Red Lobster suspends waitress after she was insulted with a racial slur

[BullKurtz]

Except that there is a signature line on the customer receipt. Most people sign it without even realizing it. Also, most people aren't thieves.

NO there is not....now how about you take your stupid ass out of this thread....what was once funny ain't funny anymore.....SCRAM.

 

[Polk]

Or what's going to happen? You're going to puff up on the internets? You kept making claims that aren't true, because you think being a fry cook who gets the run the register sometimes makes you an expert on credit cards.

 

[Asclepias]

I was not sure from the photo if Red Lobster had kept up with technology. I'd say the customers use of a word that keeps this country divided and unable to get past slavery more of an issue than the partial release of said customers information.

Red Lobster and everybody else has to have modern terminals for security reasons....about 5 years ago the industry deemed old terminals unsecure/unencrypted and quit taking transactions from them. The copy in question is the customer copy which would have been handed to him after the transaction was completed....there would be no way he could have written "******" on his copy, or ever signed it, and her being able to snap a pic of it, unless he never got his copy or left it behind because he was in a hurry.... Bogus story.....hopefully Facebook gets sued for allowing it to be posted.

She has to check if he signed it; otherwise the credit-card charge is no good. So she immediately sees the horrible!!! word and doesn't confront him right in the restaurant?

First off she is a female. Secondly I have signed and walked out of the restaurant plenty of times before my receipt was checked for my signature. She also could have totally missed it and only noticed it when ready to end her shift.

 

[BullKurtz]

I was not sure from the photo if Red Lobster had kept up with technology. I'd say the customers use of a word that keeps this country divided and unable to get past slavery more of an issue than the partial release of said customers information.

Red Lobster and everybody else has to have modern terminals for security reasons....about 5 years ago the industry deemed old terminals unsecure/unencrypted and quit taking transactions from them. The copy in question is the customer copy which would have been handed to him after the transaction was completed....there would be no way he could have written "******" on his copy, or ever signed it, and her being able to snap a pic of it, unless he never got his copy or left it behind because he was in a hurry.... Bogus story.....hopefully Facebook gets sued for allowing it to be posted.

I dont get your point in saying that. The photo is of the restaraunts copy if I am not mistaken. How would she have his copy? When I go to a restaraunt I am presented with 3 slips of paper. One which I total including the tip, sign, and give back to the waiter/waitress. The other 2 I keep for tax purposes. I then walk out and rarely has the waiter or waitress picked up the slip I left behind before I leave. I dont eat at Red Lobsters so maybe they do something different? Either way if this new system is in place in all restaurants then he had ample opportunity to sign it and write the nasty slur without it appearing on his copy.

She worked at the restaurant right? I've never seen a terminal give 3 receipts....are you eating in American restaurants? There are no "carbon copies" anymore as I explained earlier....I don't know what's confusing abouit what I've said. I would say that on occasion a waitress will end her shift and ask that a customer's account be closed out so she can get her tip. If the customer keeps drinking for instance, the place will carry his tab until he's ready to leave. That's the only way you'd get more than one receipt. Understand this, all credit card processing is done the same way, in all 50 states so there's no discrepencies in how the process works.

 

[Asclepias]

Alright, both of you indulge me, while I tell you a personal story, from back in the mid-seventies. I had gone Christmas shopping on a wet, cold, blustery evening, and as I stepped inside the store, I paused to look back at some Christmas decorations just inside the entrance. As I did I saw a woman approaching the door both hands and arms loaded down with shopping bags and packages. The store wasn't crowded, there was no one else immediately around, so I turned back and opened first the outer door, then the inner door for herShe took a few steps insider, the spun on her heels and faced me. She was a black woman, apparently about my age at the time, and the expression on her face looked like someone who had just smelled something putrid. Then, in a loud voice fairly dripping with hate, she spat out the words, "Well, thank you...HONKY!" I have to admit, I was taken aback at this response to what I thought was a simple act of common decency, something I'd have done for anyone, under the circumstances; but I recovered, smiled, and quietly shot back, "You're quite welcome....******!' I left here standing there, mouth agape, and walked away, feeling rather pleased with myself; "I showed her!", or so I thought.

It was a small, petty incident, and nothing came of it, but I've thought about it many times since, and I thought about it when we were discussing this latest incident last night. Was what I did right? I don't think so. True, she insulted me without provocation; in fact, for simply being courteous, with a "thank you" that was like a Christmas present wrapped in a turd, and I showed her...what exactly? That a white man of her generation would respond to nothing more than that with a hateful, degrading word? How do I know what inspired her to say what she did in the first place-was it some old hatred, a busy frustrating day, an earlier unpleasant reaction with someone who happened to look like me? I don't know, but I do know, that I had a choice that evening, and it would have done me no harm at all, to simply ignore the remark, and silently walk away, instead of validating whatever negative opinion she had of my race. I'm not proud of what I did, instead; I feel sure that noting good came of it, but just maybe, there's a lesson in there somewhere about the difference between immediate emotional gratification, and doing the right thing.

I think what you did was hilarious! She got what she had coming in my opinion....you smacked her on the exaxct level she was operating on and showed her that her racism would be answered in kind. Don't overthink this.....what you said doesn't make you a racist, just quick on the draw.

Thanks, but that wan't my point. I don't think that particular "retaliation in kind" was racist (at least, that was not my intent); and it may even have been justified (as you believe it was). The larger question, though, is what it accomplished. Obviously, my retort made me feel better at the moment; but beyond that, what did it do? Did it "teach her a lesson"? Yes, and that lesson was that a white man, even one who would take a moment to show her an act of courtesy and respect, would still refer to her race in a degrading manner, on a rather small provocation. I doubt that improved her perception; in her mind, all it did, was confirm the idea that "White people, even the apparently nicer ones, still despise me, because of the color of my skin; scratch the surface, and you'll see!" Now, what if I had simply said nothing? She might have gone away thinking, "I said that to one of THEM, and he didn't react; didn't even call me a name; and he DID open the door for me. Maybe SOME of THEM aren't as bad as I thought." At least the seed of doubt would have been planted. As it was, the decent act got lost in the hateful word, which was likely her only real memory of the encounter later. THAT represents a lost opportunity to open just one mind to possibilities it had not seen, and that's the point I was trying to make. There's nothing remarkable about meeting hate with hate; it's the refusal to do so, which is more likely to make someone think, and question previous assumptions.

You're too wise for this message board.

 

[BullKurtz]

Or what's going to happen? You're going to puff up on the internets? You kept making claims that aren't true, because you think being a fry cook who gets the run the register sometimes makes you an expert on credit cards.

No, my once owning a First Data agency after years as a Cardservice International sales manager makes me the expert you fucking troll. First you pose as a lawyer and now an expert on merchant services....my bet is you're a housewife with a drinking problem. STFU...there's enough bogus information going around without yiou adding to it.

 

[Asclepias]

Red Lobster and everybody else has to have modern terminals for security reasons....about 5 years ago the industry deemed old terminals unsecure/unencrypted and quit taking transactions from them. The copy in question is the customer copy which would have been handed to him after the transaction was completed....there would be no way he could have written "******" on his copy, or ever signed it, and her being able to snap a pic of it, unless he never got his copy or left it behind because he was in a hurry.... Bogus story.....hopefully Facebook gets sued for allowing it to be posted.

I dont get your point in saying that. The photo is of the restaraunts copy if I am not mistaken. How would she have his copy? When I go to a restaraunt I am presented with 3 slips of paper. One which I total including the tip, sign, and give back to the waiter/waitress. The other 2 I keep for tax purposes. I then walk out and rarely has the waiter or waitress picked up the slip I left behind before I leave. I dont eat at Red Lobsters so maybe they do something different? Either way if this new system is in place in all restaurants then he had ample opportunity to sign it and write the nasty slur without it appearing on his copy.

She worked at the restaurant right? I've never seen a terminal give 3 receipts....are you eating in American restaurants? There are no "carbon copies" anymore as I explained earlier....I don't know what's confusing abouit what I've said. I would say that on occasion a waitress will end her shift and ask that a customer's account be closed out so she can get her tip. If the customer keeps drinking for instance, the place will carry his tab until he's ready to leave. That's the only way you'd get more than one receipt. Understand this, all credit card processing is done the same way, in all 50 states so there's no discrepencies in how the process works.

The only thing that is confusing me is what your point is in saying his copy will exonerate him? It wont. It just means he either removed the carbon if there was one or he didn't choose to copy his slur onto the customer copy. Almost every place I eat at gives up three copies except fast food joints. Where do you eat that you dont get 3 slips handed to you?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's cute when you guys try to play lawyer. Forgery requires an intent to defraud, so even if we accept his story, it doesn't contain a necessary element of the offense.

A good prosecutor could argue that there was intent to defraud because she ended up making money off of it. It would be hard to convince me that that was her intent, but there are a few people it would work on.

You'd get laughed out of the court.

I wouldn't be making the argument, idiot.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So? People don't step in front of cars or slip purposefully in puddles in grocery stores?. There are lots of people who fake injuries to collect damages.

I am talking about the facts in this specific case. I think she was being stupid and had no criminal intent from what I have seen, but it is entirely possible there is something that proves she had criminal intent.

So, you have reason to believe she is not a scam artist. Did her posting of the receipt on line convince you that she was a woman of character?

It's simple. The customer says he wrote none and left. The waitress says he wrote "******" below "none" and then posted a photo of a customer's private financial information. This is about all we have with which to judge their characters.
Game set and match, customer.

I don't need a reason to believe she is not guilty, I need a reason to believe she is.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Forgery requires intent to injure or defraud (both of which refer to monetary damage). There was no effort to take money from Mr. McRacist here.

As usual, the person who is arguing that he understands the issues doesn't. There doesn't have to be any money, or actual harm, involved, all that is necessary is that the forger intended to pass a false document off as a real one.

Elements of Forgery - Forgery

The statute has been posted twice in the thread at this point. All of the relevant case law defines the harm as being monetary in nature. Your citation to a random blog doesn't overwrite that.

And I advised you to look up what defraud means, have you done it?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Who should people believe: some e-tough guy or what the state's statute specifically says (find 39-14-114 at LexisNexis® Custom Solution: Tennessee Code Research Tool for those interested)?

I've never said it matters whether or not the "forger" gained (it doesn't, by the way, nor does it require an intent to defraud a specific party). What it does require is intent to defraud or harm (in this context, financial gain). Even we accept all your claims about the waitress as true, you still wouldn't have the necessary elements. Those claims are all highly suspect anywhere, not even close to reaching beyond a reasonable doubt. They're not even enough to win a civil judgment.

Financial, or personal, gain.

The forgery statute only refers to financial gain.

It does not mention any type of gain.

 

[BullKurtz]

I dont get your point in saying that. The photo is of the restaraunts copy if I am not mistaken. How would she have his copy? When I go to a restaraunt I am presented with 3 slips of paper. One which I total including the tip, sign, and give back to the waiter/waitress. The other 2 I keep for tax purposes. I then walk out and rarely has the waiter or waitress picked up the slip I left behind before I leave. I dont eat at Red Lobsters so maybe they do something different? Either way if this new system is in place in all restaurants then he had ample opportunity to sign it and write the nasty slur without it appearing on his copy.

She worked at the restaurant right? I've never seen a terminal give 3 receipts....are you eating in American restaurants? There are no "carbon copies" anymore as I explained earlier....I don't know what's confusing abouit what I've said. I would say that on occasion a waitress will end her shift and ask that a customer's account be closed out so she can get her tip. If the customer keeps drinking for instance, the place will carry his tab until he's ready to leave. That's the only way you'd get more than one receipt. Understand this, all credit card processing is done the same way, in all 50 states so there's no discrepencies in how the process works.

The only thing that is confusing me is what your point is in saying his copy will exonerate him? It wont. It just means he either removed the carbon if there was one or he didn't choose to copy his slur onto the customer copy. Almost every place I eat at gives up three copies except fast food joints. Where do you eat that you dont get 3 slips handed to you?

THERE ARE NO CARBON COPIES OF TERMINAL-GENERATED CREDIT CARD RECEIPTS IN THE LAST SIX YEARS...HOW MANY MORE TIMES? The only way you'd get a "carbon copy" of a transaction is if the merchant's location has no electical power so he has to use his old knuckle-buster to complete the transaction. Once again there are NO TERMINALS THAT PRODUCE 3 RECEIPTS.... are you drunk?

 

[Asclepias]

She worked at the restaurant right? I've never seen a terminal give 3 receipts....are you eating in American restaurants? There are no "carbon copies" anymore as I explained earlier....I don't know what's confusing abouit what I've said. I would say that on occasion a waitress will end her shift and ask that a customer's account be closed out so she can get her tip. If the customer keeps drinking for instance, the place will carry his tab until he's ready to leave. That's the only way you'd get more than one receipt. Understand this, all credit card processing is done the same way, in all 50 states so there's no discrepencies in how the process works.

The only thing that is confusing me is what your point is in saying his copy will exonerate him? It wont. It just means he either removed the carbon if there was one or he didn't choose to copy his slur onto the customer copy. Almost every place I eat at gives up three copies except fast food joints. Where do you eat that you dont get 3 slips handed to you?

THERE ARE NO CARBON COPIES OF TERMINAL-GENERATED CREDIT CARD RECEIPTS IN THE LAST SIX YEARS...HOW MANY MORE TIMES? The only way you'd get a "carbon copy" of a transaction is if the merchant's location has no electical power so he has to use his old knuckle-buster to complete the transaction. Once again there are NO TERMINALS THAT PRODUCE 3 RECEIPTS.... are you drunk?

Are you slow or something? Did you not see the word if for the fourth time now? Like I said either way it doesn't make a difference if there is nothing on his receipt. He could have easily gotten around that carbon copy or not. You are flat out wrong about the number of receipts. I dine out often for business purposes and they always give me the store copy, the customer receipt, and another slip that looks almost identical to the customer receipt totaling the meal. Like I said before you may want stop eating fast food all the time and experience some fine dining if you want to experience this.

 

[Againsheila]

I am talking about the facts in this specific case. I think she was being stupid and had no criminal intent from what I have seen, but it is entirely possible there is something that proves she had criminal intent.

So, you have reason to believe she is not a scam artist. Did her posting of the receipt on line convince you that she was a woman of character?

It's simple. The customer says he wrote none and left. The waitress says he wrote "******" below "none" and then posted a photo of a customer's private financial information. This is about all we have with which to judge their characters.
Game set and match, customer.

I don't need a reason to believe she is not guilty, I need a reason to believe she is.

I don't get it, why give her the benefit of the doubt but not him? I know why I give him the benefit of the doubt, quite simply, the handwriting doesn't match.

 

[Asclepias]

So, you have reason to believe she is not a scam artist. Did her posting of the receipt on line convince you that she was a woman of character?

It's simple. The customer says he wrote none and left. The waitress says he wrote "******" below "none" and then posted a photo of a customer's private financial information. This is about all we have with which to judge their characters.
Game set and match, customer.

I don't need a reason to believe she is not guilty, I need a reason to believe she is.

I don't get it, why give her the benefit of the doubt but not him? I know why I give him the benefit of the doubt, quite simply, the handwriting doesn't match.

To me its way more probable he did it than the elaborate scheme you would need to believe in order to think she was lying. Unless you are a handwriting expert any difference you may think you see in the "none" and the n word is irrelevant.

 

[Againsheila]

I don't need a reason to believe she is not guilty, I need a reason to believe she is.

I don't get it, why give her the benefit of the doubt but not him? I know why I give him the benefit of the doubt, quite simply, the handwriting doesn't match.

To me its way more probable he did it than the elaborate scheme you would need to believe in order to think she was lying. Unless you are a handwriting expert any difference you may think you see in the "none" and the n word is irrelevant.

What's "elaborate" about it? She writes the "n" word, she posts it on Facebook, she asks for and receives money. Seems pretty simple to me.

 

[BullKurtz]

I don't get it, why give her the benefit of the doubt but not him? I know why I give him the benefit of the doubt, quite simply, the handwriting doesn't match.

To me its way more probable he did it than the elaborate scheme you would need to believe in order to think she was lying. Unless you are a handwriting expert any difference you may think you see in the "none" and the n word is irrelevant.

What's "elaborate" about it? She writes the "n" word, she posts it on Facebook, she asks for and receives money. Seems pretty simple to me.

Hopefully her account holding the FB funds gets hacked and she ends up being charged $39 for each check she bounces.

 

[Asclepias]

I don't get it, why give her the benefit of the doubt but not him? I know why I give him the benefit of the doubt, quite simply, the handwriting doesn't match.

To me its way more probable he did it than the elaborate scheme you would need to believe in order to think she was lying. Unless you are a handwriting expert any difference you may think you see in the "none" and the n word is irrelevant.

What's "elaborate" about it? She writes the "n" word, she posts it on Facebook, she asks for and receives money. Seems pretty simple to me.

Him simply writing the slur is way more simple.

 

[The Gadfly]

I don't need a reason to believe she is not guilty, I need a reason to believe she is.

I don't get it, why give her the benefit of the doubt but not him? I know why I give him the benefit of the doubt, quite simply, the handwriting doesn't match.

To me its way more probable he did it than the elaborate scheme you would need to believe in order to think she was lying. Unless you are a handwriting expert any difference you may think you see in the "none" and the n word is irrelevant.

Look, apart from assigning blame and passing judgement (and again, absent a criminal offense or civil tort, I wonder how relevant THAT really is), the significant thing is that someone committed a hateful act. In that sense, it doesn't matter which one did it, or which race they belong to. It's been damn near fifty years since this nation committed itself to the idea of racial equality. Does it not bother all of you that after nearly a generation, we STILL have to wonder why someone would use a racial slur in that situation, or, alternatively, whether someone else would create a hoax accusing someone of doing so? Does it not also bother you, that the prevailing response here, has been to point fingers and cast blame at the other side of the divide, and/or the political opposition, or to try to decide what extralegal consequences should befall the party we think is at fault, instead of trying to find some constructive means of breaking the cycle of grievance and counter-grievance that leads to this in the first place? Or maybe you'd prefer that we just go on slapping at each other, retaliating at each other, and picking the scabs off each other's wounds for another fifty years? If any of you don't understand the futility of continuing to do that, I don't know what else to say to you. THe ultimate indictment of that mode of thinking and acting, is that IT DOESN'T WORK; NOT FOR BLACK PEOPLE, NOT FOR WHITE PEOPLE. I'm getting a little tired of the old excuse that "THEY do it, so WE have to!" NO, we DON'T, and it's about time that got said.

 

[The Gadfly]

You're too wise for this message board.

Thanks, but the truth is, "we get too soon old, and too late smart", as an old proverb says.