Judge: Cox too dangerous to release ahead of trial

WILMINGTON — A law enforcement officer tips off a known drug trafficker via text that he is being investigated by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — information that compromises the agents’ staging location and forces them to use it as a decoy while they reassemble at a Goldsboro hotel.

He creates an alibi for a second dealer after the man allegedly shot one of the Wayne County Sheriff’s Office’s confidential informants.

And there’s more.

From a nightclub, that same law enforcement officer sends a text message to the known drug trafficker and asks the man to find him some prostitutes — accompanied by graphic descriptions of the kind of rendezvous he wants to have.

The same officer also texts pictures of his genitals to the girlfriend of the dealer who has just been arrested and asks for pictures of hers in return.

He and his coworkers communicate about the prospect of “wife-swapping.”

Those allegations combined with other details from an indictment handed down by a federal grand jury in mid-August and made public by U.S. Attorney Michael Easley Jr. Aug. 30 prompted Chief United States District Judge Richard Myers II to deny former WCSO Drug Unit chief Mike Cox’s appeal for pre-trial release Tuesday in Wilmington.

But Cox was not the only member of the department under fire inside the federal courthouse.

•

Just before 10 a.m. Tuesday morning, Cox, dressed in a bright orange jumpsuit with “BRUNSWICK COUNTY JAIL” printed on the back, was led into the courtroom — his hands and feet shackled.

His father-in-law, Larry Davis, and mother-in-law, Sue, are seated in the gallery. They are getting ready to testify that they can act as third-party custodians in the event the judge grants their son-in-law supervised release while he awaits trial on alleged crimes ranging from bid-rigging and lying to the FBI to conspiracy with multiple drug traffickers to distribute and possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and oxycodone.

Cox’s father-in-law tells the court that their homes are within a mile of one another in Walnut Creek — that before his arrest, he saw Cox “practically every day” at the house or at their shops, which are located side by side.

Duffy, however, argued that Davis’ son-in-law invited “violent drug dealers” to his home on numerous occasions.

He told Davis he “did it right there in Walnut Creek where your grandchildren sleep.”

And then he suggested that Cox borrowed money from those criminals.

“Would it surprise you if Mr. Cox was leant money by a pretty violent drug dealer?” Duffy asked. “How would it not concern you if the father of your grandchildren was in debt to violent drug dealers?”

Davis responded that he trusted his son-in-law — that he did not believe the government’s allegations.

So did his wife, Sue.

She said in her time knowing Cox, even when he was an active deputy, she has “never even known him to carry a gun” and told the court he was a “Christian” and that nothing in the indictment had been proven.

Ultimately, Myers would determine that the Davises were capable of acting as third-party custodians.

But before he ruled on whether or not Cox would be granted pre-trial release, the government added to the argument it presented during a marathon detention hearing in Raleigh Sept. 6 that Duffy said proved the former deputy was a “danger to the community.”

•

At the heart of their case against Cox — specifically, the charges related to his purported drug offenses — are his alleged relationships with Rinardo Howell and Theodore Lee, men identified in the 50-page indictment as “Drug Trafficker One” and “Drug Trafficker Two” and outed by Duffy Sept. 6.

Tuesday, with the aid of an FBI Special Agent, Duffy walked Myers through the following events detailed in the indictment:

• On May 18, 2017, Cox texted (Howell) a photograph of a Peele Road drug dealer, which was obtained from CJ Leads, a secure database for use solely by law enforcement. The text also included a pin indicating the location of the Peele Road residence and stated “(t)hat’s the man’s house.” (Howell) indicated that he would be “paying em visit.” Just 10 days later, there was a violent home invasion at the residence, and according to the indictment, even though Cox had knowledge of Howell’s possible involvement in the home invasion, he said nothing. During Wednesday’s hearing, Duffy characterized the home invasion as including “elements of torture” — describing the pistol-whipping and duct-taping of juveniles and slamming a girl’s face into a stove with the burner on.

• On June 26, 2017, Cox observed (Howell) purchasing two ounces of cocaine from a target whose home was being watched by Cox as part of a DEA operation. Instead of arresting him, “Cox pulled over (Howell) and explained that the drugs would need to be seized because the DEA was targeting (Howell’s) supplier.” (Howell) complained that he would be out the $2,000 used to buy the drugs. In response, Cox “stated that he would use buy money to reimburse (Howell) and make it appear as if the situation had been a controlled purchase, which it was not.” Cox, the indictment alleges, paid (Howell) the $2,000 and a $200 confidential informant fee.

• On Sept. 27, 2018, Goldsboro police and the Sheriff’s Office executed dual search warrants on houses used by (Howell). He was arrested and his cell phone was seized. After (Howell) was released on bond, he called Cox and was instructed to come to his home in Walnut Creek. Cox, at the time, was still a sworn WCSO deputy. He was hosting a cookout with the head of the WCSO Patrol Unit and a defense attorney. Upon arriving at Cox’s house, the indictment alleges that (Howell), the defense attorney, and Cox discussed the search warrants and then Cox arranged for the attorney to handle (Howell’s) case. During the hearing, Duffy identified the attorney as Goldsboro attorney Worth Haithcock.

• Cox later called the GPD drug unit and demanded that investigators turn over (Howell’s) phone to the WCSO. The head of the GPD drug unit refused. During Wednesday’s hearing, an FBI special agent testified that Cox contacted the GPD and “tried to get the phone back” because, as the prosecutor put it, “He knew what was on that phone.”

• Cox’s official retirement date was Oct. 31. On Nov. 5, 2018, Cox and (Howell) texted about which witnesses the defense attorney should call at an upcoming suppression hearing relating to GPD and WCSO’s dual search warrants. Charges against (Howell) were dismissed on Jan. 9, 2019. In the meantime, now that Cox was gone, the WCSO’s new head of the Drug Unit proposed that GPD join WCSO in a drug task force, which was to be housed at a new, shared facility. The indictment alleges that the city had been unwilling to join such an effort in the past because investigators believed Cox was “improperly protecting (Howell).”

• On Feb. 15, 2018, (Howell) texted Cox a photograph of 14 oxycodone pills stamped “K8” and texted “(t)here,” to which Cox responded, “(t)hanks.” (Howell) texted back, “No problem it’s 15,” which the indictment alleges was a reference to a price per pill. Four days later, on Feb. 19, 2019, (Howell) shot a cooperating informant who the joint WCSO-GPD task force “had planned to use to make buys from (Howell).” The wounded informant survived and called 911, telling the operator he had been shot by (Howell). A detective arrived at the hospital that night to check on the victim. According to the report, 90 minutes later, the detective received a call from Cox. According to the detective, Cox stated that he had heard (Howell) was being accused of shooting someone. According to the indictment, Cox said, “(Howell) didn’t shoot nobody he was texting and facetiming me all night during the Carolina Duke basketball game … he wasn’t at Slocumb and Mulberry.” During Wednesday’s hearing, Duffy argued that Cox was “busy creating an alibi” for Howell when, the prosecutor alleged, “he knew it was (Howell) who shot the C.I.”

• On April 26, 2018, (Lee’s) image was captured on a video entering a drug stash house in Goldsboro “with a handgun in his right hand and then exiting the house minutes later,” the indictment alleges. After (Lee) drove away, another dealer was seen “limping out of the house with a gunshot wound to his leg.” After the incident, (Lee) contacted Cox and asked him to let him know if law enforcement were looking for him. (Lee) was arrested and charged on May 5, 2018, but the charges were dismissed, the indictment alleges, on May 17, 2018, after the victim “signed an affidavit stating that (Lee) had not shot the victim.”

• On Feb. 21, 2019, Cox texted (Howell) and directed him to “go up to the shop. (a worker) is gonna fix u.” The indictment then alleges that Cox texted the following to (Haithcock) the next morning, “(Howell) has attempted murder warrant. It’s bullshit. … (Howell) has got like 1500 cash if you meet him at the magistrate office just try and get his bond at 200,000. He said he can make bond if it’s 200,000. Let me know if you can help him.” (Haithcock) told Cox to tell (Howell) to “lay low” until he could meet him at his office. Cox indicated that he passed the message along to (Howell).

• On March 1, 2019, (Howell) and Cox exchanged messages. (Howell) texted, “My bruh for life … (expletive deleted) who don’t like it.” On March 3, Cox responded, “I know u do. U know I have your back through anything. There ain’t many people you can trust in life. But ur my bro.”

• On June 27, 2019, according to the indictment, (Howell) texted Cox again, this time to discuss the arrest of another drug trafficker. Cox indicated he did not have any information to share yet, but discussed via text with (Howell) the possibility of getting DT3’s bond reduced to $75,000. Cox allegedly told (Howell) to put money on DT3’s canteen account at the jail and that Cox “would take the amount out of what (Howell) owed Cox.”

• On Dec. 4, 2019, (Howell) was arrested by WCSO in possession of two kilograms of powder cocaine. After the arrest, Drug Unit Subordinate, who was previously mentioned in the indictment in connection with an alleged incident involving Cox, drove (Howell) to be interviewed by investigators. During the drive, Cox called Drug Unit Subordinate One, who did not answer the call. Drug Unit Subordinate One was assigned to make a copy of (Howell’s) cell phone. According to the indictment, upon learning that (Howell’s) cell phone had been dumped, Cox sent a text to Drug Unit Subordinate One, “I know you dumped ((Howell’s) phones and have read all the text messages. Why didn’t you say anything abt when I talked to you earlier. I really don’t give a shit. Cause there ain’t nothing on any of his phones that would get me in trouble. But damn!! Why is everyone so secretive? I hope somebody comes to speak to me. Cause I will blow the roof off that dumb ass office!! Thanks for looking out.” When he did not receive a response from Drug Unit Subordinate One, the indictment alleges that Cox texted the following: “I knew something was up when you said you were going to help me at the shop and you never came or called. You know if it weren’t for me you wouldn’t even be there now. They wanted you gone. And thought you were dirty and I stood up for you. In fact I got fired because of the whole situation I had your back to the end. Investigate all y’all want to. There is nothing I have said or done that is remotely illegal. Lose my number. You don’t ever have to worry abt talking to me again. YOU LIAR.”

• On Jan. 7, 2020, the indictment alleges that a close relative who lives at Cox’s residence asked him if he could contact (Lee). “You think (Lee) could get me something in the next few days. I have cash.” On Jan. 16, 2020, the close relative — identified in Wednesday’s hearing by Duffy as Cox’s wife, Rebecca — indicated that there was “not one thing in the mailbox not even mail. You’re gonna have to threaten that sorry (racial slur deleted).” Cox responded later that (Lee) “was still looking.” After that exchange, Cox and (Lee) texted at least 30 times during the remainder of Feb. 5, 2020.

• On Jan. 24, 2021, according to the indictment, Cox texted (Lee) about getting some Percocet/oxycodone pills. (Lee) then began communicating with his suppliers to set up a deal with Cox, and calls were made by two pill suppliers. On Jan.25, 2021, (Lee) called and informed Cox of the identities of the two suppliers from whom he could get the pills and explained that the available supply would be limited to “10 pills at $15 per pill.” (Lee) also indicated that Cox would have to split the pills with him. And, according to the indictment, Cox agreed. A text discussion was held three days later negotiating prices for more pills, to which Cox agreed. According to the indictment, (Lee) agreed to deliver the pills to Cox’s home mailbox. “A review of data from a GPS device that had been placed on (Lee’s) car shows (Lee) driving to the Walnut Creek subdivision where Cox resided.” The GPS device was placed by the ATF pursuant to a federal court order.

• On Jan, 29, 2021, (Lee) texted Cox again and asked about delivery for the original 15-pill order. And after a series of texts, they agreed to the same mailbox delivery.

• On Feb. 25, 2021, (Lee) used his original cell phone to alert Cox that a GPS device had been found on his car during an oil change. He reminded Cox that he had made deliveries to his home with that vehicle. (Lee) said he pulled it off the car and told Cox that he had posted a picture of it on Snapchat.

• After receiving the call from (Lee), Cox tried to call the WCSO Drug Unit and Drug Unit Subordinate One, who spoke to him for less than two seconds. Cox also made calls to other Drug Unit members. From those calls, the indictment alleges, Cox “surmised that the GPS device was part of an ATF investigation.” Cox then called (Lee) to warn him about the ATF investigation. (Lee) then called his drug associates to warn them as well.

•

Duffy did not stop with the details outlined in the indictment.

He characterized Cox as a “cowboy” and said he had a reputation of using questionable tactics during his time with the WCSO.

He said he still had “power” over current members of the department, as evidenced, the government argues, by his alleged ability to have former coworkers “run plates” for him after he left the department to assist Howell and Lee when they were being surveilled — one by the ATF.

And he told Myers that allowing for his release could result in witness tampering, as several deputies would be taking the stand for the prosecution, a point he hammered home by repeating an anecdote he presented Sept. 6 — telling the court that Cox allegedly had Howell threaten his then-17-year-old daughter’s ex-boyfriend.

“What’s he going to do when it’s a witness who’s about to testify against him?” Duffy said.

He also questioned the integrity of Sheriff Larry Pierce, alleging he or someone in his leadership circle tipped off Cox that the case the government was building was about more than alleged bid-rigging charges against him and Maj. Chris Worth.

“He was able to figure out what we were looking at just by making a call,” Duffy said, adding that Pierce himself might have given Cox “a tip off.”

And the prosecutor alleged that members of the department had a history of protecting one another — a charge seemingly corroborated by the FBI agent who said, “I’m not sure I’ve seen one,” when asked if the WCSO ever performed internal investigations into deputies accused of misconduct and told the court that Deputy Charles Shaeffer, who was outed by Duffy as the indictment’s “Drug Subordinate One,” allegedly once “tipped off” a “meth cook” who was being investigated, was investigated by the SBI, but refused to take a polygraph test upon advice from Cox and never faced discipline.

Duffy also said that when a fellow deputy alerted Pierce about Cox’s alleged invitation one of the drug traffickers to his Walnut Creek home for dinner, the complaint “went nowhere.”

•

In addition to its contention that the government’s evidence was “speculative,” the defense questioned whether Howell or Cox could be trusted as “credible.”

And Hart Miles, a partner at Cheshire Parker Schneider, PLLC, who represented Cox Tuesday, told the court Cox knew about the pending charges for nearly two years before his arrest and did not attempt to flee.

“If he was gonna run, he would have run a long time ago,” he said.

He also told Myers that the defense team had not yet received the complete discovery file and, therefore, was not prepared to argue against some of the evidence presented by Duffy during the hearing.

“We’re kind of fighting with one arm tied behind our back,” Miles said.

And he compelled the court to grant his client pre-trial release — pledging to ensure he would appear in court when the time came.

The judge was not moved.

Myers said while he believed the Davises to be acceptable third-party custodians, the government’s evidence compelled him to keep the former deputy in jail until trial.

“No set of conditions would adequately secure the safety of others or the community,” he said.