Things are not adding up for Brinks and their drivers in the court documents they submitted. Have you ever seen a Brinks truck do 200 MPH?
New court documents have some interesting holes in them.
This is an update on the article BTU published on July 21 regarding the heist of over $100 million in jewelry and gemstones. According to court documents, first reported by the LA Times, the co-driver had finished his shift and was in the sleeper berth on his 10- hour break at the time of the robbery.
This goes against the initial report of both drivers; they originally claimed they were eating at the Frazier Mountain Flying J travel center in Lebec, California, at the time of the robbery. The truck stop recently underwent renovations and the updated security cameras captured footage during the robbery event.
The footage did not show the robbers, but puts into question events as stated by Brink’s. A timeline leading up to the robbery has some loose ends to tie up. Brink’s and the owners of the stolen jewelry are in the midst of dueling lawsuits.
The timeline of the robbery does not add up
Brink’s timeline leading up to the robbery. The $100 million+ in jewelry, gemstones and fine watches were in 22 bags that were removed from the truck during the 27-minute heist. There were a total of 73 bags on board, according to the inventory log of the truck.
After midnight on July 11, the Brink’s truck and its two drivers left the storage yard in Los Angeles enroute to San Mateo for the next leg of the jewelry show circuit. After departure, “Driver 2” entered the sleep berth in the off-duty status.
Driver 1, who drove the truck during the trip, stopped at 1:49 a.m. at the Buttonwillow rest area, 124 miles along their route. Seemingly well done, as high value regulations require that drivers travel two hours or 200 miles before they stop.
Then at 2:05 a.m., the driver arrived at the Flying J in Lebec, 55 miles away from Buttonwillow. That equates to 16 minutes to cover 55 miles. The Brink’s truck would have had to travel 206.25 miles per hour to make the trip in the time reported. Something does not add up in Brinks’ statement.
Jewelry shops launch suit, but might be mitigated by their own actions
Jewelers who had their property stolen have launched a lawsuit suing Brink’s for an amount far above what the value of the stolen merchandise was insured for. They claim Brinks’ reputation and large costs to insure are reasons most insured for a fraction of the actual value.
One shop owner reported that he only insured at the value of $400,000, when the actual value of his lot was over $1 million. He stated that was due to the 48 years of safely delivered property he had with the armored transporter. Now he may have to close his shop and declare bankruptcy due to lost sales.
Brink’s launched a countersuit, claiming a breach of contract now that the owners are claiming more than the insured value. Brink’s CEO Mark Eubanks said on the company’s quarterly investor conference call that the expected loss, according to the insurance policies taken out by the merchants, would only be around $10 million.
This is a developing story and BTU will continue to report on the updates.