A Florida man has been arrested for pretending to be an undercover Drug Enforcement Administration agent to score discounted burgers at Wendy’s.
Jesse David Stover, 57, had been claiming to be law enforcement to get a discount at the fast food chain for some time, but things went south when an employee asked to see proof.
“He quickly flashed a gold-colored badge to the Wendy’s staff and then demanded the discount again,” Bunnell Police said in a press release.
The manager declined to give Stover the discount, causing an argument.
Eventually, Stover admitted he was not a police officer, but claimed instead that he worked for DEA as an undercover agent. The badge he flashed was actually a concealed weapon permit badge, which looks similar to one that might be worn by law enforcement.
Bunnell PD says David Stover asked for the law enforcement discount at the .@Wendys & flashed a concealed weapon badge. Staff said no and PD says Stover then claimed he was an undercover DEA agent. He was denied again; an argument ensued & he was arrested for impersonating an LEO pic.twitter.com/I5NBwJJdVN
— Mike Springer WFTV (@mspringerwftv) April 12, 2022
“During the investigation, it was further discovered that Stover, a regular customer at this Wendy’s, had been demanding and getting this discount for over two years. Stover was placed under arrest and post Miranda Rights the badge being used to impersonate a law enforcement officer was discovered to be a concealed weapon permit badge which is very similar to a law enforcement badge,” the press release continued.
Flagler Live reports that Stover told arresting officers that he was a police officer “a long time ago, but he was fired because he was an alcoholic.”
Stover posted $2,500 bond with a notice to appear for his arraignment on May 9th.
While impersonating a police officer is a third-degree felony, Flagler Live notes that ‘the arrest report states that while the restaurant had surveillance video, it was not acquired at the time of the arrest, but would be retrieved ‘at a later date and time.’ Absent the video, the case would rest on the sort of he-said-she-said testimony prosecutors are usually uncomfortable with, if they are to pursue such charges.”