Woman kills husband; prevents mass shooting

galadofwarthethird
reply to post by bozzchem

 

Dude spend more then one million $$ on his gun arsenal? WTF what did he have in there a tank and rpg's, if not he got ripped off. That's one expensive hobby he had. Still it seems he married the right woman, or at least somebody more like him. Most others would of just slipped him a sleeping pill, then called the cops and made up some story about how he was threatening her and them they would have gotten him taken out on a stretcher, its not like they needed much of an excuse anyways since it seems since he actually said some words about shooting up cops, or so according to her.

And that would probably have been the least bloody outcome. Though yes the whole story does sound a bit fishy to say the least.

The funny part is that is like swatting a fly on your friends forehead with a hatchet. If she would have slipped him a sleeping pill and gone the other route, he probably would have gone to jail for some months, eventually gotten out, gone to some mandatory counseling. Eventually he would have snapped out of it and eventually maybe would have run for mayor or something, and used all that $$ he was spending on guns, to fund his campaign. And then? The limit is the sky.

If he was into NFA collectibles and high end over and under shotguns, it could easily be a million dollar collection. Transferrable BARs start out at 50K each and H&H over and under shotguns start out in the $100's of thousands.

reply to post by bozzchem


Wow. I think there is more to the story then what we see here. I don't agree with what she did. If he was really acting erratic and threatening to kill police officers then why couldn't she have been given something to put in his food or drink to knock him out? Then they could have safely moved him to another location to question him, check to make sure he owned the guns legally, and had him checked out by a doctor.

OMG, anyone in an emotional scene where their family was betraying them would say such a thing. She killed her husband and the prosecuters think this is good.

She herself didn't suggest counseling, if he even needed it. Sounds to me a case could be made the other way. A man, possibly vet though I can't remember after scanning, preparing for meltdown and changes, and she listens to the anti gun agenda and becomes paranoid over her own husband and allows their mind control tactics to contribute to her killing her husband without due process.

And no you don't get to bring your family in to the gestapo!!!!

I'm having an UGH! moment over this.
She feared for her husbands well being and safety so she calls the cops.
Why not mental health?
Looks to me like she was the one trigger happy.
Easy way to get a divorce.
No evidence AT ALL of wrongdoing on his part.
She should be charged with murder.
Period...................

I spent the entire morning researching this story and the prosecutor Michael Griffin. There is much here that doesn't seem right so let me pass on what I found and others can judge for themselves.

1) All of the story is related by Griffin to the press, there are no direct quotes from anyone else including Elizabeth Roberts. So it's all based on his word - based on her word.

2) Fact: Gary Roberts was shot once in the chest with a .38 revolver.

3) When police failed to arrive after 30 minutes she decided to tell him they were coming at which point he went to the basement and began loading weapons saying he would "shoot every cop that entered the house". She tried to talk him out of it when he told her "this can only end one way" at which point he handed her the revolver and said "do what you have to do".
Question: if you were planning on shooting back at police when you had an arsenal of fully auto assault rifles, handguns, shotguns and .50 machine guns would you bother to load a .38 revolver? That idea is laughable. Shooters know a .38 revolver is exactly the type of weapon you would purchase for a woman to carry for protection. A very common choice for that.

4) Background on Griffin - Republican, Hancock County Prosecutor, Army reservist who was a JAG lawyer who was called away to Guantanamo to defend some 9/11 suspects in 2012.

GREENFIELD — Hancock County Prosecutor Michael Griffin, a U.S. Army Reservist who is helping prosecute defendants in the Sept. 11 attacks, was called to testify before the court in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, on Tuesday.

www.greenfieldreporter.com...

5) While looking for older info on Griffin what I found was a blog belonging to someone who was running against Griffin for the county prosecutor seat as a Democrat back in 2010. He made some intriguing comments:

May 12, 2010. I have been warned. I was told yesterday that my opponent for Prosecutor, Mr. Griffin, is a masterful politician who might be able to accomplish more than any other politician in county history which is control of both political parties at the same time as well as control of the legal system as the top "law enforcer" by becoming the new Hancock County Prosecutor. There is apparently a new "Comprehensive Jail Plan" being put together by the totally Republican government of the county. I must find out about this.

Another:

It suggested that that the leadership of the local Democrat party under the influence of two lawyers - both of whom have acted complicitly with Republican candidates in recent days - is attempting to grease the way for an endorsement of Mr. Griffin by my own party!

6) News sources vary widely in some points one of them being the danger of explosives in the Roberts' home.

A search warrant was executed on the home and no explosives were located.

www.wishtv.com...

Police found about 200 pounds of explosives, ammunition and several firearms, including handguns and rifles, in the couple's home.

www.usatoday.com...

Wow! 200 lbs of explosives? Really?

The county and state explosives teams were on site after reports there might be C-4 and other explosives in the house. They found some black powder, but no other explosives.

www.wthr.com...

200 lbs of black powder is not 200 lbs of "explosives". Typical for many gun enthusiasts and very legal.
Way to bend the truth usatoday.

Seeing hints of demonization of gun owners here? Plenty more, keep reading.

7) If the following really happened why was he not charged then? Do people often get to make bomb threats and suffer no consequence?:

Police say Roberts first popped up on their radar screen weeks ago when he had a car accident. After that, he threatened to blow up Hancock Regional Hospital in Greenfield and kill workers at a drugstore there."He had recently had some mental issues, dependency on alcohol and prescription medication, that he hadn't been acting right," said Rasch. "The potential was there for some serious harm to take place."

www.wthr.com...

8) Here's a PDF of Prosecutor Griffin's statement concerning the case - ftpcontent.worldnow.com...

As you read it you will notice it is written in a narrative style as though the prosecutor were riding around inside her head while the events described transpired. His introductory comments are prejudicial and set the tone:

For more than a decade, our country has grappled with the problem of mass casualty gun violence. Each time, we have helplessly watched these senseless incidents unfold. Again and again, these incidents raise the same question: Why didn’t someone do something to stop this from happening?

Elizabeth didn't want anyone to die, and she felt compelled to do something. But what could she do? Elizabeth had few options. SHe already had informed law enforcement about the extent of Gary's firearms and ammuntion collection and that Gary was armed and dangerous. Elizabeth could leave....and let the confrontation happen. Elizabeth could stay...and do what? If she did nothing, the confrontation would happen all around her and she was as likely as Gary to die. If she did nothing, the confrontation would happen all around her and she was as likely as Gary to die. If she did something, what would that be? Motivated by her desire to stop anyone from dying, or at least stop a confrontation from happening, Elizabeth followed Gary down to the basement.

CONTINUED

This is starting to read like a trashy detective novel. Was Elizabeth afraid the police would shoot her too? She never says anything about Gary threatening her. Why didn't she just leave and wait for police? People can be waited out of such situations quite often. Even the Freemen in Montana eventually gave up. Gary Roberts probably would still be alive had she simply left the house.

But Elizabeth wanted to save lives, so if saving lives meant shooting the man she loved, a man already determined to die in a confrontation with law enforcement, she was prepared to do it. Elizabeth was left with one of the very worst prospects imaginable . . . killing her spouse. After twice warning Gary to stop or she would shoot him, Elizabeth fired one shot from her .38 caliber revolver.

Fired one shot from her .38 revolver? Notthe .38 revolver, nor his it was her .38 revolver. Hmm, no mention that she got her gun out anywhere in this narrative. Was that a casual omission or intentional?

And lastly this one:

Elizabeth was justified in using deadly force against Gary. Under this statute, being justified in using deadly force is a complete defense, meaning that Elizabeth cannot be held criminally liable for killing Gary. In fact, the last sentence of the statute, referring to “legal jeopardy,” is legalese meaning that a prosecutor is not to charge a crime of homicide against a person who can prove this defense. Elizabeth can prove this defense at trial. That is why she is not being charged with a crime.

Because she can "prove this defense" there's no need for a trial.
It is always the job of the prosecutor to charge someone when there was a murder, always.
It is the courts prerogative to decide guilt or innocence.

This is a dangerous precedent set during a time of extreme anti-gun hysteria and concern after recent mass shootings. We have a prosecutor who is able to control both parties in his county, 9/11 trials under his belt and a possible ambition for bigger political positions whose only evidence is testimony by the very person who committed the murder!

This is a sham and should be investigated by the FBI.

Going to them, and then agreeing to escort her husband there. Its all very bogus sounding. No police would expect the man to willingly go in with his wife. To me it sounds like they got to here, and used something on her so she did this outrageous thing, because they were targetting vets or anyone preparing for TSHTF scenario. Just a theory but they're leaving it wide open for theorists to examine it. Who would ever do this!

justwokeup
From reading the report her life wasn't in danger and therefore she cant claim self defence.

He could have changed his mind when the cops showed up, it could have played out in a number of ways.

She chose to shoot him dead instead. She committed premeditated murder and should do serious time.

Did you read part of the article where they stated that he a sniper rifle at his home after the police looked for evidence a sniper isn't a self defense weapon its a military grade weapon.

Agent_USA_Supporter

justwokeup
From reading the report her life wasn't in danger and therefore she cant claim self defence.

He could have changed his mind when the cops showed up, it could have played out in a number of ways.

She chose to shoot him dead instead. She committed premeditated murder and should do serious time.

Did you read part of the article where they stated that he a sniper rifle at his home after the police looked for evidence a sniper isn't a self defense weapon its a military grade weapon.

LOL. The police call every scoped rifle a "sniper rifle." Please, what is a "military grade weapon?" Please understand that the most common "sniper rifle" in the military and police is also the most common hunting rifle in the US: The Remington 700 and its variants.

NavyDoc

Agent_USA_Supporter

justwokeup
From reading the report her life wasn't in danger and therefore she cant claim self defence.

He could have changed his mind when the cops showed up, it could have played out in a number of ways.

She chose to shoot him dead instead. She committed premeditated murder and should do serious time.

Did you read part of the article where they stated that he a sniper rifle at his home after the police looked for evidence a sniper isn't a self defense weapon its a military grade weapon.

LOL. The police call every scoped rifle a "sniper rifle." Please, what is a "military grade weapon?" Please understand that the most common "sniper rifle" in the military and police is also the most common hunting rifle in the US: The Remington 700 and its variants.

Regardless as to what type of gun he may or may not had, he wasn't pointing it at her so her life was not in immediate danger so she has no self defense excuse. With a million dollar gun collection, he also probably had more assets besides. The motive is very plain. I think the story is pretty obvious, she killed him for good old fashioned cash.