Reminds me of the case way back in the day with someone who pirated music getting insane fines and how it was juxtaposed with the relatively small settlement an airline had to pay when its negligence actually killed people.
Unpopular opinion: When the minimum prison sentence for child abuse is higher than that for murder, every child abuser has a strong incentive to kill their victim, getting rid of the most dangerous witness with no further risk to themselves.
You know what? Everyone deserves freedom of speech, and threatening healthcare CEOs is not, in my opinion, a breach of it. There is a huge difference between threatening vulnerable minorities and threatening invulnerable minorities.
You have to make sure you make threats so outlandish that you couldn't possibly execute them, like "I'm going to grab Trump by the ankle and spin around really fast, and then let go, launching him directly into the sun"
"Freedom of speech" in US Law means that the government cannot suppress ideas, expressions, or beliefs so long as those ideas or beliefs do not harm specific peoples, nor negatively impact public health and morals, nor negatively impact national security. In some cases, it isn't allowed to promote harm of protected classes including race, religion, skin color, gender, or disability, but in the USA that often becomes a civil matter.
If I had my way we'd be even more strict about it: hate speech would be an actual crime and sexual orientations would also be protected classes.
So a woman quoting a murderer who assassinated an insurance company CEO, directly sending that quote to the insurance company that denied her claim, is not and will never be covered by freedom of speech.
Do you have any links to conservative takes on this? I know full well I am in a bubble and that’s the way I god damn like it. But in this case, knowing the universality of the sentiment would be really, umm, empowering?
The "you're next" after referencing a high profile murder is what actually did it.
Like, that's a credible threat. 15 years is fucking insane, and context is going to matter a lot. Did she just get denied cancer treatment for her 2 year old? Or told it's not insurance's fault doctors won't prescribe opioids? Or any of a million things in between.
That's why we have trials, to find out all that stuff. And if it's a jury trial I feel juries would be sympathetic.
The 100k is the real bullshit, but not owning guns doesn't mean much. It's insanely easy to buy a gun without a background check thru private seller loopholes.
But our bond system is insane, because the it causes judges to inflate the amount 10x. If you can afford to put it up, you get it all back later. A bondsman you pay 10%, they put up 90%, and they get the whole 100% back. Your 10% is their profit. If a bondsman thinks that's a good risk, why does the court consistently over estimate the risk?
Did anyone really think she was coming after them after that? No. She got heated on the phone and said something she shouldn't have.
It's not nothing. What she did was wrong, and it's reasonable for it to be a crime. We don't want to always have to investigate or deal with constant threats. However, she was neither credible nor specific, which are two major criteria. (Keep that in mind when you're posting here, by the way.) She committed a crime, but not one that should be very serious.
Thanks for the insight on the typical terms of bonds. Good info.
So eyes peeled on this one too I guess. They are making an example of her, I mean the judge plainly said so. We can’t let them get away with these excessive charges.
I didn’t kill anyone and I never will. But I will be damned if I let this moment fade into the next news cycle.
As a society, we are having the conversation about for-profit healthcare NOW!
Work any phone helpdesk job and you will be threatened six ways to Sunday by people who are upset over the most minor things.
Yes this incident came after very prominent consequences for an insurer in the US, but I would be hard pressed to believe that someone who works for a company that denies people lifesaving healthcare hasn’t heard worse.
This specific murder It isn't morally wrong. It isn't hypocritical. It isn't compromising some foundational pillar of being a human.
Those who stand at the top of a capitistic, private healthcare industry made a choice to create, perpetuate, secure, and promote a system which resulted in deaths of millions for the benefit of shareholders and themselves.
You don't have to qualify your indifference or quiet your support. There is no moral quandary here.
This has literally helped people already. Anthem undid an anesthesia policy reform which would have not covered it in procedures after a certain amount of minutes
She would have never been able to be charged before the patriot act. No weapons, no capacity to act on them, vague and unspecific. Its crazy how our freedoms have been eroded and how many folks seem to think thats just fine and dandy.
Indeed, when George unleashed that shit, Patriot Act, I told everyone we are one step closer to forming the SS or NKVD. Once again, we have Mango Mussolini with his merry band of racist thugs.
I have not liked it since the get go and fought it. Ugh I have these emails to a dem senator with have who came out of the military who is pretty good but to entrenched in the mindset. Still I never really felt it till this arrest. Chilling as fuck.
On the other hand when women complain about threats from stalkers the police do nothing. You might as well delete the word justice from this criminal justice system.
We should erect a giant bronze statue of Luigi. Put it in a road right near UHC's headquarters in Minnesota. Make them all drive past it each and every day on the way to work.
Two wrongs don’t make a right. She could have said DDD without “you people are next.”
Having said that, if we’re really judging people, and corporations are people, why isn’t the denial of health care seen as manslaughter? 70 people pass every day due to the lack of medical care in America. We have worse outcomes, shorter average life than other civilized countries.
When is a corporation sued for murder & sent to jail? I know it sounds crazy, but that’s the point. These systems aren’t making sense. They lack humanity. This is a bad, morally bankrupt system. Older Americans loves their Medicare: that’s socialism.
I saw someone else say this, but I hope they start rounding up the incels on Twitter saying “your body, my choice” as credible rape threats if what this woman said is going to be litigated with such fervor.
Prosecutors throw the book at people, sentences get reduced by dropping things, aclu better get on this and keep her from getting a stupid plea deal, and fight for free speech
Yeah, it's hard to judge how people ought to respond to plea deals, but 15 years is long enough where she doesn't have much incentive to take one unless it's for time served or probation or something tiny like that.
Because her alternative is to go into court and play all the audio and then let the jury imagine what they would do if they were getting f***** over, and let them remember all the times they've said things that are definitely not threats, but someone else could be an a****** and erroneously construe them as such. And you're always taking a gamble when you go to a jury trial, but that's not a bad gamble to take.
There is no goddamned way UHC doesn't pressure the prosecutor to drop this to avoid that recording going public because half the jury will be left with the same sentiment when they hear it. And when it is public they will have a lot more to deal with.
If this woman's lawyers are smart they call the bluff and say "why yes, let's get this out into trial, use discovery to add context, and play that recording". There's law, justice, but the most important thing sometimes when the moment is right is perception.
Meanwhile customer service agents have been hearing much worse than this for decades, actual direct threats not vague comments, and no one ever gave a shit before.
The thing about Jury Nullification is that you have to make it through the majority of a trial. 97-98% of criminal cases (in the U.S.) end in a plea deal without ever going to trial.
Sure, but that's on them. Taking a deal is always in the hands of the defendant. But if it looks like public opinion is on their side and the concept of jury Nullification has become common knowledge, that might be enough to substantially swing what's offered in those plea deals. Prosecutor might be generous to avoid the jury letting them off Scott free.
Did she say she was running for the presidency? Because in that case, she could take someone out on main street and she could grab them by the pussy too and nobody would say anything.
She should have tried to purchase a president or maybe purchase the presidency itself for a self pardon.
Free slave for the state of Florida. I mean, they might let her go in a few months, but slam that 15 years jail stay bill right on her. You really effed up on the "land of the free" over there.
That "when they came for the ..." had already happened. Years ago. Think on that. SL
Oh, I missed it it's f****** Florida. Anybody living in that state is taking their own life in their hands. No she does not deserve to have the book thrown at her but her likelihood of that happening is very high.
If Boston’s home is later found to have a bunch of disguises, a 3D-printed gun and a manifesto, I will, of course, eat my words and any hats that are available.
Those items will magically appear if needed for them to make a case.
Not likely she can win a civil suit. They needed probable cause to arrest her, and QI says that even if they lacked it, they're still off the hook. The judge has absolute immunity. That's it, even if she beats the rap, she can't beat the ride.
When the court decides that IS the people deciding, judges are a public office and the jury is literally just a group of people who have to make a unanimous decision. You dropped your red star.
I think she's guilty (you can't be making threats like that on the heels of someone actually committing an act of violence) but even that is too much time. IDEK if she deserves jail time at all. I'd rather see her get a fine and maybe a month or two of community service.
I don't believe that "You people are next." is a direct threat.
Sounds pretty direct to me, especially in the context of recent events. I don’t fault the CS rep at all for reporting it to her superiors and the police. Totally reasonable to be wary of copycat crimes or just similar acts of violence against healthcare insurers in general.
I don’t think she was actually making a threat, but she sure chose to sound like she was, which was fucking stupid on her part. Given how the rest of the evidence makes it clear the threat wasn’t serious, I don’t think she should be charged as such, but perhaps a lesser charge that affords her a fine or something. Can’t let people get away with that shit, but charging her like she’s making a serious threat of violence is a waste of taxpayer money.
Just because the maximum penalty for a crime is 15 years of prison it doesn't mean that's what she's going to get. In all likelyhood she's getting a fine at best. This is just feeding the outrage machine once again.