Boston Burrito Joint Sics Its Social Media Community On Robbers In Surveillance Footage

After three robbers strolled up to a Boston burrito spot called Boloco and were caught on camera while stealing the store’s safe, the local restaurant is going to the mattresses and calling on its social media community to solve the crime. says the criminals busted into the store and stole a safe deposit box on Saturday. Boloco set the surveillance footage of the crime to music and are offering it up on Facebook and Twitter with a $1,000 cash reward for tips that lead to arrest of the suspects.

Says the restaurant’s Facebook page:

We added music to the video (because that’s what we do), but it was haunting even without it.

We debated about whether to share this or not – traditionally this isn’t something that is “shared”… but it’s 2012… and we think everyone needs to see what is happening out there, and work together to reduce and one day eliminate evil people like these three.

After only a day of the crime being posted on the Internet, Boloco updated its Facebook page saying they may have caught the suspects but were waiting on an arrest before celebrating and showering a tipster with the reward cash.

It’s funny to watch one of the guys trying to be all smart and bashing the camera in with a sledgehammer, with his face turned up to it clearly, before just tipping it slightly off-kilter and thinking he’s done the job right.

Boloco Takes to Social Media to Nab Robbers, Offers $1,000 Reward [BostInno]


Edit Your Comment

  1. Tegan says:

    Oh man, I saw “Boston burrito joint” in the headline and figured it was Boloco. Shame they got robbed. They have the most delicious burritos ever! There was/is one close to where I lived in Cincinnati that renamed to “Currito”. They had tasty marinated tofu and feta and all sorts of awesome ingredients. And they made Nutella milkshakes. That’s right.

  2. GoldVRod says:

    “Boston Burrito Berklee Boylston Boloco’s Big Bad Break-In Bandits Busted By Bounty”

    If you want any more help with amazing headlines just give me a call!

  3. barbcole says:

    Very thoughtful of the robbers to rearrange the camera so we could get a better view…

  4. ChuckECheese says:

    They need to make security cameras that catch the action more at face level, rather than at tip-of-the-hoodie level.

  5. longfeltwant says:

    I’m a psychic, so I call tell you that this was a former employee, plus a couple of his friends. See? I just proved that psychics are real. If you don’t believe in magic, such as psychics, then you are just refusing to accept the obvious.

    • Fast Eddie Eats Bagels says:

      I was thinking this too. They knew the safes exact location. The guy with the sledgehammer is a flipping idiot.

      • u1itn0w2day says:

        Pinky seems to be going out of his way not to show his face and seemed to be always aware where he was at.

        What is it about disgruntled food service and crime. If they ain’t spitting they’re stealing.

        • Evil_Otto would rather pay taxes than make someone else rich says:

          Low wages, poor working conditions, no benefits, constant abuse from customers, pick one.

    • ReverendTed says:

      It’s a likely explanation, but it’s also possible to have been someone else allowed behind the scenes, perhaps someone involved in delivery or maintenence.

  6. 2 Replies says:

    one day eliminate evil people like these three

    People are not evil. It’s only some of their choices that are deemed evil.
    Like the decision to encourage an internet mob to “eliminate _ people”. Seriously, lawsuit bait much?

  7. mister_roboto says:

    What the hell? Does he think the recording gets destroyed when he breaks the camera? Like there’s a tape inside it or something? I bet the same guy if in a car chase with the cops, would think “if I just make it to the county line, I’ll be free!”

    • kosmo @ The Soap Boxers says:

      Yes, my guess is that this is exactly what he thinks.

      He might not be the highest pixel camera in the store, if you know what I mean.

    • ReverendTed says:

      If you watch, they’re clearly aware of where the camera is at the beginning, and trying to hide their faces from it. It seems like they were operating on the plan to hide their faces until the camera was smashed, and he also probably incorrectly assumed he was out of its field of view while directly under it.

    • El_Fez says:

      What – you’re saying that the Dukes of Hazard lied to me?

    • Clyde Barrow says:

      mister_roboto: What’s funny about what you said is that it used to be true during the days of Bonnie and Clyde. One of the reasons for the law enforcement’s inability to catch them is because they could not cross county lines. Hoover changed all that.

  8. Kimbeegrin says:

    I miss Boloco! When I went to school in Boston, there was one I could hit up in pajamas while cramming for finals. Cajun burrito=my favorite and their smoothies are awesome also!

  9. mandarynn says:

    I go to that location all the time! I had no idea they were busted. I hope they catch those thugs.

  10. ungeheier says:

    Funny Bueno Burger out in Arizona did the same thing sometime last year.

  11. MacUser1986 says:

    Who ever thinks that busting a camera is going to erase the footage needs to eliminated as a member of our society.

    • ReverendTed says:

      Posted this above, but just in case:
      If you watch, they’re clearly aware of where the camera is at the beginning, and trying to hide their faces from it. It seems like they were operating on the plan to hide their faces until the camera was smashed. Sledge there also probably incorrectly assumed he was out of its field of view while directly under it.

  12. Firevine says:

    Republicans probably had something to do with this.

    • ReverendTed says:

      Yeah, they set up the “Big Brother” cameras to catch the Obama-lovers looking for a free ride!
      (Full disclosure for the humor-impaired: Yes, I am also joking.)

    • Cor Aquilonis says:

      It’s almost certainly Obama’s Fault… somehow.

  13. SeattleSeven says:


    A safe not bolted down is just a heavy box full of money.

    • u1itn0w2day says:

      Bingo. At least chain the safe with an eye hook to a stud or floor. Or frame it in some how so thief people have to take TIME to get it out. My personal choice would be just put some loose weight in it so it moves and makes the safe awkward to handle.

  14. RevancheRM says:

    Wow…Big Brother really scares me. That one guy with the sledgehammer clearly has his rights violated because his face is clearly seen.

    Cameras everywhere…we don’t even know when we’re being watched, as seen by those three other cameras they didn’t know were in the establishment. These guys were just doing their jobs, making an income the best way they knew how, having no clue how much more dangerous their professsional world has become by this invasion of privacy.

    Now, his striking the camera with the sledgehammer seems a bit too far of a reaction, but I understand where he’s coming from. He never signed a release form allowing them to take images of his person, never allowed them the permission to upload those images to a public website (in this case YouTube). And if he objects, he essentially is forced to expose who he is, and now that he’s in a public ‘light’, and can assume that his anonmity, his privacy (even where he dwells) is forever ruined. He may even be forced to move from his home because of this intrusion. What is he’s an introvert and desires his privacy?!

    Shocking. I’m surprised the Consumerist even listed the name of the restaurant here, but I’m glad they did. I know I’ll never do my business there.

    Some farkers will believe anything they read.

    • El_Fez says:

      That one guy with the sledgehammer clearly has his rights violated because his face is clearly seen.

      Rights violated how? The law is pretty clear: if you have no expectation of privacy (such as over your shoulder at the ATM with a long lens), then I can photograph you without your consent. Provided that I dont misrepresent the picture (A caption that says “Mayor seen with hawt new tottie” when it’s really his daughter, for example), I can publish that photo.

      Knocking over a restaurant pretty much pisses away any expectation of privacy and that was not a misrepresentation of the event.

      So no, you’re dead wrong.

      • Rachacha says:

        i think you missed the sarcasm of his comments.

        • little stripes says:

          I think the attempt at comedy was pretty poor. Should have been more concise, less wordy. It just wasn’t every funny. But he totally got me (mostly because I got bored after about 4 sentences).

          • El_Fez says:

            Yeah, pretty much this. I got to the first point, quickly skimmed, realized that the rest of the message was pointless diatribe, refuted the one point and gave up on the rest.

            • blueman says:

              Yeah, keep digging that hole deeper. Everyone except a couple of you knew it was satire from the beginning.

          • Kavatar says:

            I don’t think you understand trolling. The source of the comedy is you.

      • ReverendTed says:

        El_Fez, you may want to read his last line again.
        It’s a sad commentary on our society that things have gotten so extremely polarized that it’s almost impossible to make a comment outrageous enough to be easily identified as parody.

        • little stripes says:

          I missed it too! *hangs head in shame*

          I think part of the problem is that we all got tired of reading it after about 4 sentences. He was way, way too wordy, so his attempt at comedy was a pretty big fail. It just didn’t work.

        • El_Fez says:


          Whatever. I pretty much tuned it out about halfway through the second paragraph and didn’t bother with the rest of the message.

        • psm321 says:

          Poe’s Law

      • rob3912811 thinks this site is full of retards and assclowns with cats for friends. says:

        I…I feel so sorry for you.

    • little stripes says:

      You really aren’t that bright, are you? You have no real knowledge of the law or constitution, yet talk like you do. The worst kind of ignorance, really.

      • pinkyismycat says:

        This is called a troll. They don’t mean what they say, they just want to get a reaction like yours. Welcome to the internet.

    • mh83 says:

      +100 troll points. Congrats

  15. El_Fez says:
  16. u1itn0w2day says:

    Pinky seems to be the only one hustling-at b&e/burglary. His assistant grey hoody #2 seems to be an up and comer. The bozo with the sledge hammer minus well be on Dirty Jobs with sludge and not a sledge hammer.

    Extraction from society if not the gene pool.

  17. u1itn0w2day says:

    This is why it might pay off to put a set of dumbbells or weight of somekind in the safe. Not only would it add extra weight, loose weight moving around would make the safe even harder to handle. Good thing for the thief people that they were stealing from a restaraunt that probably still has it’s fair share of grease on the floor even if residue.

  18. DanKelley98 says:
    • Greg Ohio says:

      So does the Philly Police Department. Oh wait, they’re the ones on camera cutting the wires before they rob the place.

  19. lovemypets00 - You'll need to forgive me, my social filter has cracked. says:

    I wish more stores would do this. Early Sunday AM, I heard some police calls from town on my scanner. Two burglar alarms went off pretty close to one another, one was a front, motion, and back door alarm, and another one was a front door alarm. I didn’t see any reports in tonight’s paper, but hopefully there’s camera footage of what happened.

    On my next day off, I might stop in and suggest this to the Sheriff.

  20. Swins says:

    Inside job, they knew where the cameras were before walking into a back office.

    • u1itn0w2day says:

      mister pink or red sweatshirt or what ever seemed to be going out of his way not to show his face and was a bit too familiar with his location in the building.

  21. Razor512 says:

    I did a security camera setup for a friends business, most security cameras are low resolution, so to capture facial detail, you need to get a closeup. My solution was to have 1 higher end camera with a more zoomed in lens to be placed at about 7 feet high at a distance to capture facial detail of everyone walking in the door.

    the IR LED is disabled on the camera, and in place are a few small IR LED panels to provide some indirect lighting at night. Direct IR lighting will cause faces to be overexposed.

    when setting up a security camera system, make sure at least 1 of the cameras can capture a good amount of facial detail. The rest can be lower cost cameras as you only then need enough detail to tell the people apart and see what they are doing.

    PS hitting a camera does not break it, even if the outer casing is smashed, there are very few components in the camera housing and they are mostly connected to each other using wires and not a large piece of PCB.

  22. pinteresque says:

    Boloco’s a chain – calling Boloco a “Boston Burrito joint” is like calling a local McDonald’s a “Kansas City Burger Joint.”

  23. ReverendTed says:

    Oh, and it’s SEMANTICS TIME!

    These nitwits are burglars, not robbers.