The post was shared on Reddit and covered by news organizations in several countries. However, some online commenters are suggesting Jenkins might have written in the slur herself because the writing looks different than the signature on the receipt.
Brilliant crowd-sourced detective work as usual. Does anyone's signature look anything like their normal handwriting?
It's not just the difference between the signature and the slur, but the two words in addition to the signature don't seem to match each other either. The N's are radically different. E's are different. Angle of writing is different. It almost looks like one person signed it, another person wrote "none", and then a third person wrote "******". Actually, looking at it again, it looks like the person who wrote "none" is right handed (and a poor writer), and the person who wrote "******" is left handed (but with much better penmanship at least). No way to reconcile that with the signature, of course (except it was clearly written by a right hander), but unless the guy signing the receipt handed it around to his friends to write comments on it (not impossible), I'm not sure we can conclude anything from this.
I'm also finding it hard to believe someone would write that on something he'd also signed his name to (and used a credit card to pay). Anyone who's worked in a restaurant can certainly see how the employee copy of a receipt with no tip might get a series of colorful notes added to it though. Hijinks abound, right? Dunno. I kinda see BS on this one as well.