Malicious Food Tampering vs. Stupid Food Thieves

[Mr Hero]

And then what? If the thief doesn't eat those ones, you've somehow got proof now? That's just more circumstantial evidence. What if the real food thief just doesn't like PB&J or there's another thief who's allergic and just didn't make it known to you?

The goal isn't to prove 100% who the thief is. It's to be able to enjoy the food you brought. I'd say mission accomplished.

[TheHuckster]

If I understand this correctly, you bring up a scenario I hadn't thought of.

The scenario is pretty much what you put in the OP (emphasis mine):

But let's say a known food thief is allergic to peanuts. You are not. You bring your food to work and you purposely include an ingredient with peanuts to protect your food.

If all I have is circumstantial evidence, I don't feel it's a good idea to confront the food thief directly because I could be wrong. If the alleged thief has an allergy to something I find delicious, I would deliberately change my menu for a few days and try to make the allergen conspicuous. There's no mistaking a PBJ sandwich.

And then what? If the thief doesn't eat those ones, you've somehow got proof now? That's just more circumstantial evidence. What if the real food thief just doesn't like PB&J or there's another thief who's allergic and just didn't make it known to you?

I just think there are far better and less error-prone ways to deal with this than what you're proposing here... you can get a locking box, or even get a very distinguishable lunch box and ask people to do you a favor and report anyone who touches your box. Sooner or later they're going to get caught.

[Mr Hero]

The scenarios I've been talking about are where you notice X is stealing food, don't say anything about it, and decide to bring peanut butter into your next meal knowing that X will strike again. THAT's where I draw the line.

If I understand this correctly, you bring up a scenario I hadn't thought of. Are you saying food thief is observed in the act? If so, I agree. If I have definitive proof, I'll go and say something. I might even snap a picture on my phone and show it to someone.

If all I have is circumstantial evidence, I don't feel it's a good idea to confront the food thief directly because I could be wrong. If the alleged thief has an allergy to something I find delicious, I would deliberately change my menu for a few days and try to make the allergen conspicuous. There's no mistaking a PBJ sandwich.

And one post seemed to imply that I currently am dealing with a food thief. I am not. I work alone so my food is safe.

[protege]

gingertea: i'm going to bring the things i personally want to eat. if someone steals my shit, and happens to be allergic to the thing i wanted to eat, that's not my fault because it was my intent to eat it myself.

That's how I see it too. I bring in what I want, and my lunch is always in a distinctive Fiat-branded canvas bag. If it's not in that, it's in a black Norfolk Southern bag...that has trains on it. Considering that I'm the only car/train guy i the office, it's pretty damn obvious that it's mine.

Every now and then, I bring in my awesome tacos. The bag contains everything--onions, peppers (including jalapenos), spices, cheese, beans, and other items. My peppers aren't hot, but if you're not used to them, they'll still kick your ass...and possibly make you shit fire

Up until now, my lunch gets left alone. However, if someone--like Sarah (who has lifted food items from the 'fridge in the past)--decides to eat them, all bets are off. I've heard her mention that she can't handle spicy items. If she decides to steal my tacos, and ends up shitting all over the office, I don't have any sympathy. If she's that stupid, she deserves it.

It's not like they're "bait," or I've "tampered" with them. I've brought them to work many times, and have at least one photo of me (taken on my birthday for some reason) eating them. So, it's not like I haven't brought them in before.

[Andara Bledin]

Where's the line, who draws the line and what side of it am I on?

The line is if you change the food you bring for yourself to potentially punish someone else.

If you don't, then stop worrying about it and get on with your life.

That said, just being innocent is not necessarily enough to protect you from accusations and recriminations. You have to also appear innocent. So, if you threaten to bring in something nasty, but never do, but the thief gets sick after having eating your food, you're possibly looking at charges and sacking. If you are known to go off regularly about someone stealing your food and the thief gets sick after having eaten your food, you're still looking at the possibility of charges being levied.

If you want to be absolutely beyond accusations, get a bloody locking lunchbox/bag and avoid the entire drama fest. Because life isn't fair and it's a trivial step to avoid being a repeat victim. Otherwise, if you've had your lunch stolen before and you do nothing to change your behavior and expect the outcome to change, then you're operating outside the bounds of reality as we know it.

[TheHuckster]

It's just that you and others had mentioned loosing their jobs and criminal liability and I wanted clarification as to what I consider innocent food and what you would consider a sackable offence should someone die taking food that is not theirs.

Some would say me bringing in a meal with allergens that X is allergic to is me trapping the food as X is known to take food, where as I say BS had the food not gone I would be eating it.
It's too easy to skew the 1st paragraph into the 2nd.

If X is a habitual thief who had been called out on their stealing before, and presumably people would also point out how stupidly risky it is for one to do that if they have a food allergy, then IMO, it shouldn't prevent you from bringing whatever you want, if you really want to eat it.

The scenarios I've been talking about are where you notice X is stealing food, don't say anything about it, and decide to bring peanut butter into your next meal knowing that X will strike again. THAT's where I draw the line.

The big thing to get out of this is I have this principle where whenever I make decisions in life, I try my damndest not to kill anybody, even if they steal my lunch. If I find out someone who's allergic to peanuts steals my lunch and I want to eat peanut butter, I'm going to call them out on it and tell them that I sometimes like to eat peanut butter and they really need to be careful. Hopefully they'll heed my warning and I keep my streak of 0 deaths per day going. If they don't heed it, then I'll still feel better knowing I did warn them.

[Ginger Tea]

Seriously, if you're bringing food you want to eat because you're going to eat it regardless of what other people might or might not do, this discussion is not about you and defending yourself is a waste of everybody's time.

If you're making or altering food specifically because another person might take it, then this is about you and you're opening yourself up to a world of liability as opposed to putting on your big person pants and dealing with the problem in a mature manner.

It's just that you and others had mentioned loosing their jobs and criminal liability and I wanted clarification as to what I consider innocent food and what you would consider a sackable offence should someone die taking food that is not theirs.

Some would say me bringing in a meal with allergens that X is allergic to is me trapping the food as X is known to take food, where as I say BS had the food not gone I would be eating it.
It's too easy to skew the 1st paragraph into the 2nd.


And each meal would be in what I classed prior as safe even with cross contamination being a factor.

Where's the line, who draws the line and what side of it am I on?

Lets say I've had X amounts of meals vanish as have others, I've brought seafood in before and you know what, no one has died whilst I ate in their presence, same with peanut butter. My meals are random between what I have in, what I buy ready made from the shops or if I get a take away on the way to an evening shift.

Say today is the day my food goes, I made two meals the night before and grab one at random, it goes, today s/he lives as its not their allergy but what if I picked up the other, random act should be in the clear even if he dies right.

But what if I decided for one reason or another to have nothing but their allergen for a week but my food never disappeared daily, in fact it was always random, my foods still there yay must have seen it wasn't good for them, or they just took someone else's food today and I just got off lucky and would have had it still no matter what it was, a week has almost gone by and my food remains, great hes got the idea that I'm peanut "butter erry day" lunch time comes nope its gone. Cue moments later hearing screams as they find his body in the shitter.

No one gets to dictate to me, or any other employee what we can nor can not eat unless it is specifically spelled out in policy.

So far no one has convinced me that I could be in the wrong, unless I prove intent by saying "I'm gonna get that fucker." or something else incriminating.

Right now should I be in this situation for real and someone were to die due to eating my home made food, my response is still too bad so sad.
Why should I be fired because someone else ate my food?
Peanut butter isn't poison, I would not have died eating it, nor would anyone else without peanut allergies.

[Ginger Tea]

In the case of my missing food, I didn't know who did it, it was gone, but I did say to my supervisors that it had gone, especially as we gave them free food, sandwiches at first break and a cooked meal at lunch.

I sometimes worked all day or started late and when the late shift break came along we didn't get any sandwiches made for us, nor were there any kept by from the first break, if I didn't buy food I starved.



One time I did see someone take my food, we were all in the break room and one guy took a piece of a scotch egg that was on the counter, he didn't take it out of the fridge he saw it out in the open and thought it was fair game (even though it was from a shop and not what we used for deliveries) I got up and checked the fridge, yep mine wasn't there ergo that one was mine.

I went off on the whole room, the guy eating a piece wasn't seen taking it out of the fridge and ditching the label that had my name on it, he saw one scotch egg from an open twin pack, someone at some point in the day had taken it out and scarfed the first one and left it out in room temperature for god knows how long.

I was on the first cooked lunch break, the 2nd found most of their food in the bin already I was pissed.

After a talking to I was told to not let it happen again, well if my food isn't stolen I would have no reason to, I even said "Why do we give them free food at break? let them bring their own in." the idea was shot down, nope they would rather keep on feeding thieves and didn't even have a staff meeting about it.

Nope the closest they got to a telling off was me calling random people who may not have even seen who took my scotch egg a bunch of c**ts and me throwing perfectly good food away.

So when the 2nd lunch started and found little of interest I point blank told em I thew some of the good shit away and why.

If I cant eat, you cant eat.

I was in charge of the reheating of spare stock and the next day I got the stuff ready and just wheeled the containers into the supervisors office and said "I've don't all I'm gonna do get some c**t to cook it."

[Andara Bledin]

No back up as what was considered tampering offered in that post and another post stated it was criminally wrong but offered nothing in context.

I'm not sure how the context isn't obvious, to be honest.

Seriously, if you're bringing food you want to eat because you're going to eat it regardless of what other people might or might not do, this discussion is not about you and defending yourself is a waste of everybody's time.

If you're making or altering food specifically because another person might take it, then this is about you and you're opening yourself up to a world of liability as opposed to putting on your big person pants and dealing with the problem in a mature manner.

*note: "you" is generic, but it's a binary option for those who bring their food, so they'll either being in column "mature enough to handle conflict in a mature manner" or column "passive aggressive fool"

[TheHuckster]

So the only way it becomes intent is if I start mouthing off that I'm going to start adding allergens to my food. If I say nothing and just keep on bringing in food that may or may not disappear daily I can bitch about its disappearance, but so long as I don't say anything about getting back I am in the clear?

As far as provable intent, yes. You'd have to make some statement prior. However, intentions can still be in one's own thoughts without saying anything. The only difference between thinking about your intentions and declaring them is in the former, you and only you truly know what you wanted to do (e.g. cause an allergy attack on a known food thief) and thus you'd almost certainly get away with it.

What I'm saying is, just because you get away with something doesn't make it right.

I'm more the loudly proclaim "If it aint your food don't fucking eat it." kind of guy, if it gets me in the office I will state that food has been going missing and I might have even taken up the issue before, its rare I go full loud mouth on the first instance, yes I'll bitch that my foods gone, it happened before at my old job, price of the sandwich was £2.20 so I went for a skive somewhere for however long that was compared to my hourly wage then make some sly dig in the supervisors office that we feed them for free even taking an employee off their job to make sandwiches and its still not enough if they will delve into a Tesco bag and take my chicken and bacon club with my name on it.

You just made my point. When someone is doing something that you don't like, you should confront the person about it rather than find their weakness and use it to cause life-threatening harm upon them, regardless of whether you'll "be in the clear" or not.

[Ginger Tea]

I had to push for clarification as anyone saying its a bad thing never actually said out of my options posted prior were what they would consider bad when I saw them as good/ethically neutral.

Seriously; tampering with your food (even if it's just including a known allergen that you can and will eat) is just plain pants on head stupid.

No back up as what was considered tampering offered in that post and another post stated it was criminally wrong but offered nothing in context.

Granted this one was before my latest post with more options, but what is the difference between me adding lemons to a dish or cucumber? "Oh one co worker is allergic to citrus but only if they eat it." well this dish tastes better with lemons and it's for me not that person.

I listed plenty of what I saw as wrong, but I also stipulated that all food unless bought at a shop on the way to work, was prepped at home by me for me, at home I am not governed by any food hygiene regulations I had to abide by at my old job (even though the food I handled was sealed just as those cook in the box ready meals are in supermarkets once out of the card board box).

Every day that the OP's food has gone missing is a day they intended to eat food, should they opt to bring in peanut butter or do as I did often and make two days sandwiches at once and cut the ham with peanut coated knives, we aren't going out of the way to taint jack shit.

100% of the food I bring in is food I intended to eat else what's the point? My hypothetical work place has no bans on certain food types, I bring in pork it's not to piss off the Muslim or Jewish co-workers off, its because I fancied pork that day.

Should there be a ban I'm not risking my job by bringing in Anchovies that Dave is allergic to, no Anchovies means no Anchovies, if its store bought I might do my shopping after work so I can check thoroughly and not accidentally bring some in cos I was in a rush to work and didn't check the label thoroughly. Yes only I am meant to be eating it, but if work says NO Anchovies, then I am in the wrong by accident.
If they don't ban food but say label allergens I will label them, but I would probably list every one going even if they are not present, as its quicker to print out a dozen identical sheets than do one at a time with the specific contents bolded.



But nothing has really been said about the office policy for food allergens, yes one or two said you can suffer just smelling something. But even Seshat's post didn't even hint as to their work place accommodating them in anyway or if it is all on them to make sure their food doesn't mingle in the fridge.

If I'm not breaking office policy then nothing I bring in in a Tupperware container or home made sandwich could be classed as tainted if I am able and willing to eat it.

If I bring in a store bought salad and the seal is obviously broken, you have no guarantee that I haven't added anything I wanted as an extra, I might have squirted some lemon juice to add to the taste, or I might have just had a nibble prior to starting work.
It's clearly been opened at some point.

However should I add Lemon juice to a salad that I had painstakingly pried the label off and resealed so you couldn't tell without really looking, that is wrong, that is the same level as a Snickers in a Mars bar wrapper or dropping random peanut M&M's in a resealable bag of plain ones.



So it's proving intent, I am going by your post in the clear bringing in peanut butter sandwiches or even the ham one cut with a knife last used to spread peanut butter. I am after all the one who's stomach is looking forwards to that ham salad sarnie.



Here is my hypothetical

There is no policy at work with regards to allergies aside from please keep it in a sealed container or Ziploc, I'm doing that.

So the only way it becomes intent is if I start mouthing off that I'm going to start adding allergens to my food. If I say nothing and just keep on bringing in food that may or may not disappear daily I can bitch about its disappearance, but so long as I don't say anything about getting back I am in the clear?



So now I'd like to see more on the post about loosing a job due to someone eating my sandwich, would any of the 'in the clear' methods posted find me out of a job due to a death?

Food goes from the fridge, not always mine, all named, there is no policy regarding allergens and I have not mouthed off about getting back at someone, I've just bitched about having no lunch again.

EG

FFS! If I wanted to be out money and food I would have given my lunch box to the first big issue vendor I saw, hell id have even asked the c**t what s/he preferred on the way in.

I might get in trouble for swearing but nothing is said about "next time I'm gonna lace everything with X and stick the ham down my pants."

So food does go missing, no one is saying or doing anything about it, at least not visibly, food is still going missing a week later, as does my its part of the recipe allergen food.

So where does my employer come in firing me for my food if they have no policy in effect the day before and after Mr. Peanut is found dead on the shitter?
I've not mouthed off saying I'm going to do something to my food.

Or would I be in the clear as I've said nothing incriminating and done nothing illegal its just an unfortunate incident where he played Russian roulette with the fridge and lost.

EDIT: between me originally opening this to start typing and looking at other sites and doing other stuff I didn't notice an edit until I was far into it, I only saw it back tracking to get Seshat's name

It becomes a trap when your decision to make the sandwich was consciously made for the purpose of setting it as a trap. Because in the scenario we are talking about, you know who is stealing your food AND you know that thief has an allergy, and you consciously chose a passive aggressive move that could kill the thief, when the correct thing to do is confront the thief.

Bold emphasising the edit, I've spent time deleting paragraphs in prior posts hence why I said I may have come across as strong before, those posts may have been edited out before submission, but I did at one point have a very confrontational post (not confrontational to members here), where I would probably not be able to hold my tongue and I would probably be out of a job for offering to feed them their own nuts to see if testicle come under nut allergies.

I'm more the loudly proclaim "If it aint your food don't fucking eat it." kind of guy, if it gets me in the office I will state that food has been going missing and I might have even taken up the issue before, its rare I go full loud mouth on the first instance, yes I'll bitch that my foods gone, it happened before at my old job, price of the sandwich was £2.20 so I went for a skive somewhere for however long that was compared to my hourly wage then make some sly dig in the supervisors office that we feed them for free even taking an employee off their job to make sandwiches and its still not enough if they will delve into a Tesco bag and take my chicken and bacon club with my name on it.

[TheHuckster]

the thing is, you still have to prove their intent was for the person to EAT it.

True. I'm speaking on purely objective moral terms. Just like with anything, it's hard to prove intent in things like this, but I know if I did something like this with the intent of getting back at the thief, and the thief ended up in the hospital clinging for their life, I'd feel pretty fucking terrible about myself.

If, somehow, you were able to find evidence that someone made the sandwich with the intent of getting someone sick, then it could be considered a premeditated crime. But you and Mr Hero are right in that legally speaking it would be hard to prove premeditation unless someone idiotically posted their intentions on Facebook or something (which, from prior stories I've seen, I wouldn't rule out).

When does it become a trap?

It becomes a trap when your decision to make the sandwich was consciously made for the purpose of setting it as a trap. Because in the scenario we are talking about, you know who is stealing your food AND you know that thief has an allergy, and you consciously chose a passive aggressive move that could kill the thief, when the correct thing to do is confront the thief.

If the little voice inside your head says, "I hope that thief steals this thing and gets a nasty surprise" that's when it is a trap. It's as simple as that.

Again, all of the scenarios you are bringing up where you bring a sandwich for yourself and intend to eat it without getting someone else sick, that's not what I'm talking about.

[Ginger Tea]

If you intended to eat it, then you did not intend to get someone else sick. That's what intent means.
* SNIP *
If someone knows who is stealing from them and also knows their allergy and, instead of confronting them, decides to bring an allergen laden lunch the next time with the expectation that the thief is going to fall for the trap, then that's when the line is crossed from unfortunate event to potential homicide.

Half of that post (including what I cut) seemed contradictionary.

It's not laced with non food stuff, just something that someone who is NOT the named owner might have a reaction to.

When does it become a trap?
I was going to eat a ham salad sandwich with just a small piece of peanut butter the size of a 5p piece 'hidden', it's not my fault someone else ate it.

I might have made two sandwiches that day, one for today and one for tomorrow and as I am the only one meant to be eating said lunches I don't care if I use the same knife with just a quick wipe down to avoid peanut butter in margarine (though its quicker and cleaner to do marge/butter first just the same as sugar first then coffee when using the same spoon not that anyone at work got the concept).

I could argue that that rogue piece of peanut butter ended up in the sandwich from the prep of my other days meal, I am not a professional sandwich shop employee who has to abide by food safety and cross contamination guidelines, I can lick the peanut butter off the knife then cut another sandwich into half moments later, hell I rarely did the first part and would cut both sandwiches with the same knife leaving trace amounts of Nuttella, peanut butter or whatever was last on the knife.

I now fully retract my stance on the 'hidden' piece of peanut butter being classed IMO as a trap, having given a few plausible excuses of how it could end up in a 'nut free' sandwich, originally I had it as a 'trap' as although food safe, it was not something anyone could see without taking the whole thing apart, unlike an obviously slathered PBJ.

If I bring in lunch it's because my intention is to eat lunch, not leave it as a 'trap' for someone who could die due to that 5p sized smear of peanut butter that dropped on the way between my other sandwich or was cut using a knife that still contained peanut butter.

I only brought in one sandwich, I didn't bring in two (unless I always brought in two) knowing I would loose one, because then I might also loose both.

Not a trap
Sloppy food prep that causes cross contamination of products that are food safe for the intended person.

Buying some form of prawn salad picking out the prawns as I don't like them whole and putting it in the fridge with my name on it.
Now this one is a bit dicey, I would not buy a prawn salad to toss half the contents away, but say there is some salad on the market which has just a few and I like the rest but they don't sell it without prawns.
Prawns wont kill me so tossing them out is fair, but they are no longer visible in the store bought tub and the product name isn't PRAWN SALAD but something else maybe even with an unpronounceable name like my previous #82 from the Thai takeaway. Prawns would only be seen if the thief took the time to read the ingredients.
[see foot note]

Oh I could pick them out at my desk, but I might buy it on the way home for tomorrow and decide to get rid of them and feed them to a hypothetical pet rather than a bin.

Same prawn salad turned into a smoothie or salad sauce for the next day, I can eat prawns I just cant eat them when whole.
I am doing this at home so I don't have to worry about contamination of any work place kitchen equipment.

Any food that is fine for me store bought or home made that you just disagree with.
This includes #82's with peanut oil or mushed up seafood.

At the end of the day you die eating my food, too bad so sad.
I've not poisoned it or secretly added allergens to an otherwise safe piece of food. It was fit for human consumption (me).



Traps
Originally my small piece of peanut butter resided in this column, but as you say in one breath "if you were going to eat it its ok" then end your post with "you know they are allergic so why did you bring in food that could harm them" we are back to "you know X is a vegan so why did you bring a chicken sandwich?"
BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO EAT A FUCKING CHICKEN SANDWICH.

It's not a pot luck, I am not bringing in food to share, if I was I would be careful about allergies or just not bother.

Taking an egg brush and coating bread, fruit or other meals with peanut oil.

Rolling an apple around a bag of peanuts.

Wrapping a Snickers in a Mars bar wrapper.

Any other method to get trace amounts of allergens deliberately added to a store bought meal that otherwise would not have peanuts / other by their recipe.
If it's in a Tupperware container it's now classed as home made and all bets are off.

Anything that renders said food not fit for human consumption, if I wont eat my lunch why did I bring it in in the first place?



Now when it comes to packaging, in the UK we don't normally go for those brown bags you see on TV, cling film, Ziploc bags or a plastic shopping bag tied up with a name clearly written on it and each individual content sufficed. So we don't have the layer of mistakes were made grabbing the wrong brown bag out.



Footnote
I recently watched an anthology movie on YouTube, some VIP, Royalty of some fictitious country was giving the stewardess a hard time, there were only 4 people on the flight including crew, yet it was a full sized passenger plane.
She was served her meal and said "I don't want this, give me what you are having"

She looked at her diet plan and you could see sea food allergy (barely see it in 360p with artefacts), yet her meal had prawns, as she was being a bitch to her she took the prawns out and served it.

What she should have done was say "I'm sorry all we have for the crew is prawn noodles, I can bring your old food back."

where pissy VIP would have some choices
Accept her original meal
Do without (I originally wrote starve but it wasn't a case of you must eat or you will die)
Insist on the prawn noodle meal having the prawns removed, but only after signing a waver that explicitly stated she knew there used to be prawns in the meal and she has an allergy but is willing to eat it regardless.

Some allergens are just aversions (like my whole prawn/shrimp) and you read about people saying they are deathly allergic to X so the kitchen staff do a full clean down of the prep area to make sure this one meal is X free and serve it, only for the allergic customer to then add X themselves later.
It's normally Gluten free fadders who get all "I could die" on the wait staff, then asks where their side of garlic bread is.

Sometimes its Tomatoes then they see more ketchup on the plate than in the bottle, but it has been stated that raw tomatoes can cause issue, but processed tomatoes don't.

To the server it just makes you look like a fussy eater and should the kitchen staff find out, the next time they have to clean down they might just say fuck it.

Pissy princess on the air plane might have just been like me with regards to prawns, but the stewardess should not have served her the meal erring on the side of caution, but in context it was akin to scenes in movies where food is returned to the kitchen spat on, dandruff laced and stuffed down someone's arse crack.

[Andara Bledin]

If this went to court, it would be difficult to prove intent.

If it went to court, it probably wouldn't matter much that the jury came back with a Not Guilty as you're likely out of a job either way, and possibly up to your ears in debt, not to mention the fact that the court of public opinion will likely be split for/against you.

Seriously; tampering with your food (even if it's just including a known allergen that you can and will eat) is just plain pants on head stupid.

[Mr Hero]

This might change a few responses, but just to clarify one scenario in my OP

You get your food ganked. You're pretty sure it's the guy with the peanut allergy. You make a deliberate change in your lunch the next day to include said allergen to deter the food thief. The food you bring in is not unsafe or undesirable to you in any way. You label it with your name, put it in the fridge, and get on with your workday. Hopefully you get to eat your delicious meal during break.

It's still hard to feel sorry for the guy because you're already giving a clear indication who the food is intended for. If this went to court, it would be difficult to prove intent.