ST. JOHNS, AZ - He was accused of helping a serial killer, but now an Arizona man is free, possibly leaving the state and prosecutors can't do anything about it.
Billie Schwartz was breathless when she called ABC15 to declare that her son was free.
“After picking up my daughter we come home to settle in for the evening and we got somebody tapping at our door and we open the door and there stands my son Joseph. Me and my daughter were just screaming at the top of our lungs and hugging him.”
For 16 months Schwartz has insisted that her son Joseph Roberts was innocent and now he was home, released after a judge dropped all the charges against him.
In nine days Roberts turns 24; he was facing 25 to life.
“Yes he's innocent, because there's no evidence. It's been a very trying time but we are so happy now,” Schwartz said.
“You know what, I imagine any mom is happy that their son is home,” said Apache County Attorney Michael Whiting. “But his release didn't go to guilt or innocence, it simply went to a technicality.”
The Apache County Sheriff’s Office arrested Roberts back in the fall of 2009.
He was charged with first degree murder, conspiracy, theft of a means of transportation, mutilating a human body, concealment of a dead body, tampering with physical evidence, and hindering prosecution.
Prosecutors say Roberts helped the self-professed St. Johns serial killer, William Inmon, shoot and kill an elderly man near the rural town of St. Johns and dispose of the body of another man.
Inmon had confessed to killing three people, including 16-year-old Ricky Flores.
Roberts’ charges related to the murders of William “Stoney” MCCarragher in 2007 and Daniel Achten in 2009.
Apache County Attorney Michael Whiting said he was both “surprised and deeply concerned” that the judge would let such a dangerous man free.
In a Skype interview, Whiting said he has been fielding phone calls from concerned parents in the area and said they should be worried because a killer is now living among them.
“I can tell you that the moment I found out that he was going to be out I’ve been worried as well. It’s very serious. This is an individual who was charged with first degree murder and last night, we all went to bed wondering where he is and what he is doing.”
The reason why Judge Donna Grimsley dropped Roberts’ charges was due to what she believed was a constitutional violation on the part of investigators for the Apache County Attorney’s Office.
On February 4, 2010 the investigators went to the Apache County Jail to speak to Roberts on the eve of his preliminary hearing.
Whiting has released audio of that interview.
You can hear investigators talking about sentencing possibilities and claims that Roberts did confess to helping Inmon with the murders.
Roberts had an attorney who was not notified of this meeting.
The defense said what the investigators did was violate Roberts’ 6th Amendment Right to Counsel and said their actions “interfered with his ability to represent the Defendant.”
Judge Grimsley agreed.
In her order she writes, “The court is appalled by the outrageous and unethical behavior of the Apache County Attorney’s Office.”
She added, “The Court finds that the damage done to the attorney client relationship is prejudicial and irreparable, even if new counsel is appointed as Defendant’s trust in the system has been betrayed.”
The last line sent shock waves through both the Apache County Attorney’s Office and Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, which is now overseeing this case.
Whiting explained, “What happened was the judge did something that quite frankly I don't know if anyone has ever seen done in recent memory. The last 23 years, anybody that I've talked to, doesn't remember this happening. She just took this extreme remedy.”
Extreme because Whiting said in most cases if a judge believes there’s been a constitutional violation, he/she will order to suppress the evidence, meaning it will not be allowed at trial.
Typical examples include police who enter a home on a search warrant that is not valid.
Let’s say the officers didn’t know the search warrant wasn’t valid and while in the home find something incriminating. Whiting said a judge could suppress that evidence.
This would be a blow to the case, but at least there was still the case.
Whiting said when it came to Roberts, Judge Grimsley had the choice to do something similar but instead she dropped all the charges against him.
Whiting is urging the public to listen to the interview, in particular to note how little, if anything, Roberts says during the brief exchange.
The last line of Judge Grimsley’s order reads, “THEREFORE the charges are ordered dismissed with prejudice.”
“With prejudice” means the charges can never be filed again.
Roberts is indeed a free man.
“I am not sure I am angry with the prosecuting people,” explained his mother Schwartz. “It’s the Sheriff, it’s the way the case was put together and it was such a mess, there were so many holes you know.”
Schwartz
PRINT
