• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Pizza Hut employee kills 2 in attempted robbery

HRS

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
21
Location
Rutherfordton, North Carolina, USA
Robbery suspects shot dead by east Charlotte Pizza Hut employee
By Ely Portillo and Steve Lyttle
elyportillo@charlotteobserver.com
Posted: Tuesday, Sep. 28, 2010
Full Slideshow

« Prev of 2Next »
Two suspects were shot to death late Monday night by an employee during an attempted robbery at an east Charlotte pizza restaurant, Charlotte-Mecklenburg police say. DAVIE HINSHAW ~ dhinshaw@charlotteobserver.com













A pizza deliveryman who shot two would-be robbers to death in east Charlotte said Tuesday that he didn’t draw his concealed pistol until the last possible second, when he thought he would be killed.


Throughout the robbery attempt, as the men hit and pistol-whipped him inside a cooler at an east Charlotte Pizza Hut, the driver said he kept his right elbow pinned tightly against his body – holding a Glock 22 under his shirt and out of view.


He said he didn’t want to use the gun unless he was forced to. But as one of the men lifted his shirt, nearly exposing the gun, the deliveryman opened fire.


The two men killed – Gregory James Hardy and Dauntrae Wallace – were both 21-year-old convicted felons, one on probation and one awaiting trial on unrelated charges.


Police were searching Tuesday night for a third suspect who fled the attempted robbery and was possibly wounded.


No charges have been filed against the deliveryman.


He asked that his name not be used out of fear for his and his family’s safety. Officials confirmed that the 57-year-old had worked as a jail detention officer and a sheriff’s deputy for about six years, leaving in 2004.


The robbery was reported about 11:15 p.m. Monday at the restaurant at East Independence Boulevard and Idlewild Road.


Just after closing, the deliveryman said the store manager asked if he wanted a soda from the McDonald’s across the street. The deliveryman said no, and continued cleaning while the manager left.


A moment later, three men walked in, at least two pointing guns. The first one told the deliveryman: “I mean business.”


They told him to open the safe. The deliveryman said he didn’t have access.


“‘Get down!’” one ordered. When the deliveryman didn’t, he says the man pistol-whipped him. The men then ordered him into a bathroom while they waited for the manager.


One of the robbers waited in the bathroom with the deliveryman. He ordered him to wrap his arms around the toilet, kneeling, and then demanded money.


“Every time I hesitated, he hit me. I have so many bumps,” the driver said. He turned over his $42 in tips for the night and a gold chain with a Jesus medallion he’s worn for almost 40 years.


The whole time, the driver tried to keep his gun pressed against his body, under his baggy shirt. The driver has a concealed carry permit, and started carrying the gun after being robbed twice in the past two years.


When the manager returned moments later, the suspects grabbed him. One told the deliveryman to crawl to the cooler in the back.


“I said I can’t crawl,” said the deliveryman, realizing that if he bent over any further his gun would stick out. “As soon as I stood up, he hit me. I took a big step and ended up in the cooler.”


Then, the suspect demanded car keys and hit the deliveryman again, opening a nearly two-inch gash next to his left eye.


When the suspect started to lift the deliveryman’s shirt, he realized the robber was about to see his gun.


“I thought, ‘He’s gonna kill us,’” the deliveryman said. “They’re gonna get what they want, and still kill me.


“I pulled my gun. I shot him three times, and he fell.”


The second suspect started to rush into the cooler, and the deliveryman shot him too. The third suspect ran away.


When police and paramedics arrived, they found two suspects on the floor, both dead, with guns nearby. One investigator said it’s possible the third suspect was wounded by the employee.


“We found some other evidence in the area of the business and are looking into that,” CMPD Sgt. Gerard Farley said. Police did not have a detailed description of the man.


Both of the men killed have criminal pasts, court records show. Wallace was convicted of breaking and entering and larceny in 2006. He was fined and given three years probation. In May, he was convicted of carrying a concealed gun and given another year of probation.


Court records show Hardy was convicted of car theft in 2006 and given three years probation. He was sent to prison for six months in 2007 when he violated his probation by trespassing.


Last year, he was arrested and charged with possessing and conspiring to sell marijuana, and was scheduled to be tried in November.


Their families couldn’t be reached Tuesday night.


The Pizza Hut attempted robbery was the second closing time fast-food hold-up in less than 24 hours. Early Monday, the Wendy’s on Charlottetowne Avenue near uptown was robbed by three men as it closed. A customer was pistol-whipped. Three men were arrested a short while later and charged with armed robbery.


Pizza Hut employees have been fired for using guns in self-defense. Chris Fuller, a spokesman for Pizza Hut’s national corporate office, said that “in the interest of our employees’ safety, we don’t discuss our safety policies publicly.”


However, there have been several reports in recent years in which Pizza Hut officials said corporate policy forbids employees from having weapons while on the job.


A Pizza Hut employee in Columbia resigned last year after police said he shot and killed a robbery suspect. The employee resigned, according to Pizza Hut’s Fuller, because of the company’s policy forbidding employees from carrying firearms.


In one well-publicized May 2004 case, a Pizza Hut employee in Carmel, Ind., was fired after he shot and killed a would-be robber. And in 2008, a Pizza Hut worker in Des Moines, Iowa, lost his job after shooting and wounding a robbery suspect. Both of those Pizza Hut employees were delivery drivers.


Though the deliveryman said he knew he’d be risking his job by drawing his gun, he was tired of being robbed. He does landscaping during the delay and delivers pizzas at night.


“It’s hard-earned money, and they think they can just take it?” he said Tuesday.


After killing the would-be robbers, the deliveryman went to Carolinas Medical Center for stitches and talked with investigators. Tuesday morning, he came home, talked briefly with reporters, and went to sleep until Tuesday evening.


Asked how he was feeling Tuesday night, he shook his head: “I don’t know. I don’t know.” Observer researcher Maria David and staff writer Cleve R. Wootson, Jr. contributed.


Read more: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/09/28/1723694/2-men-shot-dead-in-robbery.html#ixzz10t9n4nrR
 

OldCurlyWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
907
Location
Oklahoma
Better to be fired than Dead. If Pizza Hut wants him fired, he and the store manager should tell PH to KMA and Here comes the law suit for Reckless Endangerment.

:cuss:
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
SNIP Chris Fuller, a spokesman for Pizza Hut’s national corporate office, said that “in the interest of our employees’ safety, we don’t discuss our safety policies publicly.”

Yeah, right. Suuuuuuure.

The reason you don't discuss it is because you don't want to look like the unconcerned people you are. The effect of being sued, which is really just a profit motive, is the concern. If you were really concerned about employee safety, you would let them carry, or at the least not fire the one's who defended their lives.

Also, you're probably scared of the negative publicity, what with Starbucks and others coming out as pro-carry.

Maybe an employee can "leak" a copy of the employee handbook page about weapons.
 
Last edited:

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Although I praise this man's bravery and willingness to take personal responsibility for his safety, and saving the lives of his fellow employees, the fact is that TECHNICALLY he is guilty of at least TWO offenses under NC law.

First, he carried on a private property that is know to have a policy forbidding employees from carrying, which is an automatic "Trespassing" charge, even if he wasn't asked to leave.

Second, he carried into an establishment that serves alcohol for consumption on premise, which under NC law is a Class 1 misdemeanor....

I hope the DA doesn't press charges. This guy is a hero and deserves a freaking medal, not pseudo-judicial harassment.

Then again, if he DOES get charged, this could be a VERY attractive case for SAF to pick up--getting this law struck down in the courts isn't as good as getting it repealed in the legislature, but sometimes illegal, stupid, and unconstitutional laws can only be struck down in the courts.

Say a prayer for this guy, folks. He could have a rocky row to hoe, because in this day and age, no good deed goes unpunished...
 

OldCurlyWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2010
Messages
907
Location
Oklahoma
Although I praise this man's bravery and willingness to take personal responsibility for his safety, and saving the lives of his fellow employees, the fact is that TECHNICALLY he is guilty of at least TWO offenses under NC law.

First, he carried on a private property that is know to have a policy forbidding employees from carrying, which is an automatic "Trespassing" charge, even if he wasn't asked to leave.

Second, he carried into an establishment that serves alcohol for consumption on premise, which under NC law is a Class 1 misdemeanor....

I hope the DA doesn't press charges. This guy is a hero and deserves a freaking medal, not pseudo-judicial harassment.

Then again, if he DOES get charged, this could be a VERY attractive case for SAF to pick up--getting this law struck down in the courts isn't as good as getting it repealed in the legislature, but sometimes illegal, stupid, and unconstitutional laws can only be struck down in the courts.

Say a prayer for this guy, folks. He could have a rocky row to hoe, because in this day and age, no good deed goes unpunished...

Under most state laws being an employee negates number two. I am sure of that in several states other than NC.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
I'm rather dismayed that the first response to all this is that he violated PC company policy along with what he might be charged with. Rather... the mistake he made (while armed) was to hesitate. Nobody picked up on that. You guys are more subconciously conditioned to 'obey' than I imagined.
 
Last edited:

Jim675

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
1,023
Location
Bellevue, Washington, USA
This man deserves nothing but praise. He showed incredible restraint until his and his manager's lives were obviously in peril and then acted with considerable skill to eliminate that peril.

Good luck sir, and may the aftershocks be minimal.
 

RayBurton72

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
235
Location
Greensboro, ,
First, he carried on a private property that is know to have a policy forbidding employees from carrying, which is an automatic "Trespassing" charge, even if he wasn't asked to leave.

Second, he carried into an establishment that serves alcohol for consumption on premise, which under NC law is a Class 1 misdemeanor....

While I hate to quicble, I think you are misreading the statute on your first point. NCGS 14-415.11(c) states, "A permit does not authorize a person to carry a concealed handgun . . . where notice that carrying a concealed handgun is prohibited by the posting of a conspicuous notice or statement by the person in legal possession or control of the premises."

Unless the property is posted with no carry, company policy does not invalidate the legal right to carry on his permit, as that policy only applies to employees, not the general public.

On point two, I am afraid you are spot-on, as NCGS 14-269.3 does not exempt all employees, only the owner or lessee or someone specifically acting as a security guard (which usually requires being licensed as such).
 

wheelsxd

New member
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
6
Location
rio rancho
This man is a true hero!! Pizza hut should give him an award not fire him! Till PH changes their policy they can expect to being targets to thugs like these pukes!
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
Employers always say "we do not resist" in an attempt to tell would-be robbers that they can steal and do not need to harm employees. Obviously, some robbers don't care and find opportunity, but are not just there to steal.
 

Beretta92FSLady

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
5,264
Location
In My Coffee
If I was the employee I would tell Pizza Hut to trespass me if they don't like that I carried on the job...then after they fired me I would walk away with my life still intact. Following their policy would have led to death, NO THANKS!


We should remember, this guy was forced to shoot human beings and two of them died. Even though he is completely in the right legally and morally, people need to keep in mind that killing another human being is a great weight on the mind.
 
Last edited:

zack991

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
1,535
Location
Ohio, USA
Yeah, right. Suuuuuuure.

The reason you don't discuss it is because you don't want to look like the unconcerned people you are. The effect of being sued, which is really just a profit motive, is the concern. If you were really concerned about employee safety, you would let them carry, or at the least not fire the one's who defended their lives.

Also, you're probably scared of the negative publicity, what with Starbucks and others coming out as pro-carry.

Maybe an employee can "leak" a copy of the employee handbook page about weapons.

bingo
 

MK

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
396
Location
USA
Being close friends with two people who work for the corporate arm of a large national pizza delivery chain, this particular company has insurance that covers the death of their employees and robberies of their property. It can get much more costly for them should they have to deal with an employee hurting a perp or accidentily hurting an innocent. Their employees are a resource to them more so than they are a human being and someone else's loved one.

I would carry a weapon if I were a food delivery worker whether I was allowed to by my company or not.
 

Nevada carrier

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2010
Messages
1,293
Location
The Epicenter of Freedom
Being close friends with two people who work for the corporate arm of a large national pizza delivery chain, this particular company has insurance that covers the death of their employees and robberies of their property.


Who is the beneficiary of the policy? The Company or the family of the employee? And for that matter, can an insurance policy bring someones husband, wife, son or daughter back to life, or keep them from being murdered in the first place?
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
Who is the beneficiary of the policy? The Company or the family of the employee? And for that matter, can an insurance policy bring someones husband, wife, son or daughter back to life, or keep them from being murdered in the first place?

Generally if an employer takes out a policy on an employee, and pays for that policy themselves, the benefits go to the employer. The only policy that is going to pay out to the employee's surviving relatives is one that the employee paid for--out of their own paycheck...

Companies have been doing this for YEARS. In the insurance business, they call them "dead peasant policies"... No joke...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/insurance/p64954.asp

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/dead-peasant-life-insurance-policies-fair/story?id=8724327

http://deadpeasantinsurance.com/which-employers-bought-policies-on-the-lives-of-employees/
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
I am sure the policy pays when the company gets sued by the family and loses.

Employers have OTHER policies that cover lawsuits involving wrongful death, or culpability, or responsibility for accidental death.

"Dead Peasant Insurance" goes directly to the corporation, and is most often put in special accounts that are used for capital investment, executive bonuses, or executive pension funds.

"Dead Peasant Insurance" is NOT to cover the employer in case the employee's family sues. It's purely a "for profit" venture, and a most unwholesome one at that...
 
Top