Summary

Briana Boston, 42, was charged with threatening a health insurance company after repeating words linked to the murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson.

During a recorded call with Blue Cross Blue Shield about a denied claim, Boston said, “Delay, deny, depose, you people are next,” echoing phrases engraved on bullet casings at Thompson’s murder scene.

Authorities allege she exploited the CEO’s homicide to make the threat.

Boston, a mother of three with no prior criminal record, was arrested and held on $100,000 bail amidst warnings of potential copycat incidents targeting healthcare executives.

  • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 hours ago

    After you reference a killing, and then say “you are next”, that’s a threat.

    Nope, even you say so:

    The blatant implication is that the person they’re talking to is the next to get killed.

    Notice how its not that the person speaking will do it even in your own rewording? That’s how it’s not a threat

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 hours ago

      They implied the worker on the other end of the line would be the next one to suffer grevious bodily harm or death.

      It doesn’t matter if she’s the one doing the killing, doesn’t matter if it was “serious”, they used the threat of violence.

      It’s really that simple. You’re arguing a technicality that does not exist. Any reasonable person being on the other end of that line would have interpreted it as a threat. Period. Full stop.

      Maybe the lady shouldn’t have been denied. That’s probably true. She still made a threat; and she did so on a line that we all know is being recorded.

      I don’t know that it needs more than a “don’t do that”, but saying it wasn’t a threat is factually and legally incorrect.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        43 minutes ago

        It doesn’t matter if she’s the one doing the killing, doesn’t matter if it was “serious”, they used the threat of violence.

        It literally does matter legally, which is what’s being discussed surrounding her arrest, by law enforcement, and her bail being set by a Justice in a court of law.

        Please, before continuing further, do some reading on “true threat,” which is the legal requirement.

        https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution-conan/amendment-1/true-threats

        https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/true-threats/

      • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        They implied the worker on the other end of the line would be the next one to suffer grevious bodily harm or death.

        That’s called a warning, threats only can come from people who intend to act

        “You’re going to be next if you keep acting like this” is t a threat. “I’m going to make you the next one” is

        Its really that simple