Did anyone really think she was coming after them after that? No. She got heated on the phone and said something she shouldn’t have.
It’s not nothing. What she did was wrong, and it’s reasonable for it to be a crime. We don’t want to always have to investigate or deal with constant threats. However, she was neither credible nor specific, which are two major criteria. (Keep that in mind when you’re posting here, by the way.) She committed a crime, but not one that should be very serious.
You’re factoring in what you already know about this woman and letting that influence if it was credible.
The people she was on the phone likely know nothing about her besides what was discussed on the call and the threat. That should be reported, and should be investigated.
The bigger issue about framing is the media running headlines that it was just the “deny, defend, despise” that resulted in charges.
A cynic would say that was by order of the owners hoping to discourage a movement, even tho any idiot could have told them it would have the opposite and inflame people.
Which it obviously has.
I like to think at some point people realized this would backfire, and just held their tongue. But I’m an optimist when I can be.
The people she was on the phone likely know nothing about her besides what was discussed on the call and the threat.
Likewise, she knew nothing about them. A threat against some random customer service agent in a company so huge you have no idea even what country the call center is in is categorically not credible!
That should be reported, and should be investigated.
Yes. Certainly.
But the bigger issue is that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. It’s going to cost some resources from law enforcement, and that needs to be punished because we don’t want people like this regularly draining our tax dollars. But any punishment more than probation and/or community service is obscene.
They’ve framed her as a terrorist, and she’s clearly not.
able to be believed; convincing
Did anyone really think she was coming after them after that? No. She got heated on the phone and said something she shouldn’t have.
It’s not nothing. What she did was wrong, and it’s reasonable for it to be a crime. We don’t want to always have to investigate or deal with constant threats. However, she was neither credible nor specific, which are two major criteria. (Keep that in mind when you’re posting here, by the way.) She committed a crime, but not one that should be very serious.
The way they’ve framed her is obscene.
No. It was not a threat. It was not wrong. It was not a crime.
You’re factoring in what you already know about this woman and letting that influence if it was credible.
The people she was on the phone likely know nothing about her besides what was discussed on the call and the threat. That should be reported, and should be investigated.
The bigger issue about framing is the media running headlines that it was just the “deny, defend, despise” that resulted in charges.
A cynic would say that was by order of the owners hoping to discourage a movement, even tho any idiot could have told them it would have the opposite and inflame people.
Which it obviously has.
I like to think at some point people realized this would backfire, and just held their tongue. But I’m an optimist when I can be.
Likewise, she knew nothing about them. A threat against some random customer service agent in a company so huge you have no idea even what country the call center is in is categorically not credible!
Yes. Certainly.
But the bigger issue is that the punishment doesn’t fit the crime. It’s going to cost some resources from law enforcement, and that needs to be punished because we don’t want people like this regularly draining our tax dollars. But any punishment more than probation and/or community service is obscene.
They’ve framed her as a terrorist, and she’s clearly not.
Yes, that’s why the rest of my comment was essentially what you wrote, just more in depth…