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.
Why wouldn’t an insinuation of terrorism warrant a terrorism charge and a lot of bail money? That doesn’t make sense.
MAGA paraded with more direct threats of violence on signs, after Jan 6th, with no accountability.
“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 is towards the ruling class. They can’t let this grow into something that threatens them.
It’s easily argued that the statement was a warning, not a threat.
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.
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.
Remember folks, the company reps you interact with are generally not the ones making the rules they are paid to abide by. They’re working for a living, just like us.
With that, calling this an “act of terrorism” is an incredulous overreaction that just goes to show how badly they’re shitting their pants right now.
I am fairly certain insurance claim staff are used to hearing worse.
working for whom ?
We learned about individual responsibilities before, the slaying of poors is not just making a living, it’s not the corporate entity that is the evil it is the henchmen that have individual rights to say stop just like any soldier that is told to rape and plunder innocents
I’ve quit jobs because of ethical concerns before, these people don’t make a living just like me.
Imagine having the privilege of not having to compromise your morals because you can get a job just like that in this economy
Edit: yes, y’all apparently are rocks or trees. The rest of us need to eat for sustenance and have responsibilities beyond " what news headline will garner my outrage today"
I’d rather be homeless than get paid to kill innocent people.
I took that job and quit a month in for the same reason. I’d rather be in crippling debt than compromise my morals that badly. I couldn’t do it and look at myself in the mirror in the morning.
“I was just following orders.”
That’s exactly how they want you to think and be.
Angry at those with even a modicum more. But keep doing at Walmart and Amazon and every other conglomerate.Imagine not compromising my morals cost me a lot. Time after time. But as someone with a strong consciousness, I know it will cost me more to compromise on my personal values. It’s just that it’s not a monetary cost.
You sound like an economical slave, why do you accept the situation?
You sound like an economical slave, why do you accept the situation?
Because I need food and shelter otherwise I die.
there is shelter and food, plenty to go around- it’s being locked behind an amoral paywall.
do the moral things at your job and get fired over it. make it clear when you apply elsewhere why you were fired.
if we’re being forced to choose between doing the right thing and surviving, the system is broken AND those hoarding obscene amounts, living in luxury, making the decisions to further screw customers and employees in the name of investors and executives need to be addressed, one way or another.
…Im not saying any of this is easy, but the other option seems to be just try to be happy with the scraps they let us fight over? no thank you.
They’re working for a living, just like us.
They’re part of the machine that sucks the blood of the people. I wouldn’t advocate violence, but they’re not worthy of our respect.
They think they’re making an example. That this will have a chilling effect.
They’re wrong. All this is going to do is radicalize even more people. As it should.
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.
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?
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.
This occurred in Deregulated Fucking Florida and I thought the damn MAGATs are for freedom of speech.
Only for billionaires or corporations
My my aren’t we the butthurt bunch these days? heh
Seriously this is fairly extreme given the public’s delight in the shooting.
What about free speach?
Freeze Peach is only when they’re calling for war and lynching people they don’t like. When it comes to ACTUAL controversy you go to jail right away!
Don’t forget the capitalist ideology based on profiting from the denial of basic human needs. Not just free but completely indoctrinated!
I knew those frozen peach yogurts were up to something
nothing controversial here, almost all of us want to do something like this but are either too chicken or have dependents that we do not want to leave behind alone by going to jail.
It doesn’t cover threats of violence.
Are u saying quoting someone who committed violence is a threat of violence? What if i where to say liberty, equality, fraternity is that a threat of guillotine?
Saying, “you people are next,” isn’t quoting anyone, but it plus the quote of the assassin is clearly a threat.
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.
Regardless whether you support her general conduct, I think we can all rally around one tenet here:
Don’t harass a shitty company’s T1 support out of priciples against the company in general.They’re in no better position to effect change in the system than you are. They exist only to be slightly more competent phone robots, turning your whiney noise into itemized actions, and filter those actions down to a restricted subset of system commands the company permits them to do.
If anything, they’re on our level of the totem pole. Any outrage directed at them for actions of their broader company are a gross misdirection and wholly counterproductive.
I don’t know who this lady was speaking to on the phone. But if it was some minimum wage phone bank slave who is just the ablative frontline of the customer support hotline, I don’t support her threat in that context.
This is a dumb take. Their frontline workers should take the brunt of what the public feels. That is the point as you can’t get to anyone higher up. Maybe people won’t want to work there anymore and they will have to pay much higher wages to attract people.
Sounds like a win to me. Company goes under because no one wants to work for them knowing the public hates them or they will get paid enough they don’t care.
In your world we can’t show hate because someone isn’t paid enough and it isn’t their decision. It’s not their fault. But then you can’t access the person who is at fault so there is nothing you can do. This is fundamentally broken concept and is akin to resignation.
Low wage phone workers HAVE been taking the brunt of this shit. It just never mattered to CEOs until now because they never thought theyd be the ones to get the bullet. They probably expected a mass shooting at one if their call centers or something. You know, nothing that hurts them directly.
The worst part is call centers often have policies that say they aren’t allowed to hang up. So they have to sit there and take the abuse. I wonder what the depression and suicide rates are for call center workers…
The point is people are fucking desperate, told to be happy they have a job, and end up in the employment version of an abusive relationship. And like folks in abusive relationships, we should cheer for them to leave while also recognizing it can be quite difficult to do just that.
Their frontline workers should take the brunt of what the public feels.
Yes. That is the job. But the fact that they already take the brunt doesn’t justify anyone screaming/abusing/threatening/ect the CSR.
Sounds like a win to me. Company goes under because no one wants to work for them knowing the public hates them or they will get paid enough they don’t care.
A win for whom? What exactly do you get out of it? Satisfaction? Is it just some kind of flaccid moral victory or something?
If this were actually the case, quite a lot of businesses would’ve gone under a long time ago. Most of them still pay shit wages.
In the meantime, real people are negatively affected by the assholery of customers every single day.
This is not a win for the workers. It’s hard enough being forced to spend most of your life working to make just enough money to scrape by, let alone being screamed at, insulted, condescended to, ect.
But then you can’t access the person who is at fault so there is nothing you can do.
except to berate the CSR, apparently. There’s definitely nooo way to voice one’s concerns while speaking like a respectful, emotionally competant human being.
Wait, what does flipping out on them accomplish again?
Good we agree it is their job. This was not really a threat and let’s be honest because of the power difference this lady is facing actual jail time whereas the worker faces nothing.
As I explained, it is a win if CSR don’t want to work for the company unless they are paid more. At this time in history there is a glut of jobs. No one is forcing these people to work for this shit company.
Making an obvious statement out of frustration is not berating. This lady did not even curse the CSR out. I mean you are really just siding with the corporation under the guise of protecting the CSR agent.
Having worked as a CSR for years I can definitely say this was no where near flipping out. Nice try though.
This was not really a threat and let’s be honest because of the power difference this lady is facing actual jail time
I haven’t even made a single comment thus far about what she said, but I absolutely get why she said it. The fact that she’s facing jail time is absurd.
the worker faces nothing.
What we say to others can and often does have an effect on their mental health. Being forced to sit and take abuse and harassment with no recourse isn’t “nothing”. bffr
As I explained, it is a win if CSR don’t want to work for the company unless they are paid more
That’s not how the real world works, though. The majority of us are forced into our jobs because they need money to exist. Even if they wanted to leave, the job market fucking sucks. Not to mention, a lot of the jobs that exist are at other, equally shitty companies. Not much of a choice there.
Making an obvious statement out of frustration is not berating.
Again, I neither said nor implied that it was. I made it pretty clear that I was responding to this specific statement:
Their frontline workers should take the brunt of what the public feels.
The result of getting “the brunt of what the public feels” inherently includes being berated, insulted, ect. I’m sure you’ve experienced as a CSR; as have I. Countless times.
I mean you are really just siding with the corporation under the guise of protecting the CSR agent.
I’d love to hear you elaborate on this claim. It certainly is an interesting one.
My entire point is that I believe (most) people, CSRs in particular, simply deserve to be treated with respect… even when the conversation is about a problem that upsets you. It’s not exactly a complicated argument; nor is it much to ask for.
Now that I think about it, not even one of my points was actually addressed in your response. Nice try, though!
It is clear your just spinning your wheels at this point unable to grasp anything I am saying. You think CSR agents deserve respect because reasons. I believe they are the front facing staff so they can and will deal with customers who get upset.
Furthermore this was a disproportionate response that only a bootlicker would defend. I would not of reported anything as this agent. It is much like calling the cops unnecessarily. Sure you can do it, and it may be within your rights, but is a dick move.
The CSR agent is not blameless here and I doubt their professionalism as I did endure a lot and always managed to turn the call around by empathizing with the client. It was not always possible but the only times I reported someone was for repeated harassment.
As I said considering the situation your insistence on supporting the CSR without taking into context what actually happened makes you out to be a corporate apologist. If not, perhaps you are just being disingenuous.
As I already stated there is a glut a jobs and if their company faced staffing shortages because people decided they did not want to work for them it would be a good thing. Shitty companies that do shitty things lose employees.
This would force them to raise their wages which would cut into their profits. This is about the only negative thing that can happen to a company. There have been many companies that have gone under because of scandalous behavior and people refusing to work for them.
Finally the whole blameless thing is pretty rich when you think about it. No one is forced to work there and they are the front line for the corporation.
They serve the system killing people through overpriced shitty healthcare. They don’t make the decisions, but in this company they are there to stonewall people so they can’t get help when their claims are denied.
Just like soldiers they are just following orders. Oh wait lady malaria says we can’t blame them. No, this is really ridiculous when you think about it. I won’t blame the people helping to kill me because they are low on the totem poll in the corporate world.
So to some it up. Yes, we should should respect all humans, no this was not right, and CSR are not blameless. Cheers!
Found a Karen on Lemmy wow
Hey guys, I found the bootlicker!
Charging at them directly where they want you to charge, their designated fall guys, sounds like a superbly inefficient strategy. You are pinching a huge amount of bystanders caught in the middle to for a proportionally negligible effect.
Yes, if someone who is desperately asking for a proverbial (maybe literal?) bullet in their head puts a hostage between you and them, can you still plow right through the hostage and get them that way? Exhaust everyone they can possibly field to eventually break through to them? Sure, in principle. That can balloon to an absurdly high casualty count, though. Is it really all worth it?
It’s a lot more efficient to, wherever possible, sidestep around the hostage, get behind them and strike directly at the problem. That’s exactly what Luigi Mangione did, and its effectiveness is exactly what’s being applauded.
If your rebuttal is that what Luigi did is far more of a risky path to take, you don’t wish to take a risk like that, and you’d rather faff about kicking low level grunts instead because that’s an easier, lower-consequence option for you that theoretically makes progress, okay, I guess. I personally think you’re just wasting your time and energy pissing off only the wrong people. Only big stunts are gonna move the needle, in my opinion.
Killing one CEO has changed nothing, so perhaps both strategies seem fruitless. Of course one involves taking someone’s life and the other just making a logical statement considering the circumstances.
I am intrigued by your big stunts although I am not sure murder is the best way to go about it.
Maybe if her threat was directed towards the minimum wage worker, they’ll let her go then.
Inb4 nuremburg
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.
deleted by creator
“The working class is being oppressed to the point of breaking, so we better just keep them all locked up.”
The beatings will continue until morale improves.
“Status of our country.” Lol. A fucking gilded age shithole where the rich a finally being treated like the outta be?
She threatened the ruling class. And in a feudal society are not allowed to do that.
How much do judges make? The average income is around 30k a year in us, and thats just the income not even saving.
No one making 30k is going to have savings
I don’t get how people live on 30k. They have to be a multi income residence. Even in the cheap areas, that is so little in this country.
Let’s not make him a liar
Interesting to note, they mentioned the Florida woman’s name, but not the judge’s.
Interesting, interesting, interesting.
I take it that was the the information they could get.
Well Lakeland is Polk county, known by people who grew up in FL as the meth capital of Florida. All arrest records are public record in Florida, so finding a judge wouldn’t be hard I imagine. First appearance court rooms should be the link below. Not sure which judge it would have been on Wednesday.
I said Wednesday because if she was arrested Tuesday Florida does first appearances the next morning (unless it’s a weekend) https://www.jud10.flcourts.org/virtual-courtroom-links/polk-first-appearance
Honestly the judge can be added to the fucking list.
The “status of our country” is genocidal empire of massive inequality destroying the planet.
Evil. They’re evil.
Fucking florida. It’s like they all live there to prove a just god does not exist as they haven’t been washed away yet despite it being fucking florida.
The beatings will continue until moral improves.
No, but in 10 to 20 years nature will be doing the Lord’s work.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
For something really embarrassing -
Original embarrassing comment:
I hate Star Trek
Newly edited comment:
edit: removed opinion I reconsidered
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
Were their threats recorded? The fact that people have said worse doesn’t change the fact that it was a threat.
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.
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…
Clearly she was saying that they were next to receive a gift basket for all their hard work in denying claims for profit
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.
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.
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.
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.
Hot take here in Lemmy. Get it while it’s still hot!
Even more importantly, it matters who you’re threatening. Your wife? Meh, no biggie. An insurance company? Straight to jail.
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.
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.
Thank goodness for that freedom of speech we have …
Just dont say what I dont wanna hear
It’s because she said they’re next, and it was recorded. Threats aren’t protected speech.
The state threatens people all the time.
Well, she actually said “Delay, Deny, Depose. You people are next,”
That’s a pretty direct threat. The headline is misleading.
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
Pointing out that what someone is doing puts a target on their back isn’t necessarily you threatening them.
Where is the actual threat? You people are next, to get delayed, denied, or deposed.
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…
