• ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s crazy because while that could read as a threat, it could just as easily be read like: “You’re doing the same thing that got that insurance ceo killed. You’re (i.e. your company, people like you, etc are) probably next on the list if this keeps happening to people.”

      • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        That kind of is the threat? The dumb thing is the worker on the phone shouldn’t feel threatened because (s)he isn’t a stinking rich CEO.

        • ALoafOfBread@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          But that scenario definitely does not meet the legal definition of a threat. It’s just a statement of opinion based on current events - she did not threaten anyone necessarily

          • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            I should have clarified - that’s the threat that those prosecuting her are referring to. It is a threat by any contextual interpretation, but it’s indeed harmless in comparison to other things that people get away with without consequences all the time. For example murderers in uniform.