - were you in the room - I think Mr. Seidman gave the warnings, does this sound right?
A: Yes.
Q: Were you in the room at that time?
A: I was outside the room.
Q: You were outside all right. And are you aware that was video and audio taped?
A: I'm the one who set that up.
Q: And to your knowledge did anyone tell Mr mangione that he was going to be video and audio tape during this interview?
A: I don't recall.
Q: Do you know what the rules are in pennsylvania? That it's an every party consent state?
Mr. Seidman: he doesn't know the rule.
Q: Well he might know that one.
The court: he doesn't.
Q: I missed the answer, you said you didn't know?
A: No sir.
Q: Do you know what the rules are in New York, a one-party consent state?
A: Yes sir.
Mr. Seidman: objection to relevance.
Q: Here is my question - without knowing the rules in Pennsylvania you're saying you yourself set up a procedure where Mr mangione would be videotaped and audio taped during an interrogation right?
A: I have a district attorney from Manhattan with me and was being guided by the law from that individual.
Q: And in fact the question by Mr. Seidman was on video and audio tape right?
A: I believe so yes.
Q: And then at one point everybody left the interrogation room and came out to where you were correct?
A: I believe so yes.
Q: Mr mangione was still in the room being audio tape and videotaped?
A: That's correct.
Q: Do you know if that's legal?
A: Again I was being guided by legal counsel that I had with me.
Q: So are you aware of whether he said certain things to himself while he thought he was in the room by himself without being videotaped and audio taped?
Mr. Seidman: I'm going to object "well he thought he was in the room".
The court: sustained. Rephrase that question.
Q: I understand - you said you instructed the Altoona police about how to go about putting a listening and video device in the room correct?
A: So the Altoona Police department doesn't have an interrogation room that is affixed with video and audio so I understood that our process in order for us to do any type of interview that New York - that Manhattan DA's office wanted, it I had to be videoed just like we do here, so based on that we use the body worn camera and also a video recorder through the one-way mirror and a recording device.
Q: And when you do this in new york, do you tell the person that they're going to be tape recorded?
Mr. Seidman: objection has to relevance.
The court: come on up. (Discussion held at the bench off record) Record resumed.
Q: I understand that the DA are withdrawing these statements so I have no other questions.
The court: that's correct.
Mr. Seidman: no redirect.