You are viewing this article in the archives. For the latest breaking news and updates in Ann Arbor and the surrounding area, see
Posted on Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 9:32 a.m.

Man arrested after 'dine and dash' in Ypsilanti

By Kyle Feldscher

Ypsilanti police arrested a 28-year-old man for a “dine and dash” at a city restaurant late Sunday night.

Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Thumbnail image for Ypsilanti_police_badge.jpg

Police responded at 11 p.m. Sunday to a restaurant in the 700 block of West Cross Street for a report of defrauding an innkeeper. According to police, two men fled the restaurant without paying their bill.

Upon arrival, police tracked down one of the men and placed him under arrest for defrauding an innkeeper. The second man remains at large.

Multiple restaurants are listed in the 700 block of West Cross Street. It is Ypsilanti police policy to typically not release the names of businesses affected by a crime.

No substantive description of the second suspect was released Monday morning.

Anyone with information on this incident is encouraged to call the Ypsilanti police at 734-483-9510.

View Larger Map

Kyle Feldscher covers cops and courts for He can be reached at or you can follow him on Twitter.



Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 4:34 p.m.

I'd be interested to hear why Honest Abe believes anyone not directly involved in a criminal matter is "entitled" to anything other than generic information. The fact is, you are NOT entitled. The rights of a victim/business to try to keep their identity private is overwhelmingly more important than any busy-body interest you may have in details that don't concern you and that have no bearing whatsoever on the main points of the story, which are two guys left w/o paying, and one guy got arrested. If and when the arrested guy gets arraigned, you'll be able to read his name in the paper. That's it.


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 1:22 a.m.

Do people really still use the word "Innkeeper"? I love it !!


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 11:47 p.m.

You cannot have seriously removed the comments referencing the immortal dialogue from Repo Man: Debbie: "Duke, let's go do those crimes!" Duke: "Yeah. Let's get sushi... and not pay!"


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 12:37 a.m.

Kyle Feldscher

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 7:50 p.m.

I'll reply to JRW's comment here so more people can see it. Basically, when you are arrested, you are arrested on the suspicion that you committed a crime. When you are arraigned, you are formally charged and become accused of committing the crime. The difference is really a legal one. Most of the time, people who are arrested are also charged with a crime. But, there can be cases where they aren't. For instance, two people were arrested on suspicion of murdering the man in Penninsula Place earlier this year. However, prosecutors determined there wasn't enough evidence to formally charge them with the crime right now. When someone is arraigned, the court case against them begins. The reason we do not publish names and photos after someone is arrested is simply because of what happened in that Ypsilanti case: The people might not ever be charged with a crime and, by naming them before formal charges are filed, they would be forever associated with that crime. When people are charged, there is a court case that comes up and the evidence will come out and we can see in the public sphere if someone is guilty or not guilty. However, before arraignment, all of that can be withheld under the FOIA act and it's hard to present those facts in the open. That's really wordy. I hope that explains it a little bit more.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 7:36 p.m.

"Defrauding an innkeeper", delightfully Dickens.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 7:23 p.m.

Related question about procedure, Kyle: When are the names and photos of arrested individuals posted on AA dot com? At the time or arrest, or when they are arraigned? Can you explain the difference to readers? I'm not clear on why people arrested are not names in articles. Just curious about policy and procedures.

Paula Gardner

Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 8:18 p.m.

Thanks, MathGeek. That is the reason.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 11:58 p.m.

They wait until there are charges. Anyone can be arrested at any time, that doesn't mean they are the person responsible. If the police do an investigation and determine they have the wrong person, no crime was really committed, the victim doesn't want to press charges, etc. it's not anyone's business. If you're facing charges, that's part of the public record, so that's when names get published.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 5:49 p.m.

Maybe the reason the police don't put businesses name out is so someone else doesn't get the bright idea to rip off the same restaurant.

Jonathan Blutarsky

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 4:38 p.m.

I'm betting it was the Wurst bar. Their Lobster rolls are almost worth going to jail for!

Ypsi Citizen

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 4:05 p.m.

I thought dine-n-dash was a mobile game for android.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 4:22 p.m.

Sounds like you might be one of those out of town bankers that I see on billboards all over the area. (j/k) :)

Bob Krzewinski

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 4:05 p.m.

Funny how people make statements the is withholding information when they themselves will not even use their real name online!


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 12:26 a.m.

Yeah, right, like somebody would really name their kid Bob.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 3:19 p.m.

I thought dine and dash was a lost art....I guess not.

dading dont delete me bro

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 3:12 p.m.



Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 3:18 p.m.

dading...that's the official legal term/charge

Honest Abe

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 2:45 p.m.

the public tends to not want to help the police, when the police does not want to help the public. even though this article is about a petty crime, it makes a person angry when the police does not want to release information that the public should know! and has a RIGHT to know! I understand their are circumstances where information is withheld, such as major crimes, but still, in the end, were entitled to ALL information and details.


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 4:39 p.m.

In the end, you are not entitled, either legally or morally, to much of anything in a situation like this, other than what FOIA allows, and the reporter certainly isn't obligated to do your legwork, or incur expense on your behalf. Also, exactly how would you be "helped" by the police releasing the name of the victim business?


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 1:14 a.m.

Perhaps you could call the police department and ask them?


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 4:45 p.m.

Honest Abe says... it makes a person angry when the police does not want to release information that the public should know! and has a RIGHT to know! I say..., it makes a person angry when persons want information that the public need not know! and has a does not have a RIGHT to know!


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 4:42 p.m.

We are not entitled to ALL information and details. Why will you delete this?

Honest Abe

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 2:40 p.m.

" It is Ypsilanti police policy to typically not release the names of businesses affected by a crime." So, even though a crime takes place in my town, and the police are paid with our tax dollars; they will not release the names? Well guess what? THEY HAVE TO!! It's up to you, A2.Com, as reporters and journalist to press them for that information! Just because it is 'Ypsilanti Police Policy" does not mean much. FOI act? Have you heard of that before? Do you folks just turn around and walk away empty handed if the Police tell you "We're not telling you anything" ?? You folks at A2.Com need to dig and grind to get those answers!!!!!!!! Being persistent and relentless equals good reporting!


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 1:07 p.m.

The crime took place at 700 W Cross Street. I'm not sure the name of the establishment matters and may be in the best interest of the establishment to not get a stigma just because of a random act (does not come across as targeted) The crime did not personally harm anyone or put them in danger.


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 3:47 a.m.

"Not only do people apparently expect their news to be free today, they also expect to dictate the coverage." Well put, snark12.


Tue, Jun 18, 2013 : 12:30 a.m.

He's been down-voted because he's making his demand in a obnoxious fashion. ("Have you heard of that before?") He doesn't have the right to know everything he wants at the exact moment he wants to know it. Providing the reading public with omniscience is not a valid business model for any media organization today. I've noticed the comments are becoming full of people demanding answers to very specific questions. Not only do people apparently expect their news to be free today, they also expect to dictate the coverage.


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 10:43 p.m.

Why are there 11 negative votes on a post that wants the reporter to press the police to give information? Isn't that what a reporter does (no offense to the current reporter; I was just wondering why the current commenter was down-voted for pointing it out).


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 6:12 p.m.

You are angry


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 5:51 p.m.

What possible difference does it make to you or any other person not involved in the crime which business it was?

Martha Cojelona Gratis

Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 1:56 p.m.

Kids, pay your bill.. and always tip your server!


Mon, Jun 17, 2013 : 2:34 p.m.

28 is old enough to know better... make it hurt