• gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    290
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    8 days ago

    Please, marginalized people get more explicitly threatening crap said to them all the time and people rarely get arrested or charged for that. She’s being charged because the system wants to make an example out of her. The judge basically said so himself at the bail hearing,

    “I do find that the bond of $100,000 is appropriate considering the status of our country at this point,” the judge said.

    • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 days ago

      100k for a threat made in reaction to what was likely fear for her life, or the life of her loved one.

      It’s pretty amazingly cruel.

    • ArtieShaw@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      68
      ·
      8 days ago

      Ouch. “This place is a shit show,” the judge said. (Not really, just fixed it for him).

    • Kalysta@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      7 days ago

      They need to appeal this. Clear judicial error. If he wouldn’t have done this 3 weeks ago legally he can’t do it now.

    • Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Not saying you are wrong about the marginalized, but in this case she made, what could be considered threatening, a call to a health care provider that was not only actionable, but entirely recorded.

      “The system” won’t make an example out of her, “Exhibit A” will. That’s the difference.

      • Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        8 days ago

        It’s both.

        $100k bond for a threat that is neither specific nor credible is absurd.

        If it were a first time offender threat against a normal person (which is more specific), at most it would result in probation and a restraining order.