I fully support law enforcement but these guys stop at nothing to write more tickets. Recently police in my area have been posting people with binoculars peering into cars, while enforcing seatbelt laws, utilizing about 5 cop cars to perform the stops. They complain about staffing shortages to fight terrorism but have plenty of manpower to write seatbelt tickets.

McSting lacked franchise approval

U.S. 41 drive-through officer catches law-breaking customers

By MIKE HOYEM, mhoyem@news-press.com


Fort Myers police recently manned a new battle station in their fight against crime: the drive-through window at McDonald’s.

Dressed as a McDonald’s employee, an undercover officer worked the drive-through window March 21 and April 25 and spotted enough wrongdoing inside customers’ cars to warrant six arrests and 29 citations.

But someone involved — it wasn’t really clear who on Friday — may end up with Egg McMuffin on his face because the owner of the restaurant at 3645 Cleveland Ave. was never told and neither was the fast-food chain’s corporate headquarters.

“We don’t get involved with those sort of things without consulting counsel,” franchise owner Samir Homsi said. “Somebody didn’t do the right steps. I’m upset, because I didn’t know anything and they didn’t ask me.”

Homsi said he won’t let police use his restaurant for surveillance again.

“We don’t allow anybody even behind the counter,” Homsi said. “Sometimes our assistants, they do crazy things and they think because police are involved everything is kosher.”

According to arrest reports, Officer Glen Eppler did the undercover work — peering into customers’ vehicles as they stopped at the window where money is exchanged.

When Eppler saw lawbreakers — from people smoking marijuana in plain view to those who hadn’t strapped their children into safety seats — he would radio officers in patrol units McSTING: Restaurant owner, corporate office were not aware of the police effort

down the street and have the cars pulled over.

According to police, the operation netted a “significant amount of drugs” and two pistols.

Fort Myers Police Chief Hilton Daniels released a statement Friday saying he was “pleased with the outcome of these investigations” and wanted to thank McDonald’s for “helping us work to fight crime.”

But that was before it was learned that neither Homsi nor headquarters had been notified.

Fort Myers Police spokeswoman Kara Winton said the officers involved were led to believe everyone knew what was going on.

She said police got the idea for the sting after the restaurant’s employees and managers told police about seeing criminal activity in the drive-through lane.

“They expressed frustration that they often saw people coming through the drive-through actively smoking drugs or with drugs and guns beside them, and they felt like they couldn’t do anything about it,” Winton said. “It also bothered them when they saw kids not in their seat belts.”

Winton said police discussed the operation with a female general manager.

“The officer told her she needed to get a hold of upper management and corporate before they proceeded and she called back and said we had the green light and McDonald’s had approved it,” Winton said.

The female, Winton said, left the restaurant before the operation began and a male manager took over.

“They were so happy through all of this,” Winton said. “They were completely supportive of this. ... We regret the appropriate sources didn’t get notified, but we were under the impression that they did.”

Two men who appeared to be managers told a reporter Friday the sting was not the restaurant’s idea. Both refused to give their names.

Sheila Young, a communications worker at McDonald’s headquarters in Oak Brook, Ill., declined to discuss the matter.

“This is not something we would be commenting on or should be commenting on because it is a police matter,” Young said.

Question of legality

The News-Press learned of the operation through an anonymous tipster, who said the sting seemed to be an invasion of customers’ privacy.

Several local attorneys said they saw nothing illegal about the sting, but didn’t like the sound of it.

“I don’t like what you’re describing,” said attorney Bruce Tischler of Cape Coral, who has expertise in civil rights cases. “You just feel like you’re being violated. You’re going in for your Big Mac and you’ve got an officer looking into your car. It’s like going to Disney World and finding out all the Mickey characters are undercover narcotics officers.”

“People are going to say, ‘I came here for a Big Mac, not Big Brother,’” said defense attorney Aaron O’Brien of Fort Myers, who was a 2002 Libertarian Party candidate for state representative. “The lawyer in me says they have a right to stand there and do that. The Libertarian in me says hold it. People could just stop going there if they’re going to be subjected to that kind of scrutiny.”

Chief Assistant State Attorney Randall B. McGruther said he could see no trouble with the sting as far as prosecuting those who were arrested.

“I don’t see offhand any particular problem there,” McGruther said. “They are in a place where they have a right to be and there’s really no difference in them being in a McDonald’s work outfit instead of civilian clothes. There is no expectation of privacy at a McDonald’s drive-through window.”

Several people who have eaten at the franchise had mixed opinions Friday.

“I go there every morning for breakfast,” Christina Gonzalez, 24, of Fort Myers said. “I think it’s ridiculous. McDonald’s, of all places, an undercover McDonald’s worker.”

Justin Bala, 17, of Fort Myers said he eats there all the time, too.

“I totally agree with it,” Bala said. “I’ve got a lot of cops in my family. I believe in the law. There is nothing wrong with looking into people’s cars.”

Bekki Shanklin, 53, of Fort Myers works nearby and has eaten at the restaurant.

“There are a lot of people doing a lot of bad things, stupid things that possibly harm others,” Shanklin said. “I think it’s awfully Big Brotherish, but there’s an awful lot of things that need to be Big Brothered upon.”

Don't you think it would be better if the police were uniformed and would possibly PREVENT a red light runner from killing someone? What about police presence preventing crime in the area. Our police departments are pathetic sometimes.

They don't even need cops to give you a red-light ticket here, cameras at intersections do it for them. If you are photographed in an intersection after your light has turned red they send a summons to your home. The pirce of getting out of the court date is $190.

__________________
Jason Priest
1999 E430
1995 E420 - retired
1986 420SEL - retired

I agree, I don't know what the point is of hiding in plain clothes or in unmarked cars. The MTA police post empty cruisers around bridges and highways and it does a super job of slowing people down and raising general awareness, and they don't even need to pay for the personnel. They probably were just looking to increase their revenue, just like that town called New Rome (or something like that) in Ohio. But regardless, I'm not offended by tactics like these. People shouldn't be doing illegal things anyway right? And the police have the right to look into peoples' cars.

Alex

__________________
1983 300D (parked for four years)
2012 VW Sportwagen TDI Manual
2001 Miata SE
1962 Chevrolet Corvair Rampside

BENZ-LGB how about a professional opinion?

sometimes, you need to undo your seatbelt to reach out to the drive-thru clerk ... or to get money from your wallet ...

My thought exactly.

Of course giving someone a ticket for not wearing a seat belt at a drive-thru is ridiculous, but if sting operations are set up looking for plain view weapons or drugs, I don't see anything wrong with that. Alright RS, what are you booing? I'm not including seat-belt violations as one of those crimes that "people shouldn't be committing." But irregardless, I would feel severely angered if I were pulled over by someone dressed like a fast food attendant who just wanted to give me a citation for not wearing a seat belt while rolling forward to the "pay" window. It would be a flagrant mis-use of the powers the citizen body grants the police force for their own protection.

__________________
1983 300D (parked for four years)
2012 VW Sportwagen TDI Manual
2001 Miata SE
1962 Chevrolet Corvair Rampside

You wrote what I am "booing" this is a total abuse of power from top to bottom. You have certain basic rights one of them is not having Big Brother peer through your curtains looking for violations of the law.

A little piece of advice, if you are planning on being a lawyer you should start being consistent. Whether they are peering into cars for seatbelt use of pot smokers, they are still posing as a civilian for the specific purpose of surveillance.

Here we have a new public safety officer that acts as a paramedic, police officer and fireman. The big question is if he enters your home on a life saving mission and spots illegal activity what capacity does he/she have?

Howdy All,
Uh, the capacity to EAT 2 helping of buckshot if ya ask me! Then he is going to need some seriouz lifesaving. Same with any two bit wanna be lawyer..

Well, they can be there in plain clothes with the court's permission, but not for any indefinite period of time. But also, you are not protected by the pnumbras of the right to privacy in your car. But I agree with you. If a police officer posed as something other than a police officer and busted into your home (where you are protected by RTP), you'd be better off because whatever he/she found could not be admissable in court and you'd have whatever evidence they found barred. I'll read up on the relevant case law and let you know what it says, but you're right, I think it's illegal. Any intrusion into someone's home for the purpose of collecting evidence needs a warrent. A car is a different matter though, protection of one's privacy in a car is thin. Sitting in a car basically has the same legal protection as standing in the public open. Police can use whatever they see in your car (in plain view) as evidence, but I think you're probably right, they need to be in uniform, or working under the parameters of a court authorized warrent of investigation. Having police officers dressed in plain clothes I don't think could be allowed in perpetuity. I think the court would say that allowing officers to dress as "unmarked" civilians would place a chilling effect on the conduct of our daily lives. The general public would fear that their neighbor, family member or, in this case, drive-thru attendant was spying on them. That "chilling effect" would violate the constitutional right to privacy inference.

Lastly, someone want to decode this for me?
Alex

__________________
1983 300D (parked for four years)
2012 VW Sportwagen TDI Manual
2001 Miata SE
1962 Chevrolet Corvair Rampside