Nothing like jail time to radicalized someone more. Judge is playing 5d cheese by providing motivation.
Getting her in touch with the people that can get the job done.
Judge is playing 5d cheese…
Man, cheese with 2 extra dimensions has to be really delicious.
Mind blowing really
I’m guessing one of the dimensions is time, so we’re talking about an aged cheese. The fifth dimension, I’ve no idea what it could be
It’s very similar to how it feels to chew 5 gum
You couldn’t handle it!
This will definitely ease tensions among the masses and rouse support for the Healthcare execs lmao
Won’t someone think of the CEOs.
removed by mod
I think of them all the time actually…
I imagine the “Delay, Deny, Depose” didn’t get her in trouble nearly as much as the “You people are next” part. Yeah, that’s a bit hostile there.
“a bit hostile” -> straight to jail
Do not threaten commerce, they don’t tolerate that. The money must flow at all costs.
I can agree with your statement, but is it an act of terrorism? I don’t think her threat should be categorized as terrorism.
I don’t think it’s terrorism either as I understand. Terrorism targets citizens for leverage.
There’s no direct threat there more than saying the boogeyman will get you. People threaten marginalized communities like this on TV, radio and social media every day with no impunity because it’s just vague enough not to count because stochastic terrorism is totally cool for SOME people.
Clearly she was saying that they were next to receive a gift basket for all their hard work in denying claims for profit
Please, marginalized people get more explicitly threatening crap said to them all the time and people rarely get arrested or charged for that. She’s being charged because the system wants to make an example out of her. The judge basically said so himself at the bail hearing,
“I do find that the bond of $100,000 is appropriate considering the status of our country at this point,” the judge said.
Ouch. “This place is a shit show,” the judge said. (Not really, just fixed it for him).
100k for a threat made in reaction to what was likely fear for her life, or the life of her loved one.
It’s pretty amazingly cruel.
They need to appeal this. Clear judicial error. If he wouldn’t have done this 3 weeks ago legally he can’t do it now.
Not saying you are wrong about the marginalized, but in this case she made, what could be considered threatening, a call to a health care provider that was not only actionable, but entirely recorded.
“The system” won’t make an example out of her, “Exhibit A” will. That’s the difference.
It’s both.
$100k bond for a threat that is neither specific nor credible is absurd.
If it were a first time offender threat against a normal person (which is more specific), at most it would result in probation and a restraining order.
The bond is ridiculous, but the arrest wasn’t.
Yet, if Trump said it live in front of cameras, it would be “a joke.”
In Trump’s case it would be on 5th avenue in broad daylight.
Just a joke though.
Seems like free speech to me?
First amendment doesn’t cover true threats. So it all kinda depends on context and whether who it was said to felt as though they were in real danger.
That doesn’t seem like a true threat to me.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/true-threats
A person speaking out of anger who the person does not have a real reason to fear and believe they’ll follow through is not a true threat. Saying “you’re next” is clearly hyperbole. There’s no chance she loses this case. They’re just trying to make an example out of her for the moment to scare other people.
You might say it is a true threat in and of itself. There is very good reason for people to believe the state will arrest more people who use this speech. They’re assuming this is true, because they want them to fear them in order to stop them. This is what we call terrorism, except it’s the state doing it so I guess it’s totally fine.
Bullshit. Denying life saving care is a much much much more direct threat to life, as are abortion denials. The concept of a true threat depends mainly on whether you are an acceptable threat maker or not.
Except if you are actively dying and I refuse to help in my personal capacity, I’m not threatening to harm you. I’m just not helping you from imminent harm (presuming I didn’t cause that imminent harm). Now if you’re on fire and I’m currently watering my lawn with the hose when you ask for help, it’s shitty of me to not help. But if you’re in a gunfight with someone and you’re asking me to render aid as they are still a threat, sorry pal.
E: Apparently some ignorant idealists don’t like making a distinction. Tough shit. From a legal standpoint, that’s how it works.
Hot take here in Lemmy. Get it while it’s still hot!
I’m just not helping you from imminent harm
Doesn’t the law protect that in some way? I thought medical professionals were compelled to save lives first and then “worry” about costs later with the Hippocratic Oath and all. Or maybe it’s limited to some instances? Idk, I’m not from the US and our system works way differently.
That is a “good Samaritan” law. They can compel you to help, but that could be calling law enforcement. That’s also why in my examples the gunfight still had a deadly threat. No laws compel you to put yourself in danger to help.
Now if you’re on fire and I’m currently watering my lawn with the hose when you ask for help, it’s shitty of me to not help.
Inaction is still an action. If you have the ability to save someone and you let them die, you may as well have started the fire yourself.
The only real point you have is that you don’t render aid when there’s an active threat.
Even more importantly, it matters who you’re threatening. Your wife? Meh, no biggie. An insurance company? Straight to jail.
I’ve met victims of domestic violence who were threatened much worse than “you guys are next” so I’m not buying this as anything other than the system trying to use her as an example.
Oops, I completely misinterpreted your comment. Not sure what etiquette says, but I feel silly and am removing mine.
I agree that this person saying “you guys are next” is not a threat to the degree that it should be chargeable, and that she’s being made an example of.
Just want to point out that your example implies domestic violence is a lower level of violence, and as such this shouldn’t count as a real threat?
Reading comprehension ain’t for everyone.
Edit: on some reflection that might be a rude reply if you don’t already know that domestic violence threats in the US are largely ignored.
Thanks for the reflection edit! I don’t think I’m stupid, but you’re right that I didn’t read your comment correctly. Do you want me to remove my original reply?
Edit: decided to remove
I recommend doing it like I did below the horizontal lines down there 👇
_btw, tap me 4 formatting tip_
To strike through, use ~~ before and after the offending text:
~~This text would be strike’d~~
The United States has the most equitable healthcare system on earth.Edit: sorry about that, cat stepped on my keyboard
For something really embarrassing -
Original embarrassing comment:
I hate Star Trek
Newly edited comment:
edit: removed opinion I reconsidered
Were their threats recorded? The fact that people have said worse doesn’t change the fact that it was a threat.
Talk to any call center worker at any shitty company in the US and they’ll tell you they’ve heard the same thing or worse before. This isn’t new for shitty companies at all, they’re just trying to make it seem like it’s new in response to this situation and not something that they’ve been ignoring for decades.
Ohh good point. Have a call center friend; heard stories…
From the article’s source article:
“She’s been in this world long enough that she certainly should know better that you can’t make threats like that in the current environment that we live in and think that we’re not going to follow up and put you in jail,” said Lakeland Police Chief Sam Taylor.
I thought we had a legal definition of a real threat, and this isn’t it.
This man on the other hand was released after his EIGHTH stalking arrest in three years.
https://www.cbsnews.com/texas/news/plano-man-8th-arrest-stalking-harassing-smu-students/
Yeah, well, what’s she going to do? Hire an expensive lawyer? If she’s that upset by being denied, she’s likely too poor to play the U.S. justice game.
But someone who is stalking their ex and threatens to kill them the cops won’t do anything about.
Well is the ex a CEO?
“You people are next” does seem pretty threat-ish, however:
After being charged with threats to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism, a judge set Boston’s bond at $100,000.
That is completely out of touch with what happened. “You people are next” not an act of terrorism.
It’s easily argued that the statement was a warning, not a threat.
It is towards the ruling class. They can’t let this grow into something that threatens them.
It’s hard for me to agree this is a threat after media has spent years explaining why all of Trump’s language is actually never threatening or inciting violence, even after his language incited violence.
The first amendment to the Constitution of the United States does not protect speech that threatens or incites violence.
Without the means to do it it’s not a threat.
How do you know she didn’t have means to do it?
That’s up for the
copscourts to prove. This is a sham case. If trump said that shit he would be applauded “oh that’s just trump being trump!”He literally said that Liz Cheney should be shot in the face, and nothing happened.
No, that’s up to the courts and investigators to prove. Cops did the right thing here, for once.
That’s what I meant
Incorrect
Is it really a threat though? Idk. She’s repeating some words and saying “you’re next”, but not what they’re next for.
It seems pretty obvious what she was implying, but that’s what a trial is for. She may not have meant it, but it is clearly a threat of violence.
In all honesty it can be perceived as them being next in getting their claim denied and not only as the threat it as well be perceived.
It’s so very close to Delay, Deny, Defend: Why Insurance Companies Don’t Pay Claims and What You Can Do About It that it could as well be a misunderstanding as a threat.They are going to have a tough time proving that in court. I bet this will get pleaded out to some small charge though.
If someone referenced a recent assassination then said, “You people are next,” would you seriously not take that as a threat?
I might.
That doesn’t necessarily prove it was meant this way and because we’re talking potential criminal offense it has to be proven it was meant as a threat if I’m not mistaken.Yes, that’s proven in the courts, not by the cops.
She said something that could easily be taken for a terroristic threat, given the context. It would be a bad thing to not take terroristic threats seriously. Whether she was being serious or not is irrelevant regarding her arrest.
I worked in a call center for several years and received no shortage of bizarre threats. Never once did I feel that any of the threats were worth being concerned about. Granted these would be threats over lack of warranty coverage on usually budget model phones so very different from health insurance where the dollar values and stakes are many orders of magnitude higher
You’re next…to get no health insurance cover.
If she were a parrot yeah sure, but there she is, and yet, featherless
I don’t know about insurance but I worked once alongside a Google call center DB team, for adwords and they received lots of messages like these over inbound AND outbound calls, emails or chats.
Google is EXTREMELY strict with threats issued to their own employees, even third party contractors, to the point they would ABSOLUTELY and without chance of appeals blacklist people like this person.
To dimension the sheer scale of being blacklisted by Google, that means that every IP address they ever registered you using, be it by VPN or whatever, gets thrown in a black hole you can never escape
Google services or accounts you linked using those IPs? Fucked forever.
If you were part of the unlucky people who get a static IP set, get ready to start a lengthy process just to remove your account from being associated to that one.
Marketing manager accounts? Screwed for life. Might as well say goodbye to your job and consider never advertising through adwords again.
And I’m not even touching what happens with devices, payment processors, YouTube, educative domains and, worst of all, corporate compute instances.
If Google didn’t destroy you in those cases, your company and your bank certainly will.
So yeah, if Google takes that shit seriously, you bet a healthcare provider will do the same
That seems impossible to manage… you would cripple google by running a botnet tainting millions of IPs that will get cycled to legitmate users.
Ah yes, more of that freedom we crow so much about as our brand.
The company she spoke to is free to take her premium payments for years, then to kill her through claim denial, and she’s free say “thank you for taking my premiums all those years and now denying my claim” and then die quietly.
Herp derp Freedom🇺🇸
They’re determined aren’t they? To just completely make Luigi a martyr.
I’m surprised they aren’t just burying the news completely.
Doing this shit is just throwing gasoline on the fire
Lol, catch phrase or actual corporate practice? Because quoting a company memo to said company is apparently a threat.
The depose part was the assassin’s, and she followed it with, “You people are next.” context is important, and context makes this a threat.
See, telling your supposed enemy your intentions was the first mistake. If you didn’t intend to go through with it, then it was just an empty threat. Either way it’s dumb.
According to the affidavit, 42-year-old Briana Boston used the phrase during a call with BlueCross BlueShield about a denied claim.
“Delay, Deny, Depose. You people are next,” she allegedly said near the end of the call.
The “You people are next” line certainly adds some context to this story.
A bit, but it still doesn’t explain how this warrants terrorism charges and $100,000 bail. A visit from the police and probation or anger management courses? OK I still don’t really agree but it makes some sense. But not prison time. She’s getting punished harder than many rapists and child molesters.
MAGA paraded with more direct threats of violence on signs, after Jan 6th, with no accountability.
Why wouldn’t an insinuation of terrorism warrant a terrorism charge and a lot of bail money? That doesn’t make sense.
Remember this the next time the cops tell someone they can’t do anything about a stalker or angry ex threatening to kill them until they actually act. They can do something. They choose not to.
Judges too! He set her bail at 100K. Rapists get less than that.
The whole fucking system is as crooked as a $3 bill
I’ve had a loved one threatened by a drunk/high driver before. They (the asshole) nearly ran them off the road after swerving into the oncoming traffic lane, and my relative literally was doing nothing but drive the speed limit.
We had the full license plate number, and we met with the police after calling it in. The police then said they couldn’t do a thing. They didn’t even put out a call to get this guy off the road. They seemed legitimately bothered that we even reported the crime.
So, no free speech in the US after all?
🌎👩🏼🚀🔫👩🏼🚀
Free speech doesn’t conver threats.
So, Trump will be arrested as well?
He should be, yes.
Never has been.
And also shouldn’t be
You can free speech on X and truthsocial about shooting Mexicans. But you can’t free speech on other platforms about shooting CEOs.
Because “free speech” can only align with the platform you are on. If it doesn’t align, then it is some other form of speech which is not allowed. Very simple.
The lower classes must be kept in check otherwise they might realize how easy it would be for this to happen again. So let’s give a person a 100k bond, charge them with an act of terrorism for saying words fhat are literally used to describe the techniques of insurance companies
Depends on how much money you have.
Paid speech
Elon Musk could tweet about this (he won’t, though, because he’s a shit-eating ass nozzle) and nothing would happen.
Nothing. Not a thing. They can do anything they want, but the poors get shit on and jailed.
After being charged with threats to conduct a mass shooting or an act of terrorism, a judge set Boston’s bond at $100,000.
“I do find that the bond of $100,000 is appropriate considering the status of our country at this point,” the judge said.
For responding with the catchphrase insurance companies themselves created and live by. This isn’t the suspect’s catchphrase, but apparently even uttering these words back at health insurance companies is too much for them.
Well, “depose” isn’t pat of it. The killer added that part.
Well, depose isn’t actually a type of pat, so I don’t know what you are on about.
You said:
the catchphrase insurance companies themselves created and live by.
And I just said she added the part that the killer added too - depose.
Actually, you didn’t, if we are being pandantic about it. 🙃
Okay, that’s what I was trying to convey.
“you people are next,” also isn’t part of it.
You mean basically the same sort of vague threat Trump has thrown around for decades that no one does anything about when it isn’t directed at the rich, just at society in general?
This discussion has nothing to do with Trump. But, Trump should absolutely be in prison for his threats.
Ah, sorry, didn’t realize all we had to do to solve the world’s problem was switch over to idealistic make believe land.
The status of our country? What does that mean exactly?
The plebians are uppity
Correct, but the best way to deal with a moron talking in dog whistles is to ask what they mean by that and play dumb till they say the quiet part aloud.
Sure, but the judge isn’t in this thread, so…
Thank goodness for that freedom of speech we have …
Just dont say what I dont wanna hear
Well, she actually said “Delay, Deny, Depose. You people are next,”
That’s a pretty direct threat. The headline is misleading.
Pointing out that what someone is doing puts a target on their back isn’t necessarily you threatening them.
That’s worth 100k bond? Really? That’s more than voluntary manslaughter.
I don’t think so, no. Context is everything though. Before the assassination, just free speech, after, a threat of significant violence.
Also, free Luigi!
I suppose so, but the thought process of just jailing any verbal dissent… how long can, a healthcare system of all things, run on fear?
Well, it’s not just any dissent, it a threat of violence. If she didn’t say, “you’re next” I’d be agreeing with most of the people in this thread.
Whoever posted this left that part out of the post. I wonder why.
They’re afraid of the common man now
They are supposed to be…
I know
Where is the actual threat? You people are next, to get delayed, denied, or deposed.
It’s because she said they’re next, and it was recorded. Threats aren’t protected speech.
The state threatens people all the time.
