Watch moment laughing dine & dashers run away from restaurant after wracking up $200 bill gorging on shrimp & lobster
THIS is the shocking moment a trio of giggling dine and dashers fleece $200 from a restaurant after munching down on shrimp and lobster.
Appalling CCTV footage showed the heartless robbers running away without paying as they laughed like children - sending disgusted social media users into a rage.
3
3
3
The perpetrators took the free meal from local restaurant Phlavz Bar & Grille in University Village, Chicago - after racking up an immense $200 bill.
In the upsetting clip, the cruel group can be seen eating near the corner of the outdoor seating area.
One tall man is seen making a dash first, before two women follow behind him.
The third woman appears to hesitate, but quickly makes a run for it when she realises what is happening.
Co-owner of the local business Andrew Bonsu told ABC7: "It's actually disappointing, very disappointing to see that from the community we actually serve.
"We pour into the community."
The business's other co-owner Phil Simpson emphasised the damage done, saying: "The young lady that was serving that table, she's got kids at home.
"She gets a percentage of that tip.
"She worked hard to serve that table. They had a lot of food."
He added: "We are a small business, and you see this happen so often to different small businesses throughout the city, and you have to do something."
The pair took action by posting the group's moronic behaviour to social media.
And it didn't take long for the online manhunt to identify the brazen trio.
Simpson said that since the insensitive act, he was actually now in contact with one of the thieves.
He added that they actually offered to pay the bill after realising how stupid they had been.
But he said this was not the first instance of a dine-and-dash happening at his restaurant.
He emphasised that his business was struggling to keep up with the costs of goods and services going up - and soulless robberies like these were not helping.
The owners filed a police report to get the issue sorted out the "right way" rather than accept the thieves' belated cash.
Simpson said: "They apologized. They sent someone to pay the bill, but I declined to accept it.
"At that point, we are going to pursue this the right way."
In March, a suspected thief accused of stealing nearly $1,000 in sushi and drinks from a restaurant chain was busted after his sneaky dine-and-dash tactics backfired.
The suspect, who had been a thorn in the side of two Sushi Confidential locations in California, was caught after he tried to flee once again without paying.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
24 minutes ago
- Reuters
US sanctions target those providing Iran with defense machinery, Houthi oil trading
WASHINGTON, June 20 (Reuters) - The Trump administration said on Friday it had issued fresh Iran-related sanctions targeting eight entities, one vessel and one person for their alleged role in providing sensitive machinery for Tehran's defense industry. "The United States remains resolved to disrupt any effort by Iran to procure the sensitive, dual-use technology, components, and machinery that underpin the regime's ballistic missile, unmanned aerial vehicle, and asymmetric weapons programs," U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. "Treasury will continue to degrade Iran's ability to produce and proliferate these deadly weapons, which threaten regional stability and global security," he added in a statement announcing the action. Two of the entities include shipping companies based in Hong Kong: Unico Shipping Co Ltd and Athena Shipping Co Ltd, the statement said. The Treasury Department on Friday also issued counterterrorism-related sanctions targeting Yemen's Iran-aligned Houthis over alleged illicit oil trading and shipping, it said in a separate statement. Those sanctions target four individuals, 12 entities, and two vessels over imported oil and other illicit goods to support the Houthis, the department said.
The Independent
36 minutes ago
- The Independent
Investigator and jurors speak out about Karen Read murder trial in aftermath of not guilty verdict
Two jurors and the lead investigator in murder trial of Karen Read have come forward to comment about the case since a jury returned a not guilty verdict earlier this week. Read, 45, was charged with second-degree murder by authorities who said she intentionally hit Boston police officer John O'Keefe with her car after a night of drinking in the suburbs. The high-profile case culminated in a not guilty verdict on murder, manslaughter and leaving the scene charges Wednesday. The jury found Read guilty of operating a vehicle while under the influence. The trial has centered in part on lead investigator Michael Proctor, who defense attorneys described as biased against Read from the beginning. The State Police Trial Board found Proctor guilty of sending crude and defamatory text messages about Read while leading the investigation into her. He was fired and has drawn ire from Read supporters who believe he played a key role in a cover-up to frame her. Proctor told NBC 's 'Dateline' that the idea he is corrupt and framed Read is a 'ridiculous' accusation. He specifically said an accusation that he cracked Read's taillight to make it look like she backed into O'Keefe is 'absolutely not" true. 'I laugh because it's such a ridiculous accusation,' Proctor told the program. 'There's not one piece of evidence or fact to support that because it did not happen.' The judge in the case announced via court papers Wednesday that the jurors' names would be sealed from public view due to safety concerns. But one of the jurors, who identified himself only as 'Jason' in an interview with TMZ, said he did not believe Read collided with O'Keefe. He also said he did not think investigators planted taillight pieces at the scene to frame Read. 'I don't really know if there was a cover-up or not. I know that's the big conspiracy about it but I don't really know. All I know is there was a lot of holes in their investigation,' the juror said. Another juror, Paula Prado, told local news stations her mind changed about the case over the course of the last three weeks. At first, she thought Read was guilty of manslaughter, but her opinion changed as the case progressed. 'As the weeks passed by, I just realized there was too many holes that we couldn't fill. And there's nothing that put her at the scene in our opinion, despite just dropping John O'Keefe off,' Prado told media. Massachusetts State Police said in a statement that it extends its 'sincerest condolences to the loved ones of Boston Police Officer John O'Keefe.' The statement said the the events of the last three years have 'challenged' the department to reviews it actions and improve accountability and oversight. 'Under my direction as colonel, the state police has, and will continue to, improve in these regards. Our focus remains on delivering excellent police services that reflect the value of professionalism and maintain public trust,' Colonel Geoffrey Noble said in the statement. The jurors, state police and Proctor are not the first to speak out about the verdict. Some of the key witnesses in the trial released a joint statement Wednesday in which they called the not guilty ruling a 'devastating miscarriage of justice.' The joint statement was issued by several people including Brian Albert, who owned the home where the party took place, and Jennifer McCabe, Albert's sister-in-law, who was with Read and O'Keefe on the night of O'Keefe's death. Norfolk County District Attorney Michael Morrissey said only: 'The jury has spoken.'
The Independent
36 minutes ago
- The Independent
Supreme Court revives lawsuits against Palestinian authorities from US victims of terrorism attacks
The Supreme Court on Friday revived long-running lawsuits against Palestinian authorities from Americans who were killed or wounded in terrorism attacks in the Middle East. The justices upheld a 2019 law enacted by Congress specifically to allow the victims' lawsuits to go forward against the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority. The attacks occurred in the early 2000s, killing 33 people and wounding hundreds more, and in 2018, when a U.S.-born settler was stabbed to death by a Palestinian assailant outside a mall in the West Bank. The victims and their families assert that Palestinian agents either were involved in the attacks or incited them. The Palestinians have consistently argued that the cases shouldn't be allowed in American courts. The federal appeals court in New York has repeatedly ruled in favor of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority, despite Congress' efforts to allow the victims' lawsuits to be heard. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals first ruled in 2016 against the victims of the attacks from 20 years ago, tossing out a $654 million jury verdict in their favor. In that earlier ruling, the appeals court held U.S. courts can't consider lawsuits against foreign-based groups over random attacks that were not aimed at the United States. The victims had sued under the Anti-Terrorism Act, signed into law in 1992. The law was passed to open U.S. courts to victims of international terrorism, spurred by the killing of American Leon Klinghoffer during a 1985 terrorist attack aboard the Achille Lauro cruise ship. The jury found the PLO and the Palestinian Authority liable for six attacks and awarded $218 million in damages. The award was automatically tripled under the law. After the Supreme Court rejected the victims' appeal in 2018, Congress again amended the law to make clear it did not want to close the courthouse door to the victims. ___
