Texan admits he called in death threat to Fenway doctor who cares for transgender patients
Update: Sentencing rescheduled for Feb. 22.
A Comfort, TX man pleaded guilty today to one count of interstate transmission of threatening communication for death-threat calls he made to a doctor at the National LGBTQIA+ Health Education Center at the Fenway Institute in August, 2022.
Matthew Jordan Lindner, 39, potentially faces prison time of up to five years in prison at his sentencing, set for Feb. 6. Under a plea deal, the US Attorney's office will recommend a sentence of three months and restitution of $2,986. US District Court Judge William Young, however, is free to disregard the recommendation.
The plea means his lawyers will not get a chance to try to convince a federal jury that calling a doctor he didn't know 2,000 miles away to say she's "gonna burn" and that "there are people on the way" to deal with her is protected speech under the First Amendment and not a "true threat."
According to prosecutors, Lindner wound himself up reading online about bogus claims that Children's Hospital was performing sex-change operations on children. He found the name and affiliation of the Fenway Institute doctor and called the center's main number and left this voice mail - the day after Children's Hospital and part of the Longwood Medical Area were shut down due to a hoax bomb threat:
You sick motherfuckers, you’re all gonna burn. There’s a group of people on their way to handle [Victim 1]. You signed your own warrant, lady. Castrating our children. You’ve woken up enough people. And upset enough of us. And you signed your own ticket. Sleep well, you fuckin’ cunt.
Prosecutors say he also called the doctor's former medical practice and a Rhode Island university where she teaches to leave similar messages.
Before agreeing to plead guilty, Lindner's attorneys first filed two motions to dismiss the case, one arguing they did not think the call to the Fenway really rose to the level of "recklessness" required to prove he was making "true threats" rather than simply making a political statement on a contentious issue, the other arguing more specifically that he was protected by the First Amendment:
[T]he defense believes that based on the defense investigation that upwards of 30,000 persons viewed the same false news media reports that reported that the physician for whom Lindner left his voicemail message was castrating children. Also, it appears that upwards of 3,000 of those persons made disapproving comments on social media platforms. Yet, none of those persons have been prosecuted for voicing their disapproval and exercising their freedom of speech concerning the same situation.
Prosecutors rebutted:
Here, in the wake of social media discourse and traditional media coverage regarding the availability of gender-affirming care for young people in the transgender community, Lindner decided to deploy threats designed to prevent Victim 1 from offering medical services that many parents seek on behalf of their children. Lindner read information on social media and news reports and chose to seek out Victim 1, a medical professional working thousands of miles away, who he had never met. Based on his opposition to the kind of medical care Victim 1 provides, Lindner found Victim 1's telephone number at the Center. He called the Center and left his anonymous voicemail, indicating that Victim 1 and others were "all gonna burn." Lindner elaborated with the ominous warning that "[t]here's a group of people on their way to handle" Victim 1, a reference to a seemingly anonymous group who planned to travel to harm Victim 1. Lindner continued by informing Victim 1 that Victim 1 had "signed [Victim 1's] own warrant" or "ticket." And he concluded with an obviously insincere exhortation that Victim 1 "sleep well," followed by a vulgar slur. In context, these statements fall squarely within the spectrum of communications that a reasonable jury could conclude constitute true threats.
Young set a hearing for today on one of the dismissal motions. But last week, the two sides notified him they had reached a potential plea deal and he changed the subject of today's hearing to that.
Lindner is the second transphobe to plead guilty to criminal harassment related to an August wave of harassment targeting Boston doctors. Catherine Leavy of Westfield pleaded guilty in September to making the call that shut down Children's Hospital the day before Lindner made his calls.
She is scheduled for sentencing on March 19 on counts of making a false bomb threat and intentionally conveying false or misleading information that a bomb was on the way.
Attachment | Size |
---|---|
Plea agreement | 426.66 KB |
Lindner's first motion to dismiss | 190.01 KB |
Response to motion by prosecutors | 182.77 KB |
Lindner's second motion to dismiss | 167.62 KB |
Ad:
Comments
Pathetic
Pathetic loser.
Imagine thinking
That you can use phone lines or cellular networks, and not be tracked and found by the U.S. Government.
Maximum jail time minimizes opportunities for these two degenerates to breed in their lifetimes.
I know two wrongs don’t make
I know two wrongs don’t make a right, but I wish part of the plea agreement would be to publish the offender’s cell phone number. Not to threaten him, but just so he knows people could call him randomly.
Pretty sure I found his phone number in about 3 minutes.
Not going to post it here, for a whole host of reasons*, but if someone wanted to call and harass him it wouldn't be hard. (He's apparently a business owner, if the random sketchy websites I found are correct.)
* not being absolutely sure I have the right person's number; chance that someone else has the number now; risk of something having been misreported; not being a fan of doxxing in general...
Better yet
Subscribe his cell phone to the "One Magoo Post an Hour" subscription service
Well, that got dark.
Well, that got dark.
Not even Trump
deserves that.
Another idiot victim of the
GOP's latest ugly moral panic. The party can't seem to exist without whipping up hatred out of thin air for some already oppressed minority.
well yeah
Well yeah its all the GOP has these days. They can't lead. They can't govern.
So all they have to keep their jobs is to prey on the ignorance of people and get them riled up.
How is he a victim?
Ugly moral panic, yes. Victim, no. Sorry, no. "I read it on social media and I am therefore a victim" is not and should not be a defense.
Fair enough. I'm not positing idiocy as
a defense, but you do have to be a goddamned idiot to fall for this nonsense, especially as it's the same stuff over and over (substitute "gays" for "trans people" a few years ago.)
Two inconsistent things....
Two inconsistent statements:
The average person isn't an idiot. People slightly below average intelligence are also not idiots. The problem is that the manipulation is surprisingly effective, not that people are actual morons.
What's the old quote?
Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people?
I wouldn't say hatred is the
I wouldn't say hatred is the _only_ thing they have to work with. They do a lot with fear too: it's to their advantage if voters imagine a jihadi under every bed and a pedophile in every bathroom.
Was the word "Jihadi"
On the mind of a single American during the Hoover years?
If you're trying to say this
If you're trying to say this tactic is not new, then yes, you are correct.
The specific boogeymen
get changed out over time as needed.
Then
it was Bolsheviks.
truth or consequences
I can stand on the corner and yell "Donald Trump is a big poopy pants!" and that's OK. But threatening to shoot him is not OK. That's what's called a "true threat" and that is not covered by the First Amendment.
A protest is OK. If a protest turns into a mob that goes out and loots every business in sight, that is not OK. Freedom of speech doesn't mean you are protected from every other law that's out there.
Sure. Most people have this
Sure. Most people have this down by the time they graduate from high school. But when the fundamental principle your party is based on is ignorance, well, you're gonna get some ignorant people.
> Yet, none of those persons
> Yet, none of those persons have been prosecuted for voicing their disapproval and exercising their freedom of speech concerning the same situation.
Out of curiosity, how many of those people called a doctor and threatened their life? Oh, it was only this one guy?
Well, this one guy and ...
That one lady who called in the bomb threat to Children's the day before.
and isn't it ironic, doncha think?
the ad on UH yesterday was for the documentary "What is a Woman?" so I guess Adam is making some money off "transphobia." Yes I took a screenshot.
https://imgur.com/a/rJu7wrJ
There is no such thing…
There is no such thing as “an ad on UHub.” The ads that you see and the ads that I see are completely different. It’s abstracted through at least one layer of intermediaries; the site owner has some ability to restrict some categories of ads, but it’s imperfect.