[His wife] Tracie Papenfus said she still can't understand why her husband is held 450 miles from home at the St. Louis workhouse on a $45,000 bond she can't afford to pay. (That amount could be lowered at bond-reduction hearing scheduled for Monday.)
"He shouldn't have mouthed off on the phone, but this is overkill," Tracie Papenfus said. "He just can't handle it in there. He's not a criminal. ... They make it sound like he's a terrorist, and he's far from it."
Although the St. Louis Post-Dispatch says the name of the warranty company isn't given in the court papers, the address is:
...the business is located at 300 North Tucker Boulevard. The only firm in that building that sells service contracts - popularly known as "extended warranties" - is TXEN Partners, which does business as Service Protection Direct. The firm did not respond to requests for comment.
The Better Business Bureau recently accused the firm of sending mailers to consumers that incorrectly state factory warranties on their vehicles either have expired or will run out soon. Last year, then-Attorney General Jay Nixon sued the firm for misleading consumers, and a condition of that suit's settlement was that TXEN Partners would refer to consumers' expiring warranties only if the company believes "in good faith" that those claims are true.
Papenfus received a fake warranty expiration notice from them—lawsuit settlements are for chumps, apparently—and he snapped, which is when he called to give them a piece of his mind. Things escalated from there.
Our favorite part of the article is this bit of stupidity from chief warrant officer Ed Postawko. "I think all sorts of people get frustrated with all sorts of businesses," he told the paper. "The solution is to don't patronize that business, it's not to break the law. ... Two wrongs don't make a right."
How exactly you "don't patronize" a borderline-scam warranty company that spams you and tries to trick you into giving them your money is a mystery we'll leave to the hive mind to figure out.
"Phone rage leads to arrest here for Ohio man" [STLtoday.com]
(Photo: KB35)
Why does this guy even pay attention to anything about an auto extended warranty, he's a freakin mechanic, he can fix his car himself!
Seriously dude, you can't call a business and threaten to burn the place down and kill people.
]]>So now, where does one draw the line?
In the end, I'm guessing he'll walk away with a HUGE scare, a fine and a major lesson learned with a side of probation. And the publicity here is, "your rights have NEVER guaranteed you the ability to call up companies and threaten them with bodily harm." Back in the day, this was just one of those crimes people used to blow-off because "most of the time, it never amounts to anything."
No one wants one of these threats to become anything again. Do you really want to be the sheriff that shows up at a smoldering building going, "well, all sorts of people get angry at telemarketers and we figured the customer had the right to get angry. So we never followed up on the threat?"
]]>How is breaking the law by calling people are sending out scam letters appropriate behavior? It's not at all. Additionally, it's not "civilized" behavior to constantly attempt to scam people into buying a fake product that you don't even need.
]]>It's an overreaction on everyone's part, and if they can't see that people are inappropriately using the threat of "terrorism" as an excuse to lock up anyone that gets beyond pissed at someone else for being a complete douchebag, then they are the real terrorists. As far as I'm concerned, the people that did 9/11 won. Not only have we diluted our rights, we're locking innocent people up on some vague notion that they're truly evil people just because someone harassed them or fucked them over. What a fucked up world.
]]>@P_Smith:
Additional: I noticed that of all the comments, only a handful were critical of Mr. Papenfus, and all of those "critics" were the type who would drop their pants and turn over their rights without any questions.
The majority of commenters agreed that the charges were excessive in response to the initial crimes committed by the company (invasion of privacy, fraud, harassment, etc.).
]]>For example, how Verizon Telemarketing will slam you with HBO/Showtime... after saying they will give you 60 days of it for free! After you told the marketeer "no", "Nada", "Nyet". After 30 days, $30 shows up on your statement.
(yes, it happened. IF you got one of those annoying calls and they offered you Free Showtime/HBO/Movie/Starz... for 60 Days, better check your statements if you declined, or if you agreed but really don't want it. You can also call up/online chat with their customer service and have your name/number removed from their marketing...)
]]>Now, if they were that committed to the lie and swore out a warrant under false pretenses, what sort of consequences would there be for them, I wonder?
]]>The only advice readers need to take out of the item is this: threats are illegal, and you'll get be arrested for making them.
To put it in terms of an analogy, it doesn't matter how much a dealer of meth-amphetamine or seller of child sex deserves a punch in the throat, you can't hit people unless they hit you first, no matter how repugnant the seller is.
Unfortunately, despite telemarketers being on the same ethical level as drug dealers and peddlers of child sex, they're not treated the same in a court of law.
@NewsMuncher: LOL classic.
]]>So it would be a worse spot if my name with correct DOB was added if I donated a few bucks to the Papenfus legal defense fund: He's being charged with making terrorist threats.
]]>Actually, any company involving phones pretty much records everything. So even when you call your bank, you're being recorded. Just assume you're always being recorded when you talk to a phone rep - it's rarely a "maybe" anymore.
]]>If he stays in jail much longer, I think a email carpet bomb is in order.
Is he being jailed in St. Louis or in Fostoria?
mayordavoli@aol.com is the mayor of Fostoria.
]]>@CarbonFiberFootprint: Thank you for the information. I can see why the St. Louis people got "RIGHT ON THIS" plus the fact that there is probably a relative employed at the warranty firm.
]]>@chocolate1234: That was Tom Mabe and the telemarketer. Tom also went to a telemarketer convention and called their hotel rooms at 3:00am asking if they wanted to buy his products...
]]>These scumbags have tapes of everything, and records of their incoming calls (and caller ID block doesn't work on toll-free numbers). Believe me, they know how to deal with threats.
]]>'Despite all the evidence, despite knowing that a prosecution witness testified falsely about his criminal record and that the prosecutor did nothing to correct his perjury, a current St. Louis prosecutor, Ed Postawko, thinks the jury got it right. If you choose to comment upon Mr. Postawko's unrepentant attitude concerning his office's misconduct and its impact on Darryl Burton's life, please censor or disguise your profanity to avoid the law firm filters that might keep some of our readers from enjoying TalkLeft at work.'
]]>When you commit a crime, it's not a defense that your victim was a despicable human being.
I question your logic... but it's not relevant.
]]>A guy in my town, a few years ago, drove to the offices of a local mailer/flyer company and threw most of a gallon of house paint on the receptionist because he was unhappy about getting their junk mail - just, out of the blue, decides that this is a good way to handle the situation. IIRC she had permanent vision damage as a result of the paint getting into her eyes.
]]>Though, to give Chocolate the benefit of the doubt, it's *possible* that his/her dad heard the original skit and re-enacted his own version of it, or retold the story to Chocolate as if he'd been the one to do it...
]]>Personal story about "terroristic threats:"
Several years ago, my brother, who's paranoid schizophrenic, was attending a local Community College and was having a bad day. His personal hygiene and social skills were already a bit sketchy thanks to his (unmedicated at that time) illness, so he wasn't a very popular person on campus. One of his few friends there encountered him in a break room and said, "Hey man, you look bummed, what's up?"
My brother replied, "Yeah, just having what I guess you could call a Columbine kind of day," and continued to sit at the table, drinking coffee and quietly discussing with his friend the various things that were bothering him.
Someone passing by in the breakroom overheard this, and - presumably because it was the scruffy weird guy who said it - called security and the city police. Campus police quietly evacuated the building (leaving my brother and his friend in the break room) while the city police arrived... not a SWAT team, precisely, but some sort of special response unit.
Guns were drawn, tear gas threatened, dogs brought in, and eventually three officers sort of dogpiled my brother -- who by the way was still sitting quietly at the table when the cops arrived -- in their zeal to "restrain" him. He has a very visible deformity which makes his right arm utterly useless, so even if he had been raving and raging, he would not have posed a significant threat to even *one* officer, being obviously unable to use his right arm. Still, they felt the need to use three heavily armed men to "subdue" one unarmed disabled man who was sitting quietly.
The security film footage which showed all of this contributed, I'm sure, to the fact that the charges were eventually dropped (in exchange for him agreeing to drop out and forfeit all he had paid for that semester's books and tuition, and not return).
Anyway.
Bottom line: It takes almost NOTHING to have a charge of "making terrorist(ic) threats" leveled against you. In my brother's case, he was neither angry, nor profane, nor agitated, nor armed, nor particularly capable of defending himself, nor actually even MAKING ANY THREATS... he was guilty merely of (1) being "different" and (2) uttering the word "Columbine" on a campus. Which I'll be the first to admit was a dumb choice of words and certainly would be worth having security pull him aside and chat for a few minutes, but they really pulled out all the stops.
I don't condone this guy's threats whatsoever (if nothing else, it's a big waste of time), but it bears pointing out that the charge of "terrorist(ic) threats" can really be just about anything, up to and including comments, in a private conversation, that are neither threatening nor about terrorism.
]]>NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER talk to the police especially when they state clearly you are a suspect in a crime.
by law what you say to the police cannot be used IN YOUR DEFENSE.
this youtube video is the most important you will ever watch
Some of the calls provided an option to press a button to opt out of the calls, but they kept calling anyway. It was so bad that we almost canceled our land line phone because the telemarketing calls were tying up our line so badly that our family and friends couldn't get through!
]]>Because that's a pretty famous story. Also, the guy in the original story didn't outright break the law (as "your dad" did by claiming to be a police officer), but skirted as close as possible to the edge without going over by allowing the telemarketer to assume that he was a policeman without actually claiming to be one.
]]>@Vanilla5: He called them, twice. Left voicemail. They called him back. Called him "a jackass or (an expletive) or both." I want to know what the expletive his personally. And one other thing, during an argument, if you're in the wrong (yes, their business is a scam), and you decide to insult me, the gloves are off. You've crossed the line and from there on out, we're gonna settle this like men.
]]>@Froggmann: And so the solution, obviously, must be to threaten to kill a low level CSR? I mean contacting the state attorney general, the BBB, or other consumer advocate company would be ridiculous, right? It's not like you could write your congressman or physcially picket the company to generate local news interest. It's just easier, quicker, and more satisfying to tell a CSR that you're going to kill their family and burn their place of work down.
Just because telemarketers are on everyone's S-list doesn't mean you or anyone else has the right to threaten their personal safety.
]]>Again, that police officer was just trying to explain common sense to people. I guess The Consumerist's comments section is not the best place to find people who understand that.
Way to make totally false comparisons to justify your hatred for telemarketers, though.
]]>@PLATTWORX: I agree with you. I'm sick of people thinking that kind of behavior is appropriate. I don't care if it is a telemarketer. It's not civilized behavior that benefits society. It's a symptom of a radically unhinged mind and an indication of our society's ever growing acceptance of violence as a method of communication.
He should have been arrested and in my opinion a month in the clink and some anger management couseling might do him some good.
BUT... let's save the "terrorist" language for where it belongs, like in reference to 9/11 or abortion clinic bombings and not for guys like this.
]]>@Coles_Law: That is a great point. I watched a friend and coworker become enraged and make threats for years. Some how we were all surprised when he snapped and then shot and killed another friend. Sometimes a police intervention for someone becoming enraged over a small thing could be in order. I only wish something would have broken the chain of events that left one friend in prison for life and another dead. Who knows as you can never tell what might have been.
]]>@Megalomania: to be fair, there's a lot of nutjobs out there, and no chief of poliece wants to tell the family of a murder victim "Sorry, we thought the killer was just making over the top threats."
]]>@StanTheManDean: And I missed your response before I replied. Seems plausible, at the least.
]]>@midwestkel: I didn't realize cops actually did that. Still, this isn't "You won a contest!", it's "We're investigating you for physical assault" when they were investigating him for verbal assault. At least with the contest thing there's a lure to draw people-if they thought he would dodge verbal assault, why would he come in for a tavern fight?
]]>When I was in college, I lived in an off-campus apartment. One of my roomates and I were headed out to grab some dinner when a cop asked us if we'd seen our next-door woman, a middle-aged women with a bunch of cats. We hadn't in a few days.
We come back a few hours later to find her talking to our other roomate asking him if he could help her put the sliding glass patio door back on it's track. Evidently after she threatened to kill herself while on the phone with the IRS, they called the cops, and the cops, finding no answer, took her patio door off it's hinges, didn't find her, and left.
]]>Okay... does the car warranty company ever plan to pay out a claim? By the very nature of these "companies" they never do. Instead they will deny deny deny.. go BK, and start anew. That my dear officer is called Fraud, and if you ever look in one of those books you are supposed to read you will find that word on the no-no list.
]]>A guy in my city was arrested recently for making "terrorist threats" after calling the local bank. A broker at the bank made bad investments on his behalf and lost almost a hundred thousand dollars of his money, and threatening to burn it down and/or bomb it. I can see where the police might take that a little more seriously than a spurned telemarketer. But some people are just crazy enough to pipe bomb a business or set fire. You never know when someone seriously mentally ill will go berserk.
]]>It's wrong to make death threats against anyone (out loud at least). If it were me the threats were against, I'd like to hope the police took it seriously, and since, according to the article, he threatened to burn the entire building and it's occupants, it was worth checking out.
But he still gets the way to go for giving them hell.
]]>Thats the thing i dont get, cops call me asking if i was in a bar fight wanting me to drive 450 miles to clear my name? They better be providing me with a roundtrip ticket and some spending cash plus hotel. Plus given the fact its in ohio... i'da been "just issue an warrant for my arrest if you think i did it, i'm not going to ohio"
]]>Some days I get three or four calls from the same telemarketer about health insurance. That's against the law. I've filed complaints with the FCC about them. They don't stop. So now when they call I say things to them so vile and disgusting that I can't even elude to them here. Screw them. I don't care who it is on the other end of the phone, they harassing me, waking me up early in the morning and interrupting my work. They deserve to feel threatened by a large insane man in Pittsburgh.
And Fostoria...that's a nothing town with cops that probably have too much free time.
]]>They didn't call him (at first): he called them.
Bad move.
I am sorry but if you work for a company that lies steals and/or cheats people out of their money or property and you know bout it, you are responsible in my mind. I don't care if you are lowly CSR or the CEO you are equally responsible for what happens in the company you work for, especially within your sphere. This 'its not my fault I only work here' BS has gotten a tad ridiculous.
]]>But this guy did wrong. He threatened someone who happens to be employed at a shitty company. The fact of who their employer is doesn't make it ok.
And what's with the "cold-calling" remark? Nothing in the article suggests that the company called him. It states clearly that he called them after receiving a letter.
Receiving junk mail makes you violent??? Weird, I just throw it in the trash.
]]>If, like me, you're not getting as many offers as you used to, why not use those "blow in" subscription cards from magazines. Or religious tracts? Who knows, a Jack Chick tract sent to a telemarketer may just change their lives. If those are in short supply, surely last week's Walmart flyer could go to good use.
Don't get angry, get creative.
]]>I say "hang em high"..........the scammer's, that is!
]]>not to get all political (because I do NOT reside on the left), but the previous administration kinda opened the door for calling someone a terrorist to bypass lots of rights/laws and to prosecute faster and for longer.
go figure :P
]]>Call the White House and threaten to kill the President and let us know how your free speech defense works at your trial.
]]>I wonder if it is recorded - could be a catch 22 on the telemarketer's part - they may have said things they shouldn't have to try to scam him, but then he flips out and tells him he's going to hunt them like deer. Do they turn it over to the cops?
]]>You generally have to file in a jurisdiction that is convenient for the defendant.
]]>What happened to free speech in this case and proof of intent? It wasn't like the man got arrested after having been pulled over while barreling down the interstate making threats on a cell phone on his way to Missouri along with a few canisters full of gasoline, a couple of chainsaws some .45s and a ski mask!
]]>But sorry, go ahead and interpret entirely clear sentences whichever way entertains you the most.
]]>While I have no love for shady borderline-scam companies that prey on consumers already suffering from a global recession, Postawko was right when he said that "Two wrongs don't make a right."
Cold-calling and sending fraudulent mail is a crime in itself which should be prosecuted but it does not make it okay to commit the additional crime of threatening to kill someone.
]]>I totally agree that you do not, not, not get to threaten violence to people, over the phone or anywhere else. But there's a whole lot of WTF? about this case.
]]>I would hope that the police had more evidence to go on than just the tele-scammer's statement before they arrested the guy.
]]>"Papenfus' wife, Tracie, said she hasn't seen her husband since his arrest on June 27, when he was lured to a Fostoria, Ohio, police station with a false story about being suspected in a tavern fight there.
It does not say if the police made up the story to get him there or if they were give a phony story from someone possibly the the piece of crap at the location the OP called. After he was there, or while he was on his way, the real reason could have surfaced.
An assumption could be made, by how the paragraph was worded, that the police made up the story. However, we don't know that for sure.
]]>Any individual who would even think to "threaten to burn down their place of business and then kill them and their families" when a telemarketer calls needs serious help AND the police called on them.
Enough said about this post.
]]>@ChuckECheese: Well, the risk there is you end up locked in the loony bin for longer than you would have been in jail.
]]>Ultimately the guy screwed up. It sucks they called the police, but death threats are kinda over the top, regardless of the receiver.
]]>It would be interesting to know exactly what Papenfus said. The fact that law enforcement has taken it this far makes me wonder if he was very specific with the threats, which would actually fit the charge.
One would hope that if they extradited this guy to a different state and held him on such a high bond they had a pretty good reason. Then again, maybe it's a total abuse of discretion on the prosecutor's part.
Meanwhile, take this as an example of what happens to all defendants who don't have the money to post bail. This guy has been in jail for three weeks and hasn't been convicted of anything yet.
]]>So yes they did in fact make the first move. There's no splitting hairs or arguing semantics about that. They reached out to him with a transparently false "warning" in an attempt to get his business.
What happened after that was unfortunate all around, and we obviously don't condone it. (See title of post.)
]]>Pretty sure you can file suit/press charges complaint wherever the plantiff or defendant live. Generally, as the plantiff, you should file in whichever jurisdiction has the laws most favorable to you, so you're more likely to win.
]]>The analog would be Consumerist knowingly posting false stories about the business.
Unless you're just alleging that the auto-warranty company is guilty on simply not fact-checking.
]]>He called the firm after receiving the mailer, then he called the company back to complain some more, said Douglas Forsyth, a local attorney representing Papenfus. The call during which Papenfus allegedly made a terrorist threat was initiated by the firm, in a response to a voice-mail message left by Papenfus, Forsyth said.
It was an escalating issue. The full lesson is "Do not overeact to a direct mailer that you know is junkmail, call repeatidly with some vague goal in mind that amounts to 'make them feel bad' that will likely end in having your anger management issues lead to bad decisions you can't take back."
]]>Nevermind.
]]>Also - STLToday.com is the Web site for the newspaper, the St. Louis Post Dispatch. AAAAAND...the STL Post Dispatch is located at 900 N. Tucker, right down the block from the telemarketing place. They'll have a bird's eye view if somebody in the St. Louis area gets fed up with the telemarketing and decides to pay them a visit.
]]>When I read it I felt that Mr. Papenfus is a knucklehead and/or was affected by legit persciption medication, but nevertheless has a wholly legitmate and approprate complaint to make. And, as mentioned by earlier posters, over-reaction by all parties involved.
So, icky as it seems, I admire the guy a bit. If I hear of a legal fund, I will certianly donate. Which brings up another problem: Will my donation put on a list of donors to terrorists, and put me in a worse spot in the TSA no fly list?
]]>I know police run sting operations where they'll send mail to people who have open warrants telling them they've won something then lure them to an address where they are arrested. It's possible they did the same thing here so they wouldn't have to drive 900 miles to pick him up and then bring him back to their jurisdiction.
None-the-less, what was done to him is overkill (no pun intended).
]]>I suspect if Consumerist posted a snarky story including a consumer complaint that turned out to be false, and the wronged business owner threatened to kill you and your families, you wouldn't be sitting around mumbling "well, gee, can't blame the guy, we made the first move."
]]>Any St. Louis-area Consumeristas willing to do some scouting?
]]>On the bright side, I'm sure this will be the start of a great career for some defense attorney willing to do some pro bono work.
]]>Sounds like the old police detective false story to gain the persons trust and prove their alibi (or lack there-of) for a non related incident.
The guy could prove he wasn't at the tavern by claiming he was home alone... which proves he was at home at the time the call was placed and could be the only person responsible.
Remember, the police are allowed to lie, and you are not. Unless you ask the police to investigate an incident you better damn well know why you are answering their questions.
]]>@Chris Walters: But can we agree on PMITA prision for the telemarketers?
]]>My main point, however, is that they made the first move.
]]>Darn.
Just this afternoon I asked the telewhore what it would cost for a profanity. The telewhore was ticked off. Does this mean I could be arrested for solicitating prostitution?
]]>"How exactly you "don't patronize" a borderline-scam warranty company that cold-calls you and tries to trick you ..."
From the article: "Tracie Papenfus said her husband called a St. Louis telemarketing firm - she didn't know the name - after getting a mailer ..."
So, they didn't cold-call him. He called them. They sent him junk mail and he called the number on the flyer and said he's going to "burn down the building and kill the employees and their families."
So to paraphrase the cop: "don't dial the number on junk mail and threaten to kill whoever answers."
I'm still sorry he's in jail. And I agree with him. They piss me off too and I have the same fantasy he does. But I don't say it out loud. The folks that run the scam should be in federal PMITA prison. And we should have a live Web feed so we can watch. And be able to pipe our laughter and heckling into their jail cells via the net to disturb their peace forever.
]]>@post_break:
That's horrible that they called the police on him. Crime or not, nobody should take that crap seriously. They're harrassing him on the phone, and he mouthed off. Ridiculous.
Lots of overreaction on all sides here. However, this really bothers me:
On June 27th, he was "was lured to a Fostoria, Ohio, police station with a false story about being suspected in a tavern fight there,"
What? Saying "you threatened a person over the phone" doesn't cut it, so they made up some crazy lie?
]]>