6 ms·

How A Police Officer Threatened A Yelp Reviewer

• ctdonath 13y ago
  A case worth following. Any chance of a persistent link to details as they emerge?
  • coldpie 13y ago
    I don't think Mr White does that, but his blog is well worth following in general. Here's his RSS feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/Popehat?format=xml http://feeds.feedburner.com/Popehat?format=xml
• bronbron 13y ago
  Maybe it's just me but this seems like... fluff, a little bit. There are a lot of instances of police abusing their power, but this is really on the low-end of that (i.e. I don't really consider this news). This just sounds like one of those situations where everyone involved is being kinda shitty.
  • MSM 13y ago
    I feel the same way. I looked at the review that was posted and I didn't see anything that was really that bad about the pizza place. He kind of blew up a few things, so I can see why the owner would be upset. Of course the owner probably took it too far as well. As for the review: He had a big problem with putting the trash cans in the walk-in, but I don't really understand why. I leave my trashcan open and in the kitchen all day everyday. Am I putting myself in danger without realizing? He found some synthetic pot (but isn't that legal?) along with some insulin needles and came to the conclusion that it was narcotics. I had a chuckle when I imagined some guy shooting up heroin on the job but then getting synthetic pot in lieu of the real deal. I just can't imagine. Did he ever consider that the guy was diabetic?
    • 51Cards 13y ago
      He had a big problem with putting the trash cans in the walk-in, but I don't really understand why. I leave my trashcan open and in the kitchen all day everyday. Am I putting myself in danger without realizing? A walk in is by design a closed air-flow environment. Not sure I'd really like a trashcan sitting in a closed environment with food. I usually avoid putting my garbage in the fridge.
      • alexhawdon 13y ago
        Yes. Hygiene regulations that have to be adhered to in commercial settings prohibit a LOT of stuff you really wouldn't think twice about doing at home. It's all for good reason. Whilst you might be preparing a meal for a healthy 20-something person with a great immune system, restaurants have to cater to EVERYBODY.
      • MSM 13y ago
        That's a fair view. My view is that I'm sure the garbage gets emptied, and you're left a dirty bin in the fridge. Maybe it's not the cleaniest thing to do. To me having this guy complain about the (in my opinion) small things he is complaining about makes it obvious there aren't more urgent health concerns with the place. I would definitely eat there.
  • emingo 13y ago
    IMHO The interesting part of this story is NOT the 'level of wrongness' in police abuse. It's the policing of internet reviews! On the surface this is a trivial story, but in reality, this is totally bananas! A local cop policing the internet through means of coercion? Sounds sufficiently interesting to me!
    • KenL 13y ago
      Given the known facts, I agree. It's not a whack with a baton, but government authorities shouldn't call someone to wrongly warn him that his actions might be harassment. Even if it's libel, that's what lawyers and the civil court system is for.
    • notahacker 13y ago
      Did you listen to the phone call? It's possible that she was subtly threatening an innocent autistic man for the thrill of power that comes from shutting them up. It's more likely that after receiving a complaint from some angry citizen about "this crazy autistic guy online that keeps posting stuff on the internet about me even though it gets deleted" she decided to try to satisfy both parties by defusing the whole thing. Especially if she sympathized with the autistic guy after reading the post and suspected (i) he probably wasn't doing much harm and definitely wasn't intending to but (ii) probably wouldn't stand a chance in a courtroom if the angry citizen that kept badgering her followed through with his legal threats. It actually scans better if you assume the policewoman was exceeding her authority and legal knowledge in an attempt to prevent the needless harm of a disabled citizen being sued into oblivion by some over-litiguous asshole. And I'm generally in favour of police exercising that sort of discretion.
  • Zigurd 13y ago
    I get bad reviews of dubious quality on Amazon, but Amazon's "useful" scores are usually reliable at marking those reviews as poor indicators. Yelp appears to have categorically filtered out reviews referring to the proprietor's behavior in this case. Unless those reviews are actually inaccurate, I don't see a reason why they should be filtered.
  • kazagistar 13y ago
    Isn't abuse of power the most terrifying when it is used not for the extraordinary, but for the mundane? The very idea that police abuse of power is "mundane" in some way is disturbing.
• crusso 13y ago
  I feel sorry for the owners of the Pizza parlor. Sounds like they were trying to do a good thing by working with a state agency and hiring a special needs individual, even if it didn't work out. I really don't like seeing the police try to get involved, though. As another user said, this whole thing doesn't rise to the level of serious police abuse of power, put on front page of HN, though.
  • dfxm12 13y ago
    Why do you feel sorry for someone who is in a position of power & is using that to abuse a former employee? Do you think one negative Yelp review is going to ruin the owners' lives or livelihood, and that is a more serious concern than following the health code? If the place had been up to code, or the employee's concerns had been allayed, this whole situation could have been avoided, and that's the better way to deal with the situation, compared to police intimidation and hang up calls.
    • tomrod 13y ago
      Be careful. You're assuming here that the pizza parlor actually was breaking the health code, and the pictures haven't been doctored or altered in some way. In the US criminal system one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of peers, not accused in a kangaroo court of internet denizens.
      • jessaustin 13y ago
        In the US criminal system one is innocent until proven guilty in a court of peers, not accused in a kangaroo court of internet denizens. This is completely backwards. The only one who got (unwarranted IMHO) attention from the criminal justice system was the Yelp user. In the USA, as well as in every other location where free speech is valued, the owner of the pizza dive is just going to have to put up with the accusations of internet denizens.
        • tomrod 13y ago
          As I see it, the pizza parlor is being accused by the former employees of sanitation issues that break the local health code ordinances. The situation regarding the officer is unfortunate, but I fail to see where a real overreach occurred on her part (despite PopeHat's claim). From the pizza parlor owner's POV, a former employee is harassing him online and having a negative impact to the business--especially if the claims by the former employee cannot be corroborated.
• jamespo 13y ago
  not exactly Rodney King is it
• lettergram 13y ago
  There were only 3 reviews on Yelp, of which 2 were removed.. Doesn't really seem like harassment to me, nor does it really seem like the parlor owner did anything particularly awful (although looking at the photos it was disgusting in the restaurant). Basically I feel like the police needn't be involved and that officer probably should have read the Yelp posts prior to calling, I highly doubt this would ever go to trial. From Yelp http://www.yelp.com/filtered_reviews/ELUSdeDHbZLMVcl4K5qLkw?fsid=S-iCwDly9XMCz8mhhLLonA http://www.yelp.com/filtered_reviews/ELUSdeDHbZLMVcl4K5qLkw?...: A month or so ago, I was finally given a job at a local pizzeria named "The Wild Tomato" in Harrisburg. I was given duties mainly related to cleaning and sanitation. The first concern I had was the fact that they were storing trash cans in their walk-in fridge, where uncovered food and sauces were often stored despite health regulations. I learned to ignore this for the sake of employment. I have photos/video of this. Shortly within the month, I discovered a bag near the outside trash dumpster that contained multiple empty bags that had contained synthetic marijuana, a multitude of hypodermic needles, and receipts for deliveries and time-clock slips, all with the same employee's name listed (one of the drivers). Again, I have photos. Upon notifying Paul, the owner, he threw away the receipts with the employee's information and told me that it was "no longer my problem". At the time, I assumed that this meant he would take corrective action on his own. However, the employee in question was never reprimanded and continues working at the shop. Recently, I found another empty vial of synthetic marijuana, this time inside the building in the employee area, among the cleaning supplies. When I brought it to the attention of Paul, he stated that he did not care about what his employee's did, or if they brought it into the workplace or not, as long as they did not physically use them during work. He told me he could not control what his workers put into their bodies, and asked me if I wanted him to drug test everyone. I mentioned the previous incident with the needles and how I could have gotten stuck by one, causing a liability. He responded "Well then you better stay home, you go outside you could get shot, you could get hit by a car, the real world's dangerous." He also stated that an empty container with a commercial label on it, advertised with drug images but "not for human consumption" could have had anything in it. He said "If I get a vial and put a label that says cocaine on it does that mean it had cocaine in it?". He dismissed any safety concerns I might have had, implying that I was at fault for "having a problem" with narcotics on the premises.
  • 13y ago
• wavesum 13y ago
  Umm what is the threat here? I think the police woman is just trying to help. Informing that what he is doing might be illegal and it's probably not a good idea. Trying to explain to this young man that even if he doesn't like his former employer, harassment in the internet is not right way to take it forward, but going to health officials instead. I call that service. I frankly see no reason for all this butthurt.
  • ncallaway 13y ago
    > "Informing that what he is doing might be illegal" His actions were not illegal. > "harassment in the internet is not right way to take it forward" His actions weren't harassment, but a very clear expression of his 1A rights. > "but going to health officials instead" If a customer suspected health codes were being violated, I would prefer the marketplace be informed as well as health officials. Similarly, if someone gets sick after eating at a restaurant, I would prefer them to tell me, not health code officials. > "I frankly see no reason for all this butthurt." I definitely see a reason for it, though I might agree that the reaction in this instance is much larger than it needs to be. Securing pro-bono counsel for the guy is definitely a reasonable response, though. And it might be hard to secure pro-bono counsel without raising the case further into the public eye.
    • Zimahl 13y ago
      His actions don't appear to be illegal, but do the police have the right to not investigate something that was reported as illegal? I mean, if harassment is claimed by someone should the police just shrug their shoulders? No, they should probably investigate and determine if a crime actually happened. In the meantime, telling someone what could happen if they were doing what was claimed is not what I'd call 'threatening'. I guess don't really see the problem with the phone call from the police either. It's just a subtle 'I don't want to have to come back out here' warning that they give every day to prevent things from getting to the point that they have to intervene. It does seem like a bored police department, but I didn't hear any threats in the phone call. This article jumps the gun a little bit by inferring collusion between the police and the pizza restaurant.
• freditup 13y ago
  A police officer is essentially a community worker and I believe should have that mentality of serving the community. I don't really believe what the officer did was malicious or even all that inappropriate. I think the police officer is probably wrong in the views she is expressing, but I don't think it's wrong for her to call him in this situation or even help the restaurant owner and the former employee work out an issue.
  • gpcz 13y ago
    I can understand the police officer acting as a conflict-resolution mediator, but unless the officer passed the bar exam I don't think it's appropriate for him to give what could be misinterpreted as legal advice on civil law.
  • john_b 13y ago
    Ordinary community workers aren't charged with the responsibility of executing state-sponsored violence against people deemed threatening or unlawful, and are allowed significant legal protection in their duties. Given that context, he has a very legitimate reason to interpret this as a threat or an attempt at coercion.
• Domenic_S 13y ago
  The real story is Yelp's filtering algo. Notice how all the 1 star reviews are filtered out, including this guy's? After about the 3rd time of going to a 5-yelp-star place and it being terrible, then digging in to see all the negative reviews were filtered, I had enough. It's why I don't use Yelp anymore.
  • foobarbazqux 13y ago
    Isn't the longstanding scandal that Yelp will filter negative reviews if you pay them, making it a kind of protection racket?
    • tomrod 13y ago
      Wish I'd been first to market. Protection racket with brand following? Yes please!