An Evansville, Ind., DoorDash courier was charged with a felony after police said they sprayed an irritant on a meal delivered to make two people vomit. The driver is accused of spritzing the order with something from a small aerosol can — which led to on-the-spot burning in the mouth and throat, followed by stomach distress.
The case highlights a fragility in the pact between gig platforms, restaurants and consumers: trust that sealed food will arrive unchanged. It also raises new questions about the degree to which existing delivery protections prevent tampering during the last few feet between the driver’s car and a customer’s door.
What Investigators Say Happened During the Delivery
The Vanderburgh County Sheriff’s Office said a local resident complained he and his wife got sick after eating a fast-food order delivered by a DoorDash driver. He saw a red substance on the delivery bag and checked his doorbell camera. Investigators say the video appears to show the courier snapping a required delivery photo before spraying an unknown substance on or near the food from a keychain-sized aerosol can.
With the help of DoorDash records, detectives were able to identify the driver as Kourtney Stevenson from Kentucky. Stevenson told local officers she sprayed the pepper spray at a spider near the bag in a phone call with police, according to court documents. Investigators also said the explanation didn’t add up with what they observed on the video, which took place after temperatures overnight were close to 35 degrees — when outdoor spiders in the area are normally inactive.
After Stevenson reportedly refused an in-person interview, authorities obtained a warrant for her arrest on charges of battery with moderate injury and consumer product tampering. She was awaiting extradition to Indiana, the sheriff’s office said. It was unclear early Monday whether she had an attorney who could speak on her behalf, national outlets reported.
Charges and Legal Context for Alleged Food Tampering
Consumer product tampering statutes are intended to protect the wholesomeness of a product offered for sale to consumers, including prepared food. Though the legal standard varies by state, typically prosecutors need to demonstrate an intentional act with potential to harm consumers. Legal experts say that in instances where the substance doesn’t cause permanent harm, the mere suggestion of contamination can lead to felony exposure in cases like those brought against D-Alpha and other companies because it puts public health at risk and erodes confidence in the marketplace.
The symptoms here (mouth and throat burning, nausea, vomiting) fit with exposure to oleoresin capsicum (OC), the active ingredient in pepper spray. Such side effects have long been recorded in toxicology guidance and they can be acute and very unpleasant at even low doses. On the other hand, the exact drug involved in this case has not been officially identified by any authorities.
DoorDash Response and Industry Safeguards
A DoorDash spokesman said the driver had been permanently removed from the platform and that the company is cooperating with law enforcement. The company said that it had a zero-tolerance policy for actions that harm customer safety. DoorDash, like other large delivery apps, conducts background checks and uses technology that includes order sealing at restaurants, drop-off photo verification, GPS tracking, and quick deactivation protocols when tampering complaints are made.
Restaurants have used tamper-evident packaging more frequently since the pandemic to lower the likelihood of something happening in transit. That said, the vital “hand-off” moments — when a bag is set down at a door or handed to a customer — continue to be an Achilles’ heel. Doorbell cameras and entryway cams have turned into unlikely, sometimes decisive, tools of documentation in disputes over damaged orders or purported contamination.
How This Rings True for Delivery Customers
Food integrity in the gig economy is not a new concern. A much-cited 2019 study by US Foods found that 28% of delivery drivers confessed to nibbling on a customer’s food, and the vast majority of consumers said they were “concerned” about tampering. Although the industry tightened policies afterward — urging sealed packages and clearer chain-of-custody steps — the emotional stakes are high, because violations feel personal and can lead to immediate illness.
And such cases can also have an outsize effect on trust. Even isolated incidents spread through social media, leading people to demand closer verification — photos of whole seals, customized tamper tags that are tied to order IDs and “better accountability” when multiple parties (restaurant, courier and platform) handle the same order.
Practical Steps for Consumers to Improve Delivery Safety
Experts suggest looking for unbroken tamper-evident seals and staples before opening a bag, and photographing anything unusual. If something doesn’t smell right — you detect strange odors, see residue on packaging or find a seal compromised — customers should refrain from eating food and report the problem to the platform, the restaurant and local authorities. Health departments frequently keep track of such complaints, which can aid in spotting patterns more quickly.
For now, the case in Indiana will serve as a laboratory to see how quickly platforms and prosecutors respond when purported manipulation has been recorded. It’s also a reminder that in a delivery ecosystem predicated on speed and convenience, the last mile is only as secure as the guardrails and accountability applied to it.
