UPDATE: the BBQ restaurant makes a statment.

That’s called battery with bodily fluids. Jeff should be charged!

What is his role in the business and what is his financial stake/profit? I’m not for harassing the wait staff, but those two said nothing about divesting from Jeff. Why shouldn’t people boycott if he’s profiting?

“@IJustChartaLot Really stressed that he has nothing to do with this business .... In a daily operations manner.” Yep………. They never said they will no longer do business with him or he is no longer associated lol.

They talk about disagreeing with Jeff. They talk about siding with Nicole. They DO NOY talk about any consequences. Did I miss that part?

That was a bullshit non apology. They are absolutely covering for Jeff or they would had said what his relationship was and they would have cut ties with him. Instead they used creative language to avoid accountability. Fuck this place.

“He’s not a part of this business…. Uh…. On a daily basis. But he DOES work there? What?

Doesn’t sound like he has had consequences yet. Hope that’s coming.

Really stressed that he has nothing to do with this business .... In a daily operations manner.

Odd though that they didn't explain how Jeff is involved in their restaurant, and whether that has changed. Something is still unresolved here.

How is the spitter involved with the business? Michael said "day to day operations". Is he an investor? Partner? The video claiming the owners aren't ok with what happened seems half baked. Where are the consequences?

Okay, but who is Jeff to the business? Is he an owner or an employee? If he is an employee, he needs to be fired. If he is an owner, they should probably cut ties.

He just profits from that business. Got it.

Why did the owners put it that way: he has nothing to do with the day to day operations. I've been in the restaurant business. That could have been said differently if they had fired him.

You make videos exposing ppl that work or are associated with a company and hurt their reputation, revenue, ability to conduct business, etc,.. You essentially urge ppl to harass the “perpetrators” when you cover a video. Douchebag!

Restaurant guy not quite saying Jeff has absolutely nothing to do with th restaurant day-to-day 🤔 OK... but the way he said his piece made me think maybe he's a partner or somehow connected in a different way - he was careful th way he said what he said; not an absolute denial🤷‍♂️

Oh. He's a co-owner. Probably the money partner. Can't easily get rid of him and they have probably already had plenty of reason to be sorry about the whole deal.

That's how it always should be. He victim should be able to weigh in on how the situation went and should be handled. Props for those folks to make a statement. I also like their wording. That they don't agree with how he handled the situation. We need to address the behavior

@DallasPD @PlanoPoliceDept what's taking y'all so long to arrest a man who assaulted a child?

Jeff is a silent partner. That " Jeff has no association and anything to do with the daily operations of this company" is the tell.

New statement by Oak’d BBQ says Jeff “does not run this business. He is not employed by this business. He is not involved operationally.”—which probably means he’s some sort of investor in the company or silent partner. He’s still associated and connected to that business.

Sounds like he owns the restaurant and it should be boycotted. I feel sorry for the rest of the staff there but this guy needs actual consequences.

Sounds like insincere damage control... and I notice that Jeff "isn't involved with daily operations" but he's still a partner, or involved in some other fashion? Nah, not good enough.

You encourage harassment all the time but now you don’t? That eyeliner is really starting to affect the way you think

What EXACTLY is Jeff's relationship to/function with this restaurant???

Except he is still associated with the restaurant & publicly groveling saying you had nothing to do with it while he’s still reaping the rewards and monetary benefits of whatever role he plays or doesn’t play & LAUGHS about it to friends isn’t really much of a karmic result is it

So they are friends with him and made this bs statement to distance him from the place he surely works for.

In ‘a daily operational manner’ I do appreciate it - but what does this mean?

Don’t post videos like this and then admonish people for calling the business. 🙄

Semantics at work

They are using semantics to say he is “not involved in the daily operations” which means he’s an investor or part owner. And you know it. Expand on that. But white folks gonna protect white folks.

“So he’s an investor in the business we’re not gonna outright say fuck him. Nothing will really come of this, maybe some public shame for a while but we’re doing this bc what he did isn’t a good look for us and we need his seed money.”

Sounds like Jeff is an investor - a supposed silent partner. They’re choosing their words carefully and say he’s not involved in the daily operations. They never say he’s not an owner. This is why buyout clauses are necessary in partnerships

@Stephmking32 That big ass cross that she purposely wore is a signal that they are lying!

Anyone who spits on a Police Officer gets charged with assault so I hope they follow this up.

They don't say if Jeff works for them. if he was fired or what his current status is... weird.