Casino jackpot winner alleges Michigan bank wouldn’t cash her prize check because she’s Black (msn.com)
You'd think in this day and age, banks would have the technology to determine if a check is fraudulent or not. Besides, the check had her name and address on it, which matched her driver's license. That should have been enough to satisfy the bank's requirements. In the old days, they might have still allowed her to deposit it, while putting a hold on her ability to withdraw any funds until the check cleared. I've encountered that before.
She didn't have an account at the bank, so if the bank didn't want to cash it, that would be their prerogative. However, the fact that they tried to keep the check (because they wrongly assumed it was fraudulent) is where they crossed the line.
She said it was "three white female employees" who told her the check was fraudulent. The bank claims that Ms. Pugh may have "misinterpreted" their employees' actions. I wish they had interviewed these employees, as it would be interesting to know what they were thinking at the time. The bank's statement would indicate that they didn't believe the employees' actions were due to the fact that she was black. They are effectively denying the charge of racial discrimination.
I guess what baffles me is that I'm unclear on the actual thought processes taking place. Like these white bank employees; did they consciously decide that "we're not going to help this woman because she is black"? Was that a conscious thought process they went through, or was it something sub-conscious and something they may not have been aware of? Was the management team at the bank complicit in this? What responsibility do they have in screening and supervising their employees?
I often wonder the same thing when it comes to cops when they mistreat or kill black suspects in their custody. Are they consciously thinking "I'm going to give this person a hard time because they're black"? Or again, is it something more sub-conscious at work?
I realize there are also some who might doubt the veracity of this story or perhaps might think the events are not being accurately presented in the article. Perhaps there's more here that's not being said, and I understand that that might come up. I've also seen some people roll their eyes at the notion of "playing the race card," which implies there might be some other reason for someone's actions other than racism. Although it's hard to see how this can be easily explained away, especially since it was clearly a valid check with her name and address, and she had her driver's license.
You'd think in this day and age, banks would have the technology to determine if a check is fraudulent or not. Besides, the check had her name and address on it, which matched her driver's license. That should have been enough to satisfy the bank's requirements. In the old days, they might have still allowed her to deposit it, while putting a hold on her ability to withdraw any funds until the check cleared. I've encountered that before.
She didn't have an account at the bank, so if the bank didn't want to cash it, that would be their prerogative. However, the fact that they tried to keep the check (because they wrongly assumed it was fraudulent) is where they crossed the line.
She said it was "three white female employees" who told her the check was fraudulent. The bank claims that Ms. Pugh may have "misinterpreted" their employees' actions. I wish they had interviewed these employees, as it would be interesting to know what they were thinking at the time. The bank's statement would indicate that they didn't believe the employees' actions were due to the fact that she was black. They are effectively denying the charge of racial discrimination.
I guess what baffles me is that I'm unclear on the actual thought processes taking place. Like these white bank employees; did they consciously decide that "we're not going to help this woman because she is black"? Was that a conscious thought process they went through, or was it something sub-conscious and something they may not have been aware of? Was the management team at the bank complicit in this? What responsibility do they have in screening and supervising their employees?
I often wonder the same thing when it comes to cops when they mistreat or kill black suspects in their custody. Are they consciously thinking "I'm going to give this person a hard time because they're black"? Or again, is it something more sub-conscious at work?
I realize there are also some who might doubt the veracity of this story or perhaps might think the events are not being accurately presented in the article. Perhaps there's more here that's not being said, and I understand that that might come up. I've also seen some people roll their eyes at the notion of "playing the race card," which implies there might be some other reason for someone's actions other than racism. Although it's hard to see how this can be easily explained away, especially since it was clearly a valid check with her name and address, and she had her driver's license.
