This will shed a little light on what I’m talking about.

To be completely fair, I haven’t reviewed the Florida statute that she’s charged under. But basically she calls Blue Cross Blue Shield about some denied claims. Gets angry. Says “Delay, Deny, Depose, you people are next!” And gets charged with terrorism or something like that, with $100,000 bail. Apparently she’s a mom with no history of violence and no criminal history.

My gut reaction? The authorities are in fear mode. They know that there were a lot of people happy about the recent shooting I blogged about, and they think they can contain that stuff by making people afraid of what the law might do to them if they step out of line.

But screw my gut feeling. Let’s be real. Under American law, speech is not protected by the First Amendment if it is a true threat.

So I googled true threat and let the AI do the work for me.

A true threat is a statement that a reasonable person would interpret as a serious expression of intent to commit unlawful violence against another person.

Well, I can kinda see problems with this prosecution already. Does a reasonable person believe “you people are next” from a mom that’s angry about her claim being denied really mean she’s going to commit unlawful violence against them? I see how we could get there. But I also think there are much more “violent” statements that the police would never arrest anyone for.

For example, I was once told by the relative of someone I was dating that if I hurt her, they would kill me. And you know, when he said it, I was actually a little scared. Now, I didn’t run to the police. But I know the vibe of cops on Staten Island, and I have a feeling that if I went to them and recited this, they’d laugh at my face and tell me to go away. I’ll never know for sure.

But I know for a fact that when a doorman called the NYPD during my medical incident in Manhattan years ago, where that doorman obviously felt the situation required police intervention, they just never showed up. So, you know, for us little people, at least anecdotally and from stories I’ve heard over the years, it’s hit or miss on whether the cops are going to help you, shoot you, or no show. But when you make an off comment to an insurance company employee? Boom. Arrested. 100k bail. I know it’s different states. I concede that.

I think the hinge here is intent. Did she intend to communicate a threat of violence? And I guess that depends very much on the definition of intent.

Did she intend to threaten the person on the other end of that phone?

What will the courts ultimately decide? I don’t know. I’m not a lawyer and I could easily see myself arguing it either way.

But my gut, again, is telling me this is a not guilty situation. It’s more a crime of stupidity than any actual terrorism.

Then again, we live in a country where people who post legal annotations online have been called terrorist.

Maybe I’m a terrorist too?