“Disable your ad blocker to see this content” no I don’t think I will Admiral
A young woman was sexually assaulted while out DoorDashing. Two days after she reported the assault to DoorDash, they deactivated her account and she can't access the money she's owed.
Submitted 3 weeks ago by destructdisc@lemmy.world to aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
https://jumpshare.com/s/bdiD1x3nLBP33nE61xmc
Comments
cm0002@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
I wish there was some way to make site owners understand that neither I nor most people object to the occasional ad banner, it’s the “tracking every single thing you do online and selling it to Palantir” aspect that I’m blocking you for.
Canconda@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
This is exactly why I refuse to use gig services. They’re all the worst kind of exploitation. It’s like a bandaid solution but made out of used painters tape.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Remove “tape” and you’re correct.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Seems likely. Doordash and Uber are fucking trash.
Kolanaki@pawb.social 3 weeks ago
As are all corporations.
SabinStargem@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
My take: they are BOTH creeps. The dude ordered food, then got nude. That is a weird thing to do when you are expecting someone you aren’t having sex with.
The lady is also a creep, because she entered the home and filmed him, then uploaded the vid. Most delivery folk just drop the food at the doorstep or push the doorbell to hand off the food. Going into a home is outside of their duties, for all sorts of reasons.
Doordash is also a baddy. They should have paid what the deliveryman is owed, and THEN formally deactivate their employment.
EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Classic “ESH” (everyone sucks here). As much as people like to pick a good guy and bad guy, a very significant percentage of shitty situations come down to ESH.
madjo@feddit.nl 3 weeks ago
Fuck Doordash! Please stop using those services! They’re inherently exploitative.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
This is why every app that touches money should be peer to peer. DoorDash would be an escrow, but unable to unilaterally seize the funds.
ayyy@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
That’s…what escrow is.
faintwhenfree@lemmus.org 3 weeks ago
Escrow is third party, second party can’t be escrow. In this case door dash can’t really be an escrow as it will be second party.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
p2p escrow typically requires 2 of 3 signatures, not 1 of 1.
toiletobserver@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Labor lawsuit incoming
drmoose@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
She will lose as she entered someone’s home without permission
SpicyLengthiness@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
I mean, seems pretty minor tbh. She arrived, and his door was open, he was sleeping and naked. Just drop the food and dip. Why pull out your phone and start filming?
FosterMolasses@leminal.space 3 weeks ago
Disgusting disgusting disgusting disgusting
No one ever use this brand again. They literally have so many competitors with cheaper fees.
deathbird@mander.xyz 3 weeks ago
Okay but also don’t record people without their consent and post it publicly. Idk why she was suspended but that would be reason enough.
If you think it would be evidence of a crime and you felt like you needed it to pursue charges I could understand saving a photo or video privately to later turn over, but suppose dude got blitzed, ordered DoorDash, and passed out before it arrived, and you’re gonna share that with 8 billion of your closest friends? Gtfo
mcv@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
The fact that she filmed him inside his own home certainly sounds iffy to me. Do door dashers carry a body cam that films everything? That could explain how she accidentally filmed him. But if she filmed him intentionally, inside his own home, then doesn’t that technically make her the sex offender in this story?
jj4211@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Whether she accidentally or intentionally filmed him, I think that’s within her rights. But either way, it was not within her rights to go and share that on the internet, accidental or intentional.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
Nope, she wasn’t trespassing and he doesn’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy from her.
BigBenis@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Fuck I fucking hate this fucking country
beejboytyson@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I already looked into answering your door nude and yes that is legal, indecent exposure. It’s not SA though.
Spacehooks@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
The door being wide open i think is the factor here. Seems strange in any situation I could think of. The nudes part is easily explain but why is the door wide open?
Flax_vert@feddit.uk 3 weeks ago
Disgusting.
too_high_for_this@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Weird story. Apparently, the delivery driver walked into the customers home (door was open) where he was waiting? with his pants and underwear down.
When I delivered pizza, I would absolutely never enter a home. That’s like rule #1. Really good way to get robbed. Or see something you don’t want to.
And seeing a naked man in his home is not the same as being sexually assaulted. It’s gross and probably illegal if he set it all up for sexual gratification, but unless there’s more to this story, there was no assault.
I’m not sure what she wanted door dash to do about it? If you report something like that they obviously won’t respond immediately, it would get flagged and sent to a legal team.
plz1@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Well, maybe deacticate the guy’s account instead of the victim? Or arbitrate it properly? Definitely not disable access to her account (and money). But I guess now she has a legal case against them for both negligence and wage theft (I know the US doesn’t really prosecute wage theft, even though it is the biggest form of financial theft).
too_high_for_this@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
I assumed they froze both accounts to have a legal team properly review everything. Even a small complaint can get your account frozen. And it’s not wage theft when you’re technically a third party contractor.
jj4211@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Sounds like she posted her video of the customer online, which would seem to make her hands unclean. Taking the video for your own evidence sure, but posting it online crosses a line. So I could easily see both parties having their accounts suspended.
So he likely set a trap for a stranger to get a show to get off on being a bit of an exhibitionist, but it’s hard to really prove that intent, and she took a video of it and then posted it online, which is another whole can of worms being opened.
Now if they are refusing to let her take money from doordash, she’s got a legal case, though unsure if it is ‘wage theft’, since the whole loophole with these ‘gig’ companies is that there’s no employment and it’s all transactional. Terribly exploitative system.
M137@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
“deactiate”
buddascrayon@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Don’t excise this guy’s behavior. He set up a deliberate situation in order to make her uncomfortable. That is sexual assault.
Also, she didn’t “go into” his house. He was visible from well outside the door. Which is viewable from public areas. Which is a crime.
KingGimpicus@sh.itjust.works 3 weeks ago
“Making her uncomfortable” is not sexual assault. Where, exactly, is the assault? Saying shit like this cheapens and trivializes actual sexual assaults and the impact those words have on society.
lightnsfw@reddthat.com 3 weeks ago
Yeah going inside was dumb and should be against the rules if it isn’t already. Still I would expect them to ban the dude from placing future orders and would want to know if they had ignored previous reports about him (probably need a lawyer of your own to find that out though).
Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Blaming the victim and defending the pervert isn’t a good look.
mcv@lemmy.zip 3 weeks ago
Is she the victim, though? From what I understand, the guy wasn’t at the door, but asleep (or pretending to be) in his own home, which should be entirely legal. The “more info” link says the door was ajar and she filmed him. If she pushed open the door, entered his home and filmed him there, she might be the sex offender here.
Of course if he set this up intentionally, that’s exhibitionism (not voyeurism, as the article incorrectly calls it), but still, inside his own home.
thermal_shock@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
Walking into someone’s home and complaining you saw him naked is not assault.
TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today 3 weeks ago
I also delivered pizza and knew this rule… Partly because fellow drivers and my workplace told me about it. These drivers don’t have coworkers nor bosses that tell them what is and what isn’t safe. A lot of them are young and have never worked with the general public, or have previously been very sheltered.
Yes, it is… Like most people, you are confusing assault with battery. Sexual assault is any nonconsensual sexual contact(meeting/encounter). Sexual battery or aggravated sexual assault is sexual assault with the use or threat of force.
Some of the apps require you to get a code from the buyer to get paid for the delivery.
I don’t really know why we are blaming the victim here?
mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 weeks ago
An alternate perspective: he had a peeper let herself into his house, then accuse him of being naked in his own home.
From her perspective, she obviously believes it was an intentional assault. On the other side of the same coin, it’s entirely possible that she just strolled into some dude’s house when he wasn’t expecting it. And if that’s the case, he was the one who was assaulted. He was out of public view, and being naked in the privacy of your own home isn’t a crime by itself.
My point is simply that we can’t know what happened, because none of us were there. So to simply open by stating that she was assaulted is inherently biased. If he intentionally set it up for his own gratification, he assaulted her. I’m not arguing against that. But if he genuinely wasn’t expecting someone to let themselves into his house, (because honestly, why would anyone think that’s okay to do?) then he’s actually the victim here.
And the actual “what happened” part is something for lawyers to argue over in court. If he had a note saying to let herself in, and the front door was standing wide open, it’s a pretty open and shut case against him. Still a monumentally stupid move on the driver’s part, (because seriously, why would you ever enter someone’s home while making a delivery?) but it would obviously be something that he orchestrated. But again, that’s for the lawyers to argue about, because there could be confounding factors. What if there was no note to let yourself in, and he just had the door open because he was airing out the house on a nice day? Maybe he expected the driver to leave his food on the porch. Maybe he didn’t have his phone on him (because he was naked and had no pockets) and therefore didn’t feel the notification that the driver was on their way. Those are just a few quick what-ifs off the top of my head, and any of them could be possible.
Dearth@lemmy.world 3 weeks ago
If the door was open and there was no response when you rang/ called out and you expected someone to be there i think it’s pretty normal to want to enter and make sure whomever was at home was ok. Filming your entry would be smart too. The girl might have expected to find someone injured or maybe even a corpse.
SpicyLengthiness@lemmy.ca 3 weeks ago
So when I say it, I get downvoted to hell. But when this guy says it, it makes sense. Got it.
OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml 3 weeks ago
What makes you think you’re responding do a guy?