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

[Asclepias]

while what was done to her was wrong and totally uncalled for, her handling of the situation was also wrong. she put her company in an awkward position.

Looks like she was the "doer" not the "doee."

The handwriting matches hers, not the the customers'...

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Charged?

With what?

She and Red Lobster ARE being sued, though.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Looks like she was the "doer" not the "doee."

The handwriting matches hers, not the the customers'...

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

We already have one, but you rejected me because I am not black.

 

[KissMy]

Looks like she was the "doer" not the "doee."

The handwriting matches hers, not the the customers'...

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

So you are saying U.S. Postal Inspection Service experts are bias? And we should never believe anything someone paid by the government tells us? Wow I thought anyone who did not believe government was a Kook.

 

[Asclepias]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

We already have one, but you rejected me because I am not black.

I rejected you because you're not a handwriting expert.

 

[Asclepias]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

So you are saying U.S. Postal Inspection Service experts are bias? And we should never believe anything someone paid by the government tells us? Wow I thought anyone who did not believe government was a Kook.

Anyone can be biased if they are getting paid to be biased. If the expert wanted to be more credible he should have done it for free. I'm not impressed at all.

 

[Steven_R]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Charged?

With what?

She and Red Lobster ARE being sued, though.

Fraud, maybe. At the very least there is grounds for civil suit. In any event, she is untouchable. Tawana Brawley was never charged and Crystal Mangum (Duke lacrosse) was never charged for falsely crying rape. It's perfectly okay to try to destroy a man's life with a false accusation and get away with it...if the accuser belongs to a protected class.

 

[martybegan]

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

So you are saying U.S. Postal Inspection Service experts are bias? And we should never believe anything someone paid by the government tells us? Wow I thought anyone who did not believe government was a Kook.

Anyone can be biased if they are getting paid to be biased. If the expert wanted to be more credible he should have done it for free. I'm not impressed at all.

His analysis can be checked by another expert. Handwriting analysis, while a mix of science and art, still follows general protocols. Anyone out there is free to dispute his findings.

 

[martybegan]

Looks like she was the "doer" not the "doee."

The handwriting matches hers, not the the customers'...

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

All expert witnesses are paid by the people who want to call them to the stand. His analysis is open to all to be refuted.

Pulling the "he's getting paid to do this" maneuver is hacky.

 

[Sunshine]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

All expert witnesses are paid by the people who want to call them to the stand. His analysis is open to all to be refuted.

Pulling the "he's getting paid to do this" maneuver is hacky.

It doesn't work in court either because all expert witnesses get paid.

 

[Sunshine]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Charged?

With what?

She and Red Lobster ARE being sued, though.

Fraud, maybe. At the very least there is grounds for civil suit. In any event, she is untouchable. Tawana Brawley was never charged and Crystal Mangum (Duke lacrosse) was never charged for falsely crying rape. It's perfectly okay to try to destroy a man's life with a false accusation and get away with it...if the accuser belongs to a protected class.

And apparently to be an unnamed school shooter as well.

 

[Asclepias]

You are assuming that. She hasn't been charged yet, and if she did write it, she should be.

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

All expert witnesses are paid by the people who want to call them to the stand. His analysis is open to all to be refuted.

Pulling the "he's getting paid to do this" maneuver is hacky.

I dont see anything yet about the expert going to court. Seem more like an attempt to sway public opinion. When the expert gets into court and says something that exposed him to perjury then I can trust him. I doubt he will do that. Right now it just looks like he was paid to say the guy didn't write it.

 

[martybegan]

Everyone completely missed the fact that he hired this guy and plans to sue Red Lobster. When they can get an uncompromised, objective party please PM me on it.

All expert witnesses are paid by the people who want to call them to the stand. His analysis is open to all to be refuted.

Pulling the "he's getting paid to do this" maneuver is hacky.

I dont see anything yet about the expert going to court. Seem more like an attempt to sway public opinion. When the expert gets into court and says something that exposed him to perjury then I can trust him. I doubt he will do that. Right now it just looks like he was paid to say the guy didn't write it.

Then the other side can bring thier expert in to say he did write it, and thier analysis can be taken into account.

This has been out a few days now, one would think there would be some refuting done by another expert, but it hasnt happened yet.

There are countless examples of made up stories of racism, this wouldnt be any different.

 

[Asclepias]

All expert witnesses are paid by the people who want to call them to the stand. His analysis is open to all to be refuted.

Pulling the "he's getting paid to do this" maneuver is hacky.

I dont see anything yet about the expert going to court. Seem more like an attempt to sway public opinion. When the expert gets into court and says something that exposed him to perjury then I can trust him. I doubt he will do that. Right now it just looks like he was paid to say the guy didn't write it.

Then the other side can bring thier expert in to say he did write it, and thier analysis can be taken into account.

This has been out a few days now, one would think there would be some refuting done by another expert, but it hasnt happened yet.

There are countless examples of made up stories of racism, this wouldnt be any different.

Why would you think that? No expert is going to refute anything unless they too test his writing. This is a company with corporate attorneys. I'm sure they are not going to expose their hand. Right now all this guy is doing is making noise to see if he can settle out of court. Thats how the game works.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Fraud, maybe.

Can't be fraud unless money is involved.

Basically she is a scumbag - but that is not a criminal offense.

At the very least there is grounds for civil suit.

Yes, she and Red Lobster are being sued for Libel and Defamation.

In any event, she is untouchable. Tawana Brawley was never charged and Crystal Mangum (Duke lacrosse) was never charged for falsely crying rape. It's perfectly okay to try to destroy a man's life with a false accusation and get away with it...if the accuser belongs to a protected class.

Unfortunately, the Darden Group, owners of Red Lobster, will be the ones who pay - the "deep pockets" game used in our injustice system.

 

[Katzndogz]

It doesn't matter whether the waitress was lying. It SHOULD have been true because even a lie is justice. The customer SHOULD have written a racial slur so he DID, whether he really did or not.

The kind of people who fake a racist attack by setting themselves on fire are the kind of people who would do anything to fake a racist incident.

Police: Sharmeka Moffitt Lied About Attack, Set Herself On Fire (VIDEO)

 

[martybegan]

I dont see anything yet about the expert going to court. Seem more like an attempt to sway public opinion. When the expert gets into court and says something that exposed him to perjury then I can trust him. I doubt he will do that. Right now it just looks like he was paid to say the guy didn't write it.

Then the other side can bring thier expert in to say he did write it, and thier analysis can be taken into account.

This has been out a few days now, one would think there would be some refuting done by another expert, but it hasnt happened yet.

There are countless examples of made up stories of racism, this wouldnt be any different.

Why would you think that? No expert is going to refute anything unless they too test his writing. This is a company with corporate attorneys. I'm sure they are not going to expose their hand. Right now all this guy is doing is making noise to see if he can settle out of court. Thats how the game works.

So there is ZERO chance this waitress or someone else besides the person being accused wrote in the word "******."

The new analyses being brought to light go against your preferred view of the event. Thus attacking the messanger is the only thing you have.

The anaylsis of the handwriting is out there for all to see, I'm sure if there is something wrong with said anaylsis someone will counter the experts claims.

 

[Asclepias]

Then the other side can bring thier expert in to say he did write it, and thier analysis can be taken into account.

This has been out a few days now, one would think there would be some refuting done by another expert, but it hasnt happened yet.

There are countless examples of made up stories of racism, this wouldnt be any different.

Why would you think that? No expert is going to refute anything unless they too test his writing. This is a company with corporate attorneys. I'm sure they are not going to expose their hand. Right now all this guy is doing is making noise to see if he can settle out of court. Thats how the game works.

So there is ZERO chance this waitress or someone else besides the person being accused wrote in the word "******."

The new analyses being brought to light go against your preferred view of the event. Thus attacking the messanger is the only thing you have.

The anaylsis of the handwriting is out there for all to see, I'm sure if there is something wrong with said anaylsis someone will counter the experts claims.

I cant tell if you first sentence is a question or a statement. Assuming it is a question there is always a chance that he is innocent and that she or someone else wrote it.

I'm not attacking the messenger. I'm saying people have been paid before to lie or color the truth and I'm pretty sure its not an isolated incident.

You cant critic the analysis unless you too test the handwriting. No expert is going to risk damage to their career claiming he is wrong without testing for themselves and coming up with a different conclusion.

 

[martybegan]

Why would you think that? No expert is going to refute anything unless they too test his writing. This is a company with corporate attorneys. I'm sure they are not going to expose their hand. Right now all this guy is doing is making noise to see if he can settle out of court. Thats how the game works.

So there is ZERO chance this waitress or someone else besides the person being accused wrote in the word "******."

The new analyses being brought to light go against your preferred view of the event. Thus attacking the messanger is the only thing you have.

The anaylsis of the handwriting is out there for all to see, I'm sure if there is something wrong with said anaylsis someone will counter the experts claims.

I cant tell if you first sentence is a question or a statement. Assuming it is a question there is always a chance that he is innocent and that she or someone else wrote it.

I'm not attacking the messenger. I'm saying people have been paid before to lie or color the truth and I'm pretty sure its not an isolated incident.

You cant critic the analysis unless you too test the handwriting. No expert is going to risk damage to their career claiming he is wrong without testing for themselves and coming up with a different conclusion.

If this person is purely doing it for the money and falsifying thier analysis, I'm sure somone else in the profession would be ALL OVER them about it. The samples are in the open, and availible for another expert to check at thier leisure.

Here is the resume of the document examiner, he has an impressive CV, as well as the proper professional associations.

http://www.asqde.org/vastrick/vitae.pdf

 

[Asclepias]

So there is ZERO chance this waitress or someone else besides the person being accused wrote in the word "******."

The new analyses being brought to light go against your preferred view of the event. Thus attacking the messanger is the only thing you have.

The anaylsis of the handwriting is out there for all to see, I'm sure if there is something wrong with said anaylsis someone will counter the experts claims.

I cant tell if you first sentence is a question or a statement. Assuming it is a question there is always a chance that he is innocent and that she or someone else wrote it.

I'm not attacking the messenger. I'm saying people have been paid before to lie or color the truth and I'm pretty sure its not an isolated incident.

You cant critic the analysis unless you too test the handwriting. No expert is going to risk damage to their career claiming he is wrong without testing for themselves and coming up with a different conclusion.

If this person is purely doing it for the money and falsifying thier analysis, I'm sure somone else in the profession would be ALL OVER them about it. The samples are in the open, and availible for another expert to check at thier leisure.

Here is the resume of the document examiner, he has an impressive CV, as well as the proper professional associations.

http://www.asqde.org/vastrick/vitae.pdf

Why would they be all over him if they don't have their own handwriting sample to work with? That would be pretty stupid. Just because you are "sure" doesn't make true.

Resumes dont make people honest. Why would you think that because someone has a resume they must be telling the truth?