Mike, There was no link and no text, so I'll just contribute some. GREENFIELD — A central Indiana woman who fatally shot her suicidal husband before he could open fire on police was freed from jail Thursday after a prosecutor declined to file criminal charges.
Elizabeth Roberts, 56, of Greenfield, "acted in defense of others" and was justified in using deadly force when she shot Gary Roberts, 57, on Friday at the couple's home, Hancock County Prosecutor Michael Griffin said.
She was released Thursday morning from the Hancock County Jail, about 20 miles east of Indianapolis.
The woman had reported her husband to police Friday, saying he was acting erratically, had suicidal thoughts and had several weapons in their home. Police say that when she told her husband she had reported him, he warned her and a family friend that he would kill any officers who came to their home.
Court documents say he handed her a gun "and told her to do what she needed to do."
Gary Roberts was loading a magazine with ammunition when his wife shot him, the Daily Reporter reported.
"She tells us that the reason she took the action she did was because the threats he made to law enforcement and she had to stop him," Capt. Jeff Rasche of the Hancock County Sheriff's Department said. "She told him if you don't stop I'm gonna shoot you."
I finally got to see the video. For some reason it doesn't show up on my desktop browser, but does on my ipad. Interesting that the prosecutor commented that we need to stop mass gun violence and that Mrs. Roberts did that by shooting the Mr. Doesn't that sound a bit like what a certain gun organization has said? About a good guy/gal with a gun? Her actions seem to follow what is a fairly standard definition of justifiable use of force. His possession of an M2 .50BMG is interesting. I doubt we'll hear if they were real M2's or the semiauto only version available on the civilian market. It wouldn't be an effective weapon in his house because it has to be mounted on a tripod or vehicle mount to be used effectively.
Yes, you can use deadly force to protect you or someone else from death or great bodily harm in most states. The prosecutor and law enforcement are satisfied. In fact it appears she spent nearly a week in jail while they conducted their investigation. He spoke of his intent to police to at least two witnesses and then started loading magazines. She expected police to arrive at any time. We're you expecting her to wait till he actually opened fire?
I disagree mike. From my reading of the article, and watching your video. Her husband was actively preparing to ambush police officers who were expected to arrive at any time. He stated his intent to both his wife and a family friend. She gave him a verbal warning to stop or she would shoot. And then fired. Are you suggesting that there was something else she should have done? Why do you feel she was wrong? Just because the police weren't there yet?
You people are idiots. We have NO PROOF that the dead guy said shit to her. I'd check insurance policies. This is another version of "stand yer ground and kill the wounded". Dead men tell no tales.
Anon, The article above stated that he also told a family friend. They took a good look at it considering she was in jail for almost a week during the investigation before being released.
Here are the issues- They can only go by what the wife says because her husband is not alive to defend himself. Even if there are people that heard him say such things there is absolutely no proof he intended to follow through, except for the wife's word. It doesn't mention anywhere that the husband was an immediate threat to the wife. She mentions that he was readying his weapons but nowhere does it say he had one in hand when she shot and killed him. In fact it clearly says he handed his gun to her and was loading a magazine. It doesn't say he was loading a gun. So, at the moment in time she shot him he was unarmed and not an immediate or imminent threat to her or the police. If we look at this from the perspective of AOJ we clearly see that lethal force wasn't justified. Since his threat was toward the police and not his wife- did you have the immediate Ability to follow through on his threat? No he didn't. While he did have the firepower to follow through the police were not yet on scene. Did he have the Opportunity to follow through on his threat? No, he didn't because again the police were not on the scene. Jeopardy- Did the police have reason to believe that their lives were in immediate danger? No, because they were not yet on the scene. preclusion- did the wife have other options available to her besides lethal force? Most certainly!
To be honest it sounds to me like the wife was unhappy with her marriage and found an easy out.
You make some very good points. In fact, many are addressed in the article I posted above. Shootings like this should be looked at closely, and I have a pretty good feeling that the Sheriff's office and Prosecutor did just that during the week that Mrs. Roberts spent in jail. I believe that if there was some question as to whether the shooting was suspicious, they wouldn't have praised her actions so highly after she was officially cleared. They could just as easily made a simple comment saying the shooting was justified, or even said there wasn't sufficient evidence to prosecute her at this time. Is it possible that she might have been able to do things differently? Possibly. Its also possible that if she had tried to run, the husband might have just shot her. The impression I get is that he wanted to die. He handed his wife a gun and told her that if any police showed up he was going to kill them. If she had been able to flee, the police were still on the way and would likely react the proper way to make his wish to die come true. And in the process, some police officers might have been wounded or killed. She was put in a terrible spot with either choice resulting in her husband dying. She picked the choice that had fewer innocents being put at risk.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteThere was no link and no text, so I'll just contribute some.
GREENFIELD — A central Indiana woman who fatally shot her suicidal husband before he could open fire on police was freed from jail Thursday after a prosecutor declined to file criminal charges.
Elizabeth Roberts, 56, of Greenfield, "acted in defense of others" and was justified in using deadly force when she shot Gary Roberts, 57, on Friday at the couple's home, Hancock County Prosecutor Michael Griffin said.
She was released Thursday morning from the Hancock County Jail, about 20 miles east of Indianapolis.
The woman had reported her husband to police Friday, saying he was acting erratically, had suicidal thoughts and had several weapons in their home. Police say that when she told her husband she had reported him, he warned her and a family friend that he would kill any officers who came to their home.
Court documents say he handed her a gun "and told her to do what she needed to do."
Gary Roberts was loading a magazine with ammunition when his wife shot him, the Daily Reporter reported.
"She tells us that the reason she took the action she did was because the threats he made to law enforcement and she had to stop him," Capt. Jeff Rasche of the Hancock County Sheriff's Department said. "She told him if you don't stop I'm gonna shoot you."
http://heraldbulletin.com/local/x934955778/Woman-who-shot-husband-who-threatened-police-freed
All that was in the video, no?
DeleteDo you have any thoughts on it?
I finally got to see the video. For some reason it doesn't show up on my desktop browser, but does on my ipad. Interesting that the prosecutor commented that we need to stop mass gun violence and that Mrs. Roberts did that by shooting the Mr. Doesn't that sound a bit like what a certain gun organization has said? About a good guy/gal with a gun?
DeleteHer actions seem to follow what is a fairly standard definition of justifiable use of force.
His possession of an M2 .50BMG is interesting. I doubt we'll hear if they were real M2's or the semiauto only version available on the civilian market. It wouldn't be an effective weapon in his house because it has to be mounted on a tripod or vehicle mount to be used effectively.
"Justifiable use of force?" You mean like the preemptive war we had with Iraq.
DeleteI thought you opposed punishing people for what they might do in the future?
Yes, you can use deadly force to protect you or someone else from death or great bodily harm in most states. The prosecutor and law enforcement are satisfied. In fact it appears she spent nearly a week in jail while they conducted their investigation.
DeleteHe spoke of his intent to police to at least two witnesses and then started loading magazines. She expected police to arrive at any time. We're you expecting her to wait till he actually opened fire?
I can't believe you're justifying that. It seems like a major flip-flop from your usual positions.
DeleteI disagree mike. From my reading of the article, and watching your video. Her husband was actively preparing to ambush police officers who were expected to arrive at any time. He stated his intent to both his wife and a family friend. She gave him a verbal warning to stop or she would shoot. And then fired.
DeleteAre you suggesting that there was something else she should have done? Why do you feel she was wrong? Just because the police weren't there yet?
Mike,
DeleteHere is an item which discusses the self defense debate regarding this case. And it includes the tau main opposing views,
http://www.indystar.com/article/20131004/NEWS02/310040028/1282/NEWS02
You people are idiots. We have NO PROOF that the dead guy said shit to her. I'd check insurance policies. This is another version of "stand yer ground and kill the wounded". Dead men tell no tales.
ReplyDeleteAnon,
DeleteThe article above stated that he also told a family friend. They took a good look at it considering she was in jail for almost a week during the investigation before being released.
Here are the issues- They can only go by what the wife says because her husband is not alive to defend himself. Even if there are people that heard him say such things there is absolutely no proof he intended to follow through, except for the wife's word. It doesn't mention anywhere that the husband was an immediate threat to the wife. She mentions that he was readying his weapons but nowhere does it say he had one in hand when she shot and killed him. In fact it clearly says he handed his gun to her and was loading a magazine. It doesn't say he was loading a gun. So, at the moment in time she shot him he was unarmed and not an immediate or imminent threat to her or the police. If we look at this from the perspective of AOJ we clearly see that lethal force wasn't justified. Since his threat was toward the police and not his wife- did you have the immediate Ability to follow through on his threat? No he didn't. While he did have the firepower to follow through the police were not yet on scene. Did he have the Opportunity to follow through on his threat? No, he didn't because again the police were not on the scene. Jeopardy- Did the police have reason to believe that their lives were in immediate danger? No, because they were not yet on the scene. preclusion- did the wife have other options available to her besides lethal force? Most certainly!
ReplyDeleteTo be honest it sounds to me like the wife was unhappy with her marriage and found an easy out.
Anon,
DeleteYou make some very good points. In fact, many are addressed in the article I posted above. Shootings like this should be looked at closely, and I have a pretty good feeling that the Sheriff's office and Prosecutor did just that during the week that Mrs. Roberts spent in jail.
I believe that if there was some question as to whether the shooting was suspicious, they wouldn't have praised her actions so highly after she was officially cleared.
They could just as easily made a simple comment saying the shooting was justified, or even said there wasn't sufficient evidence to prosecute her at this time.
Is it possible that she might have been able to do things differently? Possibly. Its also possible that if she had tried to run, the husband might have just shot her.
The impression I get is that he wanted to die. He handed his wife a gun and told her that if any police showed up he was going to kill them. If she had been able to flee, the police were still on the way and would likely react the proper way to make his wish to die come true. And in the process, some police officers might have been wounded or killed.
She was put in a terrible spot with either choice resulting in her husband dying. She picked the choice that had fewer innocents being put at risk.