Boycott McDonalds

[am1]

Very disappointing:

 

[Passepartout]

Like I'm sure they'll notice your boycott. Let us know if Ronald sends you some coupons to lure you back.

 

[am1]

Like I'm sure they'll notice your boycott. Let us know if Ronald sends you some coupons to lure you back.

You are right rarely work but hopefully you are not attacked and McDonalds has video evidence that they do not want to hand over to law enforcement.

I buy 6-7 times a year for my kids. Other then that have been boycotting since I was in high school and did not know anywhere. Never have had a McDonalds hamburger.

 

[jabberwocky]

Sorry - too busy playing McDonalds Monopoly.

 

[James G]

I'll add this story as reason 143 on my list of why I don't eat at McDonalds. Reasons 1-142 concern heart attacks, the workers, the food, the clientele, the cleanliness, etc.

 

[SteelerGal]

Since it’s an individual franchise, they can do what they choose. However Depending on how valuable this Franchise is, Corporate could decide to push the owners out.

 

[slip]

I like McDonald’s and I I still have to have a Big Mac and fries from time to time.

 

[silentg]

I feel sorry for the woman that was assaulted. Not going to McDonalds anymore.

 

[DaveNV]

Has McDonalds said why they're not willing to turn over the video footage? Seems like we're only hearing one side of the story.

Dave

 

[am1]

Has McDonalds said why they're not willing to turn over the video footage? Seems like we're only hearing one side of the story.

Dave

McDonald’s is free to come out with their side of the story whenever they want. Even could have got in front of it

 

[DaveNV]

McDonald’s is free to come out with their side of the story whenever they want. Even could have got in front of it

So I take that to say they haven't said anything? That seems rather odd. The video said they have till this Friday to comply. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Dave

 

[CanuckTravlr]

I'm quite frankly shocked at the attitude of the McDonald's involved in this incident. Not a great display of concern for their customers. Unless the attacker is a close relative of the franchisee, it seems to be a prime example of how NOT to conduct public relations. The subpoena was issued in March, so they have had over 6 months to explain their position.

I notice the subpoena involves McDonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. I don't know if that is a local franchisee or a direct subsidiary of McDonald's Corporation itself. If it is a franchisee, with this now becoming known outside the local area, I would hope McDonald's Corporation would get involved and read some version of the riot act to the franchisee. If it's a corporate store then shame on them.

If it is just a franchisee, then if there is going to be a boycott, it should really be directed at the local store or any other stores in Florida owned by that franchisee. Not sure why other franchisees elsewhere should be penalized for the attitude of one idiot franchisee.

 

[DeniseM]

Google says: "McDonald’s said they would hand over the video if prosecutors agreed not to give it to a third party, including the media, and then give it back once trial is over." The police have already viewed the video, and ID'd the culprit from the video, and arrested him.

Judge rules McDonald’s cannot withhold surveillance video of attack on elderly woman in Hialeah

McDonald's refusal to release surveillance video of an attack on an elderly woman led to a judge granting an order for them to hand over the footage.

www.local10.com

I can't stand McDonald's, but this story seems to be more nuanced than the first impression.

 

[CanuckTravlr]

Google says: "McDonald’s said they would hand over the video if prosecutors agreed not to give it to a third party, including the media, and then give it back once trial is over." The police have already viewed the video, and ID'd the culprit from the video, and arrested him.

Judge rules McDonald’s cannot withhold surveillance video of attack on elderly woman in Hialeah

McDonald's refusal to release surveillance video of an attack on an elderly woman led to a judge granting an order for them to hand over the footage.

www.local10.com

IMO, funny how McDonald's feels that control of evidence should be different for them than for anyone else. They want it back "when the trial is over" and not shared with "any third party". What if the accused is convicted, but appeals the conviction and the tape has been returned to the store? I find this whole situation bizarre and McDonald's attitude to be disturbing at the very least. Who are they trying to protect...the attacker?

Even the judge has said in the written court order, that McDonald's has given no clear reason under the law for their conditions or refusal to hand over the video, despite having over six months to do so. I am really puzzled why a supposedly customer-focused organization is having so much trouble cooperating with police and the courts in favour of the attacker and to the detriment of the interests of its customer, the victim.

 

[Patri]

Why have cameras running if you don't want the footage for something? Maybe they would use it if the store was broken into? This makes no sense. I imagine they will ultimately turn the tape over. Otherwise, McDonalds, turn your cameras off!

 

[am1]

Google says: "McDonald’s said they would hand over the video if prosecutors agreed not to give it to a third party, including the media, and then give it back once trial is over." The police have already viewed the video, and ID'd the culprit from the video, and arrested him.

Judge rules McDonald’s cannot withhold surveillance video of attack on elderly woman in Hialeah

McDonald's refusal to release surveillance video of an attack on an elderly woman led to a judge granting an order for them to hand over the footage.

www.local10.com

I can't stand McDonald's, but this story seems to be more nuanced than the first impression.

Exactly evidence needs to kept for appeal. Maybe if someone else posted then you would react differently?

 

[am1]

I'm quite frankly shocked at the attitude of the McDonald's involved in this incident. Not a great display of concern for their customers. Unless the attacker is a close relative of the franchisee, it seems to be a prime example of how NOT to conduct public relations. The subpoena was issued in March, so they have had over 6 months to explain their position.

I notice the subpoena involves McDonald's Restaurants of Florida, Inc. I don't know if that is a local franchisee or a direct subsidiary of McDonald's Corporation itself. If it is a franchisee, with this now becoming known outside the local area, I would hope McDonald's Corporation would get involved and read some version of the riot act to the franchisee. If it's a corporate store then shame on them.

If it is just a franchisee, then if there is going to be a boycott, it should really be directed at the local store or any other stores in Florida owned by that franchisee. Not sure why other franchisees elsewhere should be penalized for the attitude of one idiot franchisee.

All for one and one for all. If its just a rogue franchise then get corporate in it before the blowback it too much.

 

[DeniseM]

I'm guessing that the franchise owner is afraid that the bad publicity of the video being aired on the local news will hurt his business, but that strategy may have backfired on him.

 

[pedro47]

their must something in fine print by McDonald's about who can used the video
IMHO..

 

[Brett]

I want a bacon, egg and cheese biscuit ...

 

[beejaybee]

Ignoring subpoenas seems to be a common occurrence of late.

 

[Talent312]

the[re] must something in fine print...

It doesn't matter what they say.
Confidentiality laws require prosecutors to get court orders for things like medical records, but
they don't apply to business records. They are fair game for subpoenas, which this McD ignored.
Perhaps a daily fine or a few nights in the pokey would encourage compliance.

BTW, I prefer Egg McMuffins.
.

 

[Bunk]

It looks to me that this is a McDonald's owned subsidiary and not a franchisee.

2020 FLORIDA PROFIT CORPORATION ANNUAL REPORT
DOCUMENT# 456358
Entity Name: MCDONALD'S RESTAURANTS OF FLORIDA, INC.
Current Principal Place of Business:
110 N CARPENTER ST CHICAGO, IL 60607-2101
Current Mailing Address:
711 JORIE BLVD
OAK BROOK, IL 60523 US

The officers and directors named all have the same Illinois address.
I don't understand how any lawyer for McDonald's would ignore the subpoena

 

[controller1]

Deleted

 

[RX8]

I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that the suspect is the son of the franchise owner.