Two years ago, a 19 year old man decided to snatch a tip jar from a Starbucks and run. A witness to the crime ran after the suspect and was knocked to the ground as the suspect backed his car out of a parking space. As a result, the man sustained head injuries and died two days later.
Last year the victim’s family met with the thief, who served a year in prison for involuntary manslaughter, and not only forgave him, but allowed him to spread the ashes of their deceased relative on a memorial tree planted outside the shop.
So the man responsible for the loss is their new BFF. Starbucks is the real enemy here with their deadly tip jars:
It alleges that Starbucks “did not employ security to prevent the perpetration of such crimes” and that it “invited the act of perpetration of said crime” by having a tip jar.
As a “direct and proximate” result of this, Kreutz was killed after he was hit by the car, the filing claims. It says Starbucks had a duty to “exercise reasonable care” to protect Kreutz or give him adequate warning against harm.
Indeed, Starbucks is a monster for having a tip jar to help out their baristas. And that cash register they have with all the money in it? That’s just a ticking time bomb.