Woman jailed after using shooting suspect's catchphrase as insurance company denied claim
Woman jailed after using shooting suspect's catchphrase as insurance company denied claim
Headline is incorrect. There's no evidence that's the suspect's catchphrase. That's what the perpetrator wrote. Assuming that that's also the suspect's catchphrase is assuming he's guilty. I don't think this qualifies for libel but yet another example of useless journalism.
That's not even his catchphrase anyway. It's "another day, another play." This is
I've found it a bit weird how quickly people accepted that the guy they arrested must have been the shooter because they arrested him.
the casings found at the next CEO crime scene will be engraved Exculpate, Exonerate, Excuse
Yeah when I woke up I thought there was a 90% chance that Luigi did it (and in that 90% I include a 30% chance that the official story of him being snitched is false and the feds are doing parallel construction) and 10% chance that this is just a convenient patsy they found to pin it on someone. But the more I think about it, the more that 10% grows to, like, 20%.
Weird I thought there was free speech in America
No, america has Free Speech™*
*Terms and Conditions apply, see website for details. Free Speech™ is a registered trade mark and not a reflection of any actual freedom of expression. Free Speech™ can be revoked at any time for reasons including but not limited to: net worth, income, skin color, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, language, culture, political views, and occupation. America reserves the right to alter what constitutes Free Speech™ at any time for any reason. Offer not valid in American territories, states, districts, or any other area under control or influence of America.
Speak with your doctor to see if Free Speech™ is right for you
Reminder, people have got jailed for 'weaponizing the first amendment'. That was the justification used literally last year.
Police concluded that she intended to use "the UnitedHealthcare CEO's homicide to her advantage."
Who does she think she is, one of the two political parties justifying bombing and invading another country?
it's because of the implication
Which is weird because they didn't even charge the person they suspect of coming up with the catchphrase with terrorism, they charged him with second degree murder.
How is it a threat of terrorism to refer to a crime that was not considered terrorism?
but if she called them a racial slur she'd be perfectly fine
She can literally shout "I'm Adolf Hitler" and threaten to kill minorities and she'll be fine.
I would really like to believe that it was her adding, "You people are next," that got her in to trouble. Otherwise, I find it troubling to get in to trouble by telling someone their own slogan.
It would be like going to jail for sitting through a Mets game, watching them lose, and then saying, "Lets go Mets," only to then be arrested.
Let’s be real, she got in trouble because there were orders from above that they need to find a case like this to prosecute. There’s no way that the frontline support staff of health insurance companies don’t hear dozens of death threats a day.
she did things in the wrong order. first you do things and then you do the catchphrase, not the other way around
Free my woman.
Jury nullification is all of our friends on this blessed day
Can’t even engage in free speech anymore
Well, congrats to this lady because she just got probably at least a million dollar auto-win suit against the police or city for false arrest and the company for lying to get her arrested. There is no way in Jebus's holy asshole that saying those words can be taken as a legally actionable threat. Hopefully she's talking to one of the big defamation lawyers like the one who got Alex Jones and is currently digging inside Elon's ass. There's another digging in Crowder's ass too. One of them would probably love to sue a health insurance corporation right now especially over some easy win shit like this. Just really drag their asses publicly. Or get a fat settlement. Whatever.
It is interesting to see this here, I'm used to seeing everyone being to jaded to believe in the rule of law. I think pretty much everyone I am used to interacting with believes that it is purely a downward pressure
if she ends up getting a settlment it'll be a tiny drop compared to industry profits. round-off errors like that are acceptable losses if it maintains the pretense of a system that's essentially benign for everyone.
I'm not sure why people would think this type of legal action is no longer possible. I understand the inclination to thinking it if someone doesn't really think that much about it though.
Let me explain my thinking. If we're looking at like "The breakdown of rules, laws, and norms" in the US or adjacent to the US, there's definitely been some of that in the past ~10 years (just to put some timeline for analysis). For example, the total ignoring and pressures put on the ICC. Trump actually being charged (although that's unique for the opposite reason) but then totally getting away with everything he clearly did (well, back to the norms there...). CEOs have effectively never been held really accountable. So no change there. Monopolies used to sometimes be broken up. Now they never are. That's a change for sure.
I could go on and on, but I'll just cut to the conclusion here. There's definitely a pattern of the wealthy getting away with shit... but that goes back 10 years and all the way back forever basically. However, there's no indication, to my knowledge, that the very, very basic stuff like "You can't just arrest someone, dumbass..." has been thrown out. A lot of people that are illegally detained and have some amount of legitimate "This was incredibly fucked up" get settlements. Shit is slowrolled, individual cops never pay of course, but courts do pay out settlements for the most egregious shit. I think being falsely arrested for what cannot in anyway by any sane person he deemed "a threat" (also threats require more than words to be criminal typically. Like specifics that show intent and ability to commit the crime being threatened. A clearly articulated threat is also sort of required... otherwise, what the fuck?) is fairly egregious. It could be worse. It can almost always be worse. But this is a clear cut first amendment violation that even the hogged up judges will go "yeah, that's kinda fucked..."
There's also the optics situation. Do some health insurance fuck sticks want their name dragged for months online where literally everyone will side with the lady or just pay her whatever amount to shut up about it? They are very aware that they only get to do this evil when no one pays much attention. Right now everyone is paying attention. If she files suit though, who knows the political landscape at that future moment. People always hate the bloodsucking insurance corps though, so, good bet with the right lawyer she can get big positive PR.
Tl;dr the institutions are rotting but it's not like laws don't exist at all or that nobody can get "justice" (not really, but what the shitty system calls justice). Of course that doesn't mean it's easy to get payouts. That's why I say you need a uniquely egregious scenario and a skilled lawyer who knows how to apply pressure.
And before someone suggests it... no, they aren't gonna "Boeing whistle blower" your ass over a small (in grand scheme) defamation suit (and whatever else). They roll out the Boeing special for when a significant part of the bag is being threatened. (Remember that time Boeing just straight up assassinated whistle blowers btw??? Talk about memory hole)
at least a million dollar auto-win suit
Still won't cover her medical bills.
it's a crime to gain an "advantage" over a corporation
Land of the free
No your honor, I was just trying to get the insurance company officials to read the book "Delay Deny Defend" and just blanked on the correct title, silly me
Maybe this can also be a lesson to America that actions are louder than words.
YOU CAN'T SAY THOSE WORDS ANYMORE CITIZEN
They got the probation officer robot from Elysium handling health insurance claims
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
Woo hoo! Can’t wait for when trolly problem memes about the US health insurance industry affect your credit score!
free briana
The baddie did nothing wrong
I love living in a country that takes mass shootings and terrorism seriously!
Love there is no pretext of justice in that judge’s statement. Just straight up saying “some people at the last eyes wide shut party were really uncomfortable so you must pay”
Finally something both Republican and Democratic congresspeople can agree on.
Don’t we love common law folks? Don’t we love being ruled by Judge Kings?
Basically every mass shooter is "known to authorities" or "on their radar" and they don't do shit.
Someone who doesn't even own a gun says something they decide is threatening? Time to throw the book at her!
I swear the media trying to treat this with the same severity as a mass shooting (if anything they're treating it more serious than a mass shooting. No news outlet had a talking head wearing a 3d printed 9mm pin offering thoughts and prayers) is making me lose my mind. The media is basically trying to say Luigi gives mass shooter vibes. There's a reason there has been efforts to remove pictures of him, take down posts of his statement, and generally trying to frame him in the same vein as a school shooter.
Also more proof (as if we needed it) that the bail bond system is solely in place to keep poor people in jail and rich people out.
i absolutely think they are going to roll out the same viciousness they used to defend the zionist entity if this nascent class disturbance keeps going
Which judge? Can we find out his name? I'm just asking questions