Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Starbucks sued over Washington restroom camera (secret toilet cam)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 06:12 PM
Original message
Starbucks sued over Washington restroom camera (secret toilet cam)
WASHINGTON | Tue Sep 20, 2011 4:59pm EDT

Reuters) - A Virginia man is suing Starbucks Coffee Co after his 5-year-old daughter allegedly found a video camera in a Washington cafe bathroom pointed at the toilet.

William Yockey, of Norfolk, is asking for $1 million in the civil suit on four counts, including breach of privacy, his lawyer, Hank Schlosberg, told Reuters on Tuesday.

Yockey and his daughter went into a Starbucks in downtown Washington to use the restroom during an April sightseeing trip, he said.

After using the unisex toilet, the girl discovered a digital video camera hidden in the U-shaped drain pipe under the sink. The camera was aimed at the toilet and recording, Schlosberg said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/20/us-starbucks-camera-idUSTRE78J63W20110920
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
1. If this is at least the third incident, I'd go for more than
a million dollars. The statement says they their their responsibility very seriously -- you'd think after two previous problems they would make checking for cameras part of the daily cleaning procedure. Or something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
2. She Was Searching The Drain Pipe?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. Small children have a perspective that is lower to the ground.
She may have simply seen that "something" was down there and got curious to see what it was. Even a child knows that there isn't usually something tucked into the bend of a pipe under a sink.

Good for her, finding that. An adult probably would never have seen that camera.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChandlerJr Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. Why sue Starbucks?
Is it any wonder potential employers feel the need to run background checks on everyone, including social media and credit checks. You can't even hire a coffee jerk without putting your business at risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Because the Starbucks should be cleaning that bathroom
often enough, and thoroughly enough that something like this simply can't happen.

If that bathroom was being cleaned well on a routine basis then the staff that clean that restroom would have found that camera and called the police, unless it had only just been put there.

But the person who put that there must have felt that there was a very good chance that the employees wouldn't clean well enough to find the camera, and that the camera would remain undiscovered long enough to be able to come back to retrieve it too.

How long does would the bathroom have to go without a thorough cleaning for that to be possible? I guess that depends on how many pictures that peeper was hoping to get.

Regardless, this little girl found something that Starbucks should have found first.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChandlerJr Donating Member (554 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Or the person who planted the camera was a Starbucks employee
who should have been screened more closely and Starbucks needs to be more intrusive in it's hiring background checks to prevent this type of thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bandit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Where does the buck stop?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chan790 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. You'd think so...but you'd be wrong.
I used to manage a 'bux, I've talked about it at length. We were recognized for having the cleanest bathrooms in the entire company in my store, I was complemented on the cleanliness of them by a hospital sanitarian. I used to stick post-it notes in odd places to insure my staff was cleaning every surface of the shitter and not just the public-visible ones. To company standard the bathroom is checked once a half-hour and cleaned once every two hours whether it needs it or not. I maintained at-least that rate and usually double it if a slow day.

That camera would have gone undetected...there is simply nothing under there that need be or should be cleaned, except the floor-sweep and that wouldn't have discovered that camera. People who place these cameras are not idiots, those locations are chosen because they will not be discovered pretty much ever because they're in places that nobody ever has a reason to look or clean.

We don't polish the undersink pipes...that'd be idiotic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pintobean Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-20-11 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
4. Does anyone know where Chuck Berry was at the time?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dana_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 01:58 AM
Response to Original message
7. that happened at my daughter's last job too
(also a coffee place). They found the camera after the pipes started leaking. I don't know if the cops ever figured out who did it but my daughter is still afraid that she, her co-workers and customers may be somewhere online now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal_in_LA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. omg
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dana_b Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-21-11 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. yeah - that was our thought(s) too n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 02:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC