Well-known peace activist Corey Nett had his civil rights violated last month by the Bristol chain of restaurants in the Louisville area when he was asked to move to the back of the restaurant or leave. Nett, who has cerebral palsy, was told that his voice was allegedly annoying other customers.
Just about anybody in their right mind understands this is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Here’s the story:
If you’re an elected offical, candidate, member of the press or prominent individual and you happen to eat at the Bristol– rest assured that you’re likely to be questioned and called out by activists for supporting discrimination.
Is the rumbling we hear the beginning of a major boycott? Will the Bristol do the right thing?
22 responses so far ↓
1 sportschik // Sep 17, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Bummer…..I love the Bristol burgers and the green chili won tons! But I despise discrimination and ignorance more. No Bristol for me and I was just about to schedule an event there!
2 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Sep 18, 2007 at 12:19 am
This is indeed disappointing. Bubye Harry’s dressing and Steak au Poivre (two of my favorites)… until Bristol publicly apologizes.
3 Stumbette // Sep 20, 2007 at 3:56 pm
This is terrible. Why is WHAS the only media to report in this???????
4 Sarah Clark // Sep 20, 2007 at 6:37 pm
I sent an angry email off to all my (like me) Bristol-loving friends today and told them I would be boycotting the restaurant. I am ashamed of The Bristol’s behavior and shocked that they haven’t publicly apologized. And Stumbette, I agree with you – where is the rest of the media?
5 Paula Kesler // Sep 21, 2007 at 9:24 am
The owner of a business cannot be immediately responsible for every action of every employee. The fact that The Bristol did not come forward at once to correct this appalling behavior puts the responsibility right in their lap.
6 Marian Herthel // Sep 21, 2007 at 10:07 am
How sad that a disabled person was treated in this manner. We have come so far yet learned so little. The disabled have to fight so hard to do what most of us do every day without even thinking. Ah the old saying … walk a mile in my shoes….shame, shame, shame on the Bristol.
7 Kan // Sep 22, 2007 at 12:32 am
I am appauled at Bristol’s ‘inaction’ as well. Not only am I not eating there until the situation is rectified, but I intend on joining the peaceful protest this Thursday (the 27th) between 5-8 p.m. in front of the Bristol on Bardstown Road.
8 Meg // Sep 24, 2007 at 7:05 am
It’s a shame that only one side of the story can be told at this juncture, because, believe me, there are two sides to this story… for one thing, the employee who allegedly behaved insensitively, was swiftly terminated when this matter came to light… and more importantly, the story did not unfold as Mr. Nett would have you believe… I can assure you, the company and its employees are all very sensitive to those with special needs and they go out of their way to serve all patrons respectfully. Believe it or not, there are those who use circumstances such as this to make political statements or make monetary gains, and in the process destroy many innocent lives in their wake… Perhaps, you should have all the facts before rushing to judgment. Perhaps, Mr. Nett should think about whose rights he’s violating by distorting the facts in this case, and I assure you, the Mr. Nett’s claims are greatly exaggerated and inaccurate. People with handicaps can be just as unscrupulous as people with no physical impairments. Mr. Nett doesn’t want an apology. Mr. Nett wants a staggering sum of money. Ask him how much he stands to gain if he wins his bogus case! By the way, the last time I checked, our Constitution affords equal rights to all citizens and not more rights or special rights to individuals or groups…
9 jake // Sep 24, 2007 at 9:46 am
Dear treads96607@mypacks.net / Meg:
It’d be wise not to defame the character of the Nett family. Would also be wise to take into consideration the amount of evidence in the case that backs up Corey’s claims.
I’ve known that family for a few years (Corey’s aunts Ann and Kathleen, Corey, Geoff, et al) and it’s complete horseshit for you to accuse them of being money grubbers. That couldn’t be further from reality.
Further, “Meg” – if you’re in any way affiliated with this case, I advise you to recant anything you’ve said before I pass along your IP address and contact information to attorneys handling the matter.
And, I do have all the facts. As do all of the witnesses who were there that evening.
10 flubby // Sep 24, 2007 at 1:21 pm
jake, we are to assume a commenter risks being outed if you don’t personally agree with everything they have to say? the stifling of debate, even as misguided as “Meg” here, seems a little petty for an otherwise informative blog
11 jake // Sep 24, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Making assumptions isn’t a great idea.
The commenter left the same comment on four posts, e-mailed me several times with some inane threats re: Corey Nett and has commented on a dozen other sites trying to demean Corey. Not cool.
Why on earth would anyone do such a thing unless they have something to lose?
I didn’t reveal the individual’s identity and won’t. Even edited the original comment to mask their true identity.
No one has to worry about being “outed”… unless they’re doing something Larry Craig-esque.
12 Paula Kesler // Sep 24, 2007 at 2:18 pm
I am not acquainted with either Meg or Jake as far as I am aware. I do, however, know the Nett family and have known them since Corey was born. I have not found them to be unscrupulous in any way. I wasn’t present the night of the incident at The Bristol, but since Corey has been a patron there in the past, I can think of no reason for him to concoct this story now. It seems to me that the only reason the one side of the story is the only one being heard is that The Bristol has not replied. Perhaps if they did issue an apology to Corey and were sincere, the whole matter would be dropped.
13 jake // Sep 24, 2007 at 5:34 pm
Would like to add that there’s no guarantee of privacy on the internet when you’re actively defaming someone’s character.
For anyone who has opinions? Feel free to express them. But don’t get upset and play the victim after you’ve done something as disgusting as attack someone you or your company have discriminated against. Alleging anyone who has been discriminated against is violating the rights of others by using the legal system– that’s a little off-kilter.
Asking a disabled individual to so much as quiet down, move or leave– that’s a big damn deal.
If the several commenters from the Bristol (three so far, not just one person) really do take these matters seriously– why haven’t you properly addressed the situation by issuing formal apologies? Sad.
14 Meg // Sep 24, 2007 at 6:17 pm
While you caution others not to make assumptions, you assume that anyone not in agreement with you is a Bristol employee? Did it ever occur to you that those “commenters” (not an actual word, by the way) could be loyal customers, friends or otherwise concerned citizens interested in hearing all the facts before judgment is passed? Wouldn’t it be wise to let this play out through personal and/or legal negotiations before hanging a possibly innocent party? If an injustice was done, it should be decided in a court of law and not in the court of uninformed public opinion…
15 Jake // Sep 24, 2007 at 6:57 pm
Since three of five hate-filled comments/emails today came directly from Bristol locations? That’s a pretty safe bet.
There’s a big difference in disagreeing with something and demeaning someone with tripe.
16 Meg // Sep 24, 2007 at 7:06 pm
My knowledge of computers is limited. If a customer were to send an email while on a business Wi-Fi system, would it show that it came from that location? I believe all the Bristol locations are equipped with Wi-Fi, aren’t they?
17 jake // Sep 24, 2007 at 7:12 pm
One of the e-mails came from a bristolbarandgrille.com address. That ranks pretty high up there with my statement that they came directly from Bristol locations. Not to mention I have other means of verification.
All of the other messages/comments/e-mails (not yours) but one came before any Bristol location was open for business.
18 Judy // Sep 28, 2007 at 1:41 am
Bravo to Corey Nett and to the 100+ people who protested tonight against the violations of his rights by the Bristol. Like Corey and his family, I live in the neighborhood and have enjoyed the Bristol for many years.
Meg’s hostile comments here leave me speechless. There is no response to such hateful statements. Certainly she knows that Corey only filed the law suit after waiting weeks for the Bristol to respond to his complaint. This breakdown of common decency makes it very hard for all of us who admired the Bristol.
Pete Peters read a statement to WHAS and FOX this evening which shows the Bristol just doesn’t get it. Peters claims that the allegations in the lawsuit don’t match the Bristol’s POLICY to serve all customers fairly, but policy isn’t the problem. The issue here is actions — and the actions of the Bristol regarding this case are very sad indeed.
19 Laura // Oct 1, 2007 at 2:30 pm
First, I would like to say thank you to Jake for speaking up for Corey! As to Meg…I will concede that not every person with disabilities has upstanding morals. It would be just as discriminatory to say they all did as to make a negative statement about the entire community as whole. Everyone is a distinct person with their own set of moral issues. You mentioned your concern about “whose rights he’s violating by distorting the facts in this case.” A look into the history of individuals with disabilities will inform you of the need for vigilance when it comes to maintaining their civil rights. The issue is not, and has not historically been the need to defend the civil rights of those who are not members of a minority groups. I wish you could know Corey and fully comprehend the number of times every day that his rights are comprimised. As for the person who lost their job…it is unfortunate that their superiors made that decision. Other companies might have supported their employees and given them a chance to discuss the situation with Corey or provided education concerning cerebral palsy and how to interact with customers of all ability levels. In my opinion, conversation and education only enhance interaction and provide opportunities for effective change and I am surprised that a company who is “very sensitive to those with special needs” did not take this opportunity when it arose.
20 Bring Out The White Sheets // Oct 2, 2007 at 8:32 am
This reminds me of a time when men in white sheets burned crosses in people’s yards. Funny how the more more things change, they stay the same. By the way – I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t even live in the Commonwealth. Jake, if you can pull my IP address, I’ll give you a cookie :)
21 jake // Oct 2, 2007 at 5:47 pm
Equating violation of the ADA with the Klan is INSANE.
And why expose your IP address? You aren’t habitually defaming anyone’s character.
22 Bring Out The White Sheets // Oct 3, 2007 at 8:18 am
Correct, violation of the ADA is terrible, and the KYADA (correct civil authorities) should be engaged heavily. The trialling of people in the court of public opinion is what the Klan does – and lynch people; and burn crosses; and spew hate speech; and well you get my drift. Again you are correct, I am not defaming anyone’s character, but many of the comments above do. Ergo my comment, “Funny how the more more things change, they stay the same. ” Have a great day! :)
Leave a Comment