On the night of January 13, Mark Anthony Cox killed his manager, Danielle Watson, at the Flying Biscuit Cafe in Charlotte as she was closing up. He wrapped her body in plastic and dumped it in the garbage.
He drove off in her car with $2,500.
The victim was engaged and expecting a baby. Cox now faces double murder charges.
But as disturbing as this story is, it gets worse:
The Charlotte crime is eerily similar to other crimes for which Cox served prison time. He was released in November of 2011 after serving three years. He started working at the Flying Biscuit within a few weeks.
Back in 2008, Cox was 18 when he worked in the kitchen at a Sonic restaurant in eastern North Carolina.
Police in Roanoke Rapids told WBTV’s Sharon Smith that Cox and some co-conspirators planned to rob the restaurant. His co-workers were held at gunpoint, while the robber demanded $3100.
Cox was given a three-year-suspended prison, which was suspended for probation. It was only activated after his probation was revoked and another crime was committed.
This time, police in Wake County say Cox broke into the home of a man who was trying to help him. The victim had just recently told Cox to move out, and the break-in was how Cox responded, according to Knightdale police investigators.
How could Mark Anthony Cox have been hired with this kind of record? Why would management allow this predatory slime to work in close quarters with unsuspecting co-workers? The article manages to ask the question without asking it: “The owners have been silent on the background check issue and their security policy.”
Maybe this story from last week will shed a little light on the mystery:
Pepsi Beverages Co. will pay $3.1 million to settle federal charges of race discrimination for using criminal background checks to screen out job applicants — even if they weren’t convicted of a crime.
The settlement announced Wednesday with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is part of a national government crackdown on hiring policies that can hurt blacks and Hispanics.
Get that? Checking for a prospective employee’s past criminal activity has an adverse effect on certain minorities.
Problem is, NOT checking past criminal activity has an adverse effect on innocent co-workers. What’s a business to do – turn their employees into unwitting targets, or risk a crackdown from the national government?
The answer is obvious. So once again, in its never-ending effort to impose equality of outcome in the workplace, the government commits the unspeakable in pursuit of the impossible.