Murder at Lululemon in Bethesda

[Anonymous]

We don't even know if they ever even left the store.... perhaps they NEVER left the store in the first place. That would explain the alarm company not being signaled the alarm was not reset.

[Anonymous]

Well we do know that SHE left the store to move Jayna's car which is what linked her to the murder because she left blood in the car. She must have moved it to Strosnider's parking lot. I believe the police did say though that they both DID leave and then come back and that is why Jayna's car was in front of the store. And Brittany moved the car because she had NO idea whether or not Jayna had told anyone that she was meeting her and if she was supposed to be meeting people later or not. If her car was in front and someone was waiting on her then drove to Bethesda and saw the car in front of the store they would have called the police! That is my take!

[Anonymous]

It's so shocking and scary when things like this happen so close to home... it's crazy what seemingly normal people are capable of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well we do know that SHE left the store to move Jayna's car which is what linked her to the murder because she left blood in the car. She must have moved it to Strosnider's parking lot. I believe the police did say though that they both DID leave and then come back and that is why Jayna's car was in front of the store. And Brittany moved the car because she had NO idea whether or not Jayna had told anyone that she was meeting her and if she was supposed to be meeting people later or not. If her car was in front and someone was waiting on her then drove to Bethesda and saw the car in front of the store they would have called the police! That is my take!

Yeah I agree. And also the cops say they did believe they left the store. It makes sense bc there could have been 1 or 2 more employees who closed with them. So it might not have been just Jayna and Brittnay in the store. That why she had to call her back bc she wanted them to be alone. But again, I do not know its just my thought on it.

[Anonymous]

She could have very well had that racial attitude thing going on with her. So it could have been that she called to get her wallet and the attitude that Jayna had about coming back set her off. And it had nothing to do with anything other than she made up a story about how she was thinking she was being treated by Jayna that seemed to be racially induced. And she lost control of her anger. Then she had to think quick which she has had to do in other situations where her anger got the best of her in order not to lose ground in any given situation. Only this time it was an unimaginable predicament that she had to get herself out of. And quite frankly she was pretty damn creative which is what tells me she is used to getting herself out of messes that she has gotten herself into as a result of her anger issue. Just another one of my takes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the race of the surviving victim? In the other forum it is rumored that the women are of different races?

Why in the world does this matter?

Because:

If she's White: "How dare we blame her..she is a victim. It's sick to even think of blaming her".

If she's Black/Hispanic: "She probably was in collusion with the perps and they decided to rough her up to make it look like she was a victim."

Sad...but it's how some minds work.

I'm curious, does the fact that the murderer proved to be black cause you to reconsider your motivations for making this kind of statement? I mean, obviously you posted in a fit of moral superiority, the facts don't support the comment you made, and the imaginary racists you posit in this post would have been correct. Reaction?

[Anonymous]

it was the other victim that killed her boss and then tied herself up and said they had been attacked, its in the news today,
watchout who you hire is the only lesson here

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do places like lululemon perform any type of background checks on prospective employees? She had a failure to appear in court and a lawsuit for non-payment of rent. These surely tell something about the person, and I would not hire anyone with this history to work in a store.

Exactly. Lululemon dropped the ball here.

As a business owner or hiring manager you have to have a valid business case for not hiring someone as a result of a background investigation and you actually have to send out a formal notice that you are not hiring the person as a result of their background investigation. For example, if she was caught stealing money from a former employer you would certainly have a case but I'm not sure about failure to appear in court.

That is total bullsh*t. If you find something on a background check, you don't hire the person. You don't have to make explanations. Show me the law you are referring to. I would have viewed her as a bad risk, not because I would think she'd be a murderer, but because being evicted for non payment of rent coupled with failure to appear in court=total lack of judgment and having to fire people is a hassle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can't imagine that most businesses perform background checks on low-level, cashier-type employees. I've worked in tons of those kind of jobs and they rarely ever checked references, much less did a background check.

No, they don't and they shouldn't be expected to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:right, going to not hire a black female (two protected classes) because of an unpaid speeding ticket or because she had a dispute with a large apartment landlord when she was in her early 20s? right. what color is the sky in your world?

Seriously? You think when a black female presents for a job, you're required to hire her or be sued for discrimination?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:right, going to not hire a black female (two protected classes) because of an unpaid speeding ticket or because she had a dispute with a large apartment landlord when she was in her early 20s? right. what color is the sky in your world?

Seriously? You think when a black female presents for a job, you're required to hire her or be sued for discrimination?

Unfortunately this crime has caused a lot of creepy racists to show up in this discussion. Most of the comments have already been deleted. I think the best response is to either report the hateful comments or ignore them so they will go away.

[Anonymous]

A friend of mine told me that when she signed up with an employment agency they were required to answer a questionnaire that asked about things like whether you could fly or whether you can read other peoples' minds. She said they were trying to screen out people with mental issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do places like lululemon perform any type of background checks on prospective employees? She had a failure to appear in court and a lawsuit for non-payment of rent. These surely tell something about the person, and I would not hire anyone with this history to work in a store.

Exactly. Lululemon dropped the ball here.

As a business owner or hiring manager you have to have a valid business case for not hiring someone as a result of a background investigation and you actually have to send out a formal notice that you are not hiring the person as a result of their background investigation. For example, if she was caught stealing money from a former employer you would certainly have a case but I'm not sure about failure to appear in court.

That is total bullsh*t. If you find something on a background check, you don't hire the person. You don't have to make explanations. Show me the law you are referring to. I would have viewed her as a bad risk, not because I would think she'd be a murderer, but because being evicted for non payment of rent coupled with failure to appear in court=total lack of judgment and having to fire people is a hassle.

Okay, I found a reference, I apologize. Still, I would inform her and move on. I've done background checks, they weren't expensive or time consuming.

[Anonymous]

If you're citing the background check as a reason that you didn't hire this person, and can demonstrate (in the unlikely event that someone attempts to file a discrimination suit) that you declined to hire men and/or people of various ethnicities based on background checks that revealed similar offenses, I think you're pretty much in the clear legally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:right, going to not hire a black female (two protected classes) because of an unpaid speeding ticket or because she had a dispute with a large apartment landlord when she was in her early 20s? right. what color is the sky in your world?

Seriously? You think when a black female presents for a job, you're required to hire her or be sued for discrimination?

Unfortunately this crime has caused a lot of creepy racists to show up in this discussion. Most of the comments have already been deleted. I think the best response is to either report the hateful comments or ignore them so they will go away.

Who are you saying is a racist, me or the first quote? I was the second poster. And my point was only that you cannot fail to hire because of someone's race or gender. However, you could certainly decide not to hire because they have suits against them. Yes, even for a $7 an hour job.