Hilarious reason for Luigi Mangiones barefoot loafers without socks courtroom look revealed

Luigi Mangiones courtroom fashion faux pas last month happened because he did not like how his socks looked, prosecutors have claimed.

The suspected UnitedHealthcare CEO shooter stunned his fans by wearing loafers and no socks during a February court appearance in New York.

Prosecutors revealed the reason for his questionable fashion choice in a court document responding to recent requests from his lawyers on Wednesday.

Most jailed defendants wear jail uniforms at routine court dates, but Mangione was allowed to change into clothes brought by his legal team. 

However, prosecutors said they found his adoring fans snuck notes into his socks, which he then opted not to wear during his appearance. 

A court officer intercepted the heart-shaped note, which urged the accused killer to know there are thousands of people wishing you luck, according to prosecutor Joel Seidemann.

The note - plus another heart-shaped message addressed to someone called Joan - was hidden in a piece of cardboard at the center of a new pair of Argyle socks. Its not clear who wrote the note or slipped it into the socks.

Mangione, 26, donned the socks but later took them off because he felt that "they did not look good," according to Seidemann.

Luigi Mangiones courtroom fashion faux pas happened because he did not like how his socks looked

Prosecutors said they found his adoring fans snuck notes into his socks, then he opted not to wear them

His feet were then pictured crossed under the table wearing brown loafers, ankle cuffs, and exposed skin - which sent the internet into a frenzy.

The revelation came in response to Mangiones bid for him to get a laptop to review legal material in his cell while he awaits trial in the December shooting of Brian Thompson.

Objecting to the proposed laptop as a request for unmerited special treatment, Seidemann wrote special treatment to the defendant´s benefit was violated when (prosecutors) made accommodations for defendants fashion needs during the last court appearance.

Mangione is facing a slew of charges in the Big Apple, and is also facing lesser charges of false identification and weapons charges in Pennsylvania.

In other recently filed court documents, his attorney Karen Agnifilo argued that police leaked writings they said belonged to the now 26-year-old and labeled them a manifesto - thereby spreading fear in an effort to justify prosecutors terrorism charge.

The writings were released shortly after Mangione was arrested at a Pennsylvania McDonalds following a five-day search for the masked man who gunned down Brian Thompson outside a New York City hotel.

He was allegedly found with a 9-millimeter pistol and silencer, clothing that matched the apparel worn by the shooter in surveillance footage, and a notebook describing an intent to whack an insurance company CEO, according to court filings.

But Agnifilo now says there is absolutely no evidence to suggest her client wrote the so-called manifesto as she called out prosecutors for sharing the message.

His feet were then pictured crossed under the table wearing brown loafers, ankle cuffs, and exposed skin - which sent the internet into a frenzy

Since the inception of this case, law enforcement has consistently leaked writings purported to be written by Mr. Mangione, while also prejudicially labeling these writings a "manifesto" to the media, she argued.

By releasing these writings to the public and calling them a manifesto, law enforcement is responsible for causing the very public alarm that they are now trying to attribute to Mr. Mangione, which is the basis for charging him with the enhanced charge of murder in the first degree as an act of terrorism.

There is absolutely no evidence that Mr. Mangione ever released the writings that law enforcement is attributing to him publicly; any publishing was done by law enforcement, she continued.

By painting Mr. Mangione as a "terrorist" and releasing a purported "manifesto," law enforcement is intending to prejudice Mr. Mangione and cause the public alarm and fear that they now attribute to him, Agnifilo argued.

This is problematic and fatal to the governments charge of murder in the first degree, which requires said murder to be in furtherance of an act of terrorism "intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population," and insofar as it is law enforcement that is responsible for said intimidation.

This behavior by law enforcement is wildly irresponsible, as they are spreading a message to the public intended to incite individuals who may as a result believe Mr. Mangione held purported viewpoints.