Briana Boston could get 15 years in prison?

[Swede]

Briana Boston had reportedly just had a medical claim denied when she said to the person on the phone: ‘Delay, deny, depose’

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/dec/14/police-arrest-briana-boston

Online fundraiser for Briana

https://www.instagram.com/miaminewtimes/p/DDiGPt7SGcS/

[Lonestarblue]

1. What happened to free speech!

[Kid Berwyn]

3. Offer good for pre-qualified Repuglians only.

IOKIYAR works even for treason.

[RandomNumbers]

18. You're being sarcastic, I hope

Free speech means the government can't lock you up for opposing government policies.

Threats, or "shouting fire in a crowded theatre" are not protected speech.

Seriously, if something analogous was directed at a prominent Dem, what would we be saying? (I am referring to the part of her statement NOT posted in the OP).

Emphasis added:

Boston had reportedly just had a medical claim denied by her health insurance company, Blue Cross Blue Shield, and allegedly said to the person on the phone: “Delay, deny, depose. You people are next.” This appears to have been a reference to the words written on ammunition discovered at the scene of the killing of the UnitedHealthcare CEO, Brian Thompson.

Boston has apologized for what she said and reportedly told police she didn’t mean anything by it. And there’s no reason, with the information we have now, to think otherwise. Referencing a high-profile assassination was obviously extremely poor judgment on her part.

Personally, I think that absent any evidence that she was prepared to carry out her threat, she should be released and let this be a warning to her (which I think she has already recognized). But it is not a "free speech" case.

[sop]

2. Briana should demand a jury trial.

[Shermann]

4. She did say "You people are next."

That's problematic but probably doesn't rise to the level of being a serious crime. It depends on context way too much.

[MichMan]

5. "Delay, deny, depose. You people are next."

Why wasn't her entire quote included in the OP? For some reason, this is the third time on DU that the "You people are next" part has been conveniently omitted in a post.

Her comment was not directed at anyone with any executive authority, but some poor customer service representative who answers the phones.

[jimfields33]

7. I'm surprised that some are ok with this.

This was a direct threat. Those words were the exact same words used to gun down a guy recently. And she knew exactly what she was saying.

[NutmegYankee]

10. It doesn't meet the standard of a direct threat.

Her best bet right now is to go to a jury trial as soon as possible. This is a easy win for the defense under free speech.

[jimfields33]

12. She definitely deserves a fair trial.

She will get her day in court. And I’ll be fine with whatever the jury finds. But I just think it was too soon to be using those words to a customer service representative.

[NutmegYankee]

20. She's not going to be convicted.

The elements for a direct threat are simply not there. And if she can get to trial fast, the public outrage against insurance companies will help her considering her arrest is a gross over-reaction and clearly intended as a favor to corporate interests.

[Think. Again.]

13. That was obviously not a direct threat.

It could just as easily be taken as a sincere warning from someone concerned for others.

When a doctor tells a patient they are vulnerable to heart failure, it does not mean the doctor intends on causing them heart failure.

[MichMan]

15. It is because the target of the threat was an insurance company

Make a similar threat to a K-12 school after a recent hi profile shooting, or a Black family after the Floyd killing, and everyone here would be demanding justice, and prosecution to the fullest extent of the law.

[sop]

16. Florida's criminal threat laws can be found in Chapter 836 of the Florida Statutes.

Section 836.05 covers threats to kill or do bodily injury, and specifically addresses the making of threats:
"Threats to Kill or Do Bodily Injury makes it a crime to threaten someone with death or serious bodily injury, either verbally, in writing, or by electronic communication. Violation of this statute can result in felony charges."

This woman did not "threaten someone with death or serious bodily injury," her statement was ambiguous and vague. The law states if a statement is open to multiple interpretations and does not clearly convey an intent to cause fear or harm, it does not meet the legal definition of a criminal threat.

[hot2na]

17. This was not a friggin direct threat!

Give me break. This was nothing more than a pissed off mother who was pissed off about being denied coverage and said something she shouldn't have and apologized for it. She didn't have a friggin manifesto, or bomb making materials, or anything even remotely like that.

Are you OK now that anyone who now gets angry at the ever worsening customer service and health care in this country can get hauled away for 15 years for a verbal indiscretion.

Wake up.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

6. Some threats are more equal than others.

[cadoman]

8. this is why it's worth paying attention to elections for district attorneys

They have discretion on what gets charged and their role in our justice system is not properly understood or appreciated by most of the public. VP Harris describes the power and responsibility of the role best:

With the swipe of a pen, someone can be charged with the lowest level offense, and because of the swipe of my pen, that person could be arrested, they could sit in jail for at least 48 hours, they could lose time from their work/family, maybe lose their job. They'd lose standing in their community, all because of the swipe of my pen.

We are fortunate that Vice President Harris understood the gravity of this power and used it for good. The white general attorneys in Florida are likely not so careful or intelligent or gracious with this power...

The upshot of this, is perhaps we are entering a time when online threats will be policed more seriously. The story author, (Arwa Mahdawi, pronouns unlisted) also raises the excellent point that they are threatened regularly and the police do nothing. But if the attorneys are protecting medical insurers it does create the implicit obligation to protect other members of the public as well.

The greatest measure of your strength, is not who you beat down, but who you lift up.

Amen sister. Who is this FL AG lifting up?

[Hotler]

9. How many has the orange one threatened? Liz Chaney. the whole J6 commission.

How may Dems & Libs did he threaten with military violence because they don't support him?

[Autumn]

11. Yeah but that doesn't count because... Justice?

[Dennis Donovan]

14. From the article

The police’s newfound zest for taking threats seriously hasn’t gone unnoticed online. As soon as Boston’s story went public, social media was full of viral stories from women about how the police had ignored harassment because “a crime hadn’t been committed”. The double standards are stark. I’d bet pretty much everything I have that if, instead of threatening a health insurance company, Ms Boston had gone to the police and told them that she was being stalked by an abusive ex-boyfriend, they’d have shrugged their shoulders and told her there was nothing they could do until she had actual proof her life was in imminent danger.

The seemingly disproportionate response to the 42-year-old mother’s outburst appears to be an attempt by law enforcement and the legal system to make an example of Boston. “I do find that the bond of $100,000 is appropriate considering the status of our country at this point,” the judge in Boston’s case said. It’s clear that, as resentment towards health insurance companies in the US reaches a boiling point, the judge and the police want to send a message. Mission accomplished, they’ve sent one! The message being: we care far more about the protection of wealthy CEOs than everyday violence against women.

That's where we are. Fucking shameful.

[MiHale]

19. Maybe we should the flood the Insurance companies...

Phone lines with one simple message…Delay, Deny, Despose. If millions of those calls came in it would dilute their insidious claims.

[MichMan]

21. Don't forget the "You people are next! " part

Make sure you target the lower level people in customer service too.

[Iggo]

22. She also said "you're next."

You left out the important part.

EDIT: I see a bunch of people pointed this out. (A good lawyer maybe gets this tossed, but I sure as hell ain’t paying for it.)

[ThePartyThatListens]

23. We're literally in thought crimes territory now

Class warfare is in effect.

This needs to come to a screeching halt.