Blood Ambush (11 page)
Authors: Sheila Johnson
31
On July 31, District Judge Sheri W. Carver issued a court order requiring Barbara to appear in her courtroom on August 3, to show cause why her bond should not be revoked.
In Barbara’s response to the state’s motion to revoke bond, filed on August 1, Stallings listed several points for the court’s consideration as to why the bond should not be revoked.
The state’s allegations were untrue and required proof, said the response: the affidavit lacked authenticity, the information presented was an attempt to enter hearsay statements and was due to be stricken, and Barbara had not changed her address and had no intentions to do so.
Barbara was in the state of Georgia and not in Cherokee County, Alabama, when Vernon Roberts stopped her as she was going about her own business, and Vernon commenced harassing and cursing her, whereupon she ended the unwanted contact by leaving, Stallings claimed.
This is a futile effort by the State to incarcerate the Defendant in a malicious attempt to garner power over the Defendant for purposes of coercion and intimidation in order to obtain a confession,
the response read, then asked that the motion to revoke bond either be dismissed or a date be set for a hearing on the motion with the state’s witnesses, Vernon Roberts and Barbara’s brother, present for cross-examination.
the response read, then asked that the motion to revoke bond either be dismissed or a date be set for a hearing on the motion with the state’s witnesses, Vernon Roberts and Barbara’s brother, present for cross-examination.
After the hearing was concluded, Judge Carver issued a court order denying the motion to revoke bond, but modifying the previous conditions of Barbara’s bond. The order required both the Floyd County and Conyers residence addresses to be verified with the court within five days, that Barbara would have no contact—either direct or indirect—with Vernon Roberts or any other member of Darlene’s family, even if the contact was initiated by someone other than Barbara, and that Barbara would not enter Cherokee County except to assist in the defense of her case. Also, in any event, she would not travel within five road miles of the home or workplace of Vernon Roberts, and the court should be notified in writing of her need to travel into Cherokee County in aid of her defense. The other conditions of her previous bond would remain the same.
32
As the members of the grand jury of Cherokee County, Alabama, were being readied for their October 2006 session, ABI agent Jason Brown and Cherokee County Sheriff’s Office investigator Bo Jolly traveled to Parkwest Medical Center in Knoxville, Tennessee, to interview James “Jim” Anthony Captain, Parkwest’s manager of neurosciences. Captain had been friends with Robert John Schiess III since May 2000. Captain had contacted Jolly on October 18 to tell him that he’d had several phone conversations with Schiess during which Schiess had made several disturbing remarks concerning his involvement with the murder of Darlene Roberts. Jolly quickly contacted ABI agent Brent Thomas, who called Captain and arranged for a meeting with Brown and Jolly.
Captain told the officers that he had been friends with Schiess since May 2000. He lived in Schiess’s apartment for ten months in 2002, with Schiess moving back in for the last four months, and the two men being roommates during that period. They had kept in touch ever since Captain had moved out that November, and Captain had called him several times in May, June, and once in early August.
Captain had surgery in March 2006, and his wife had a note attached to Captain’s chart when she learned that Barbara and Bob were going to visit him in the hospital during his recuperation. She said in the note that her husband had company coming in from Georgia, a retired neurosurgeon who “tries to throw his weight around” and demand that things be done and who to contact about Captain’s treatment. Mrs. Captain said for the staff not to let Schiess make any decisions regarding her husband’s care, and to call her if Schiess became a problem, or call security and have him sent off the premises. She also said he might request or try to see Captain’s chart, and followed that statement with the words—capitalized and underlined—
NO, NO, NO!
NO, NO, NO!
As it so happened, during their visit to the hospital, both Schiess and Barbara had to be escorted out of the building by security for causing problems.
Captain said that the first time he spoke on the phone with Schiess after his surgery was in early May. Schiess was quiet at first, and Captain asked him how things had been going.
“What,” Schiess said, “you haven’t heard?”
“No, what?” Captain asked.
“Barbara and I have been arrested and accused of murder.”
Captain was astonished to hear this, and asked, “Whose murder?”
Schiess told him that it was Barbara’s ex-husband’s wife. They had been arrested at the airport, he said.
Captain then asked, point-blank, if Schiess had been there at the scene, and Schiess said, “Yes.”
There were a few seconds of silence following this statement; then Schiess said that it had been done with a shotgun. He rambled for a few moments, then asked Captain what he would do if someone threatened his family. Captain told him he did not know.
Schiess then made another startling statement, saying to Captain that his sister had told him to stop killing people. Then he said that a shotgun was a perfect weapon because it did not leave a ballistic trail, such as rifling.
“I soon got off the phone with him,” Captain said.
The next time Captain called, a few days later, to see how Schiess was doing, Barbara answered. When he asked to speak to Schiess, she told him that he had checked himself into an alcohol and drug treatment program and was not there.
“I asked her if he was still drinking and taking pills, and she said he was. ‘Well,’ I said, ‘maybe a treatment program is where he needs to be.’ We talked a little longer, then ended the call.”
In Captain’s third phone call to Schiess, a short time later, Schiess said that he had sent his mother a shotgun, which Captain said that he believed was a birthday present.
In the August phone call, Barbara answered and told Captain that Bob was out. Barbara told Captain that she had her preliminary hearing, then told him that the investigators were looking for Darlene’s son, Benji, who had been missing, she claimed, for the past few weeks. She said that Benji and his mother had been arguing before the murder, and she thought that he had committed the murder.
“We shortly ended the phone call,” Captain told the officers, “and I have not contacted Bob or Barbara since.”
Captain told the officers of several other statements Schiess had made to him at various times. He said on one occasion that his father would not give his weapons back to him because he was afraid that he would hurt someone or himself. Schiess said that he told his father, “What makes you think I don’t have a weapon now?”
Schiess also told Captain that Barbara was the weakest link in the case against them.
In early May, Captain said that Bob called him and wanted him to go to North Carolina and pick up some equipment and a riding lawn mower at a residence while the homeowner was at church. Schiess said he would have to force open the garage door and take the equipment, and that Barbara would stand watch at the end of the road while he did it.
“I did not meet or go with him,” Captain said. “He called several times on that Sunday morning and left a message saying he was waiting for me to arrive.”
Schiess told Captain that the reason for taking the equipment and lawn mower was that this person owed him money for a land deal that fell through, and the individual would not return his deposit that Schiess had put down.
One of the most telling comments Schiess made to Captain came during a conversation about a news event that included mention of the death penalty.
“I said, ‘I believe in the death penalty,’” Captain said.
“Bob got quiet, then said, ‘Jim, I may face that one day.’”
33
During the October 2006 term of the grand jury of Cherokee County, Alabama, many cases were sorted through and dealt with, either by indictments or by being no-billed, but none had received the publicity and public attention of the charges brought against Barbara Ann Roberts and Dr. Robert John Schiess. Newspapers, television, and radio news had followed the case of Darlene Roberts’s murder, the arrest of Barbara and Schiess, the charges against them, and their extradition from Georgia to Alabama. Now it would be up to a group of seventeen Cherokee County citizens to determine whether the two would be tried on the charges recommended by District Attorney Mike O’Dell.
When Barbara received a plea bargain offer from the district attorney’s office, prior to the grand jury session, offering life with eligibility for parole in exchange for a guilty plea, instead of the death penalty, attorneys Steve Lanier and Rodney Stallings were very much in favor of her giving it some serious consideration. But for some reason, Barbara expressed very little interest in the offer, which might have amounted to the difference between life and death for her.
Lanier, Stallings, and Barbara met to discuss the offer, and both attorneys were dismayed to learn their client was so disinterested in such an important opportunity to better her situation.
The two attorneys believed that Barbara would be expected to testify against Schiess in the event she decided to accept the plea bargain.
“What if she takes the plea, then totally exonerates Bob?” Lanier asked Stallings. “I think they’re relying on the statements you’ve previously made,” he added to Barbara, “but if you do a one-eighty on them, saying he wasn’t involved in any shape, form, or fashion, then I’d think all bets are off.
“I think they’re expecting full cooperation to testify against Bob. If you play a ‘stand by your man’ kind of thing, then they’ll probably say—”
Stallings interrupted to tell Barbara, “That’s what worries me about you having all this contact with Bob.” Stallings had been concerned for some time that Barbara and Schiess were continuing to live together after they had been released from the Cherokee County Jail on bond pending the grand jury indictments that were very likely about to be issued.
“I think she’s somewhat locked in by her prior statements,” Lanier told Stallings. He then told Barbara, “They’ve got enough right now to indict on capital and get a conviction on capital on you and Bob, based primarily on evidence at the scene and witness statements. What they’re wanting is if you’ll testify against Bob, then they’ll offer you a life with eligibility for parole. Just let me know tomorrow. Think about it, pray about it, and let me know tomorrow.
“There’s been very little death penalty litigation in Cherokee County, Alabama, and there are not many lawyers locally that have even done a death penalty case. The death penalty is an all-or-nothing war. If they ask for the death penalty, you have to go all out because there’s so much at stake, and the alternatives are not pleasant. You have an opportunity. You know what the options are.”
Lanier and Stallings were concerned that Barbara did not understand that if indicted by the grand jury for capital murder, she and Schiess would be rearrested and most probably held without bond for quite some time until the lengthy trial process was completed.
“Vernon Roberts is extremely upset about the way this case is being handled,” Lanier told Stallings, “specifically, them being out on bond. So you’ve got a victim’s husband disgruntled, applying pressure. I’ve never known of a death penalty defendant being out on bond.”
34
A grand jury motion had been filed by Barbara’s attorneys prior to the session asking that the evidence introduced before the grand jury be recorded and transcribed, with the defendant agreeing to pay for the employment of a court reporter to record and transcribe the minutes and testimony.
The motion also asked that prior to considering the charges against Barbara, the grand jurors be asked several questions, starting with whether any of the grand jurors were related within the sixth degree to the prosecutor, the accused, or the deceased. The other questions dealt with whether any of the grand jurors had expressed or formed any opinion as to Barbara’s guilt or innocence, and whether or not any of them had any prejudices or biases either for or against Barbara, or if they could be perfectly impartial.
The defense asked that any grand juror answering any of the foregoing questions in the affirmative be excused from the grand jury room during the consideration of Barbara’s case. The attorneys also asked that before any state witness testified, the prosecutor would ask them if they had ever been convicted of any felony or crime involving moral turpitude. It was requested that all answers to the questions and all votes of the grand jury be recorded and a copy delivered to the defense.
The defense asked the court in a separate motion to question each of the grand jurors individually on pretrial publicity. The motion claimed that prior to, and after, Barbara’s arrest, there had been extensive, intense, and prejudicial publicity by the local and national news media concerning the investigation of Darlene’s alleged murder and the facts surrounding Barbara’s alleged involvement in it.
Prior to the grand jury’s vote, the motion said, the court should question them individually on whether they had a preconceived opinion against Barbara because of the publicity preceding the indictment proceedings. This action, the motion said, would protect the defendant’s due process of law and her right to a fair and impartial, qualified grand jury. Those jurors who had formed an opinion against her due to the publicity, the motion said, should be disqualified, and if there were less than twelve remaining qualified grand jurors, the court should not permit them to consider or vote on an indictment in the case.
Another motion was titled “Motion for the Recordation of the Entire Grand Jury Proceedings and for a Copy of the Grand Jury Minutes.” In support of the motion, the following was stated:
1.
The district attorney of the Cherokee County Superior Court had informed the attorney for the defendant that the charges against the defendant were being presented to the grand jury.
The district attorney of the Cherokee County Superior Court had informed the attorney for the defendant that the charges against the defendant were being presented to the grand jury.
2.
The investigation of the defendant’s alleged involvement in the murder of Darlene Roberts and other alleged offenses was conducted by local, state, and federal law enforcement officers. These police agencies conducted numerous scientific tests on particular evidence, which, based on information and belief, was being presented through expert witnesses to the grand jury.
The investigation of the defendant’s alleged involvement in the murder of Darlene Roberts and other alleged offenses was conducted by local, state, and federal law enforcement officers. These police agencies conducted numerous scientific tests on particular evidence, which, based on information and belief, was being presented through expert witnesses to the grand jury.
3.
The district attorney’s presentation of the case against the defendant was based solely upon circumstantial evidence. Various witnesses would testify, based on information and belief, before the grand jury, as to numerous details that described these circumstances.
The district attorney’s presentation of the case against the defendant was based solely upon circumstantial evidence. Various witnesses would testify, based on information and belief, before the grand jury, as to numerous details that described these circumstances.
4.
The defendant had a due process right to have the testimony of the witnesses recorded so that she might, through her attorney, subsequently examine that testimony to prepare her defense in the trial of her case.
The defendant had a due process right to have the testimony of the witnesses recorded so that she might, through her attorney, subsequently examine that testimony to prepare her defense in the trial of her case.
5.
The law of the state of Alabama did not preclude the recordation of the grand jury proceedings. The recordation of the entire proceedings would not interfere with the proper functioning of the grand jury. (Recordation is the most effective restraint upon prosecutorial abuse of the grand jury process.) The stenographic transcription of the grand jury proceedings would improve the administration of criminal justice.
The law of the state of Alabama did not preclude the recordation of the grand jury proceedings. The recordation of the entire proceedings would not interfere with the proper functioning of the grand jury. (Recordation is the most effective restraint upon prosecutorial abuse of the grand jury process.) The stenographic transcription of the grand jury proceedings would improve the administration of criminal justice.
6.
Recordation of the grand jury proceedings would not violate the secrecy of those proceedings. Upon a proper showing by the defendant, the grand jurors might be required to disclose everything that occurred in their service. The minutes of the grand jury proceedings might be sealed by the court until such time as the present grand jury’s term had expired, prior to the defendant’s trial.
Recordation of the grand jury proceedings would not violate the secrecy of those proceedings. Upon a proper showing by the defendant, the grand jurors might be required to disclose everything that occurred in their service. The minutes of the grand jury proceedings might be sealed by the court until such time as the present grand jury’s term had expired, prior to the defendant’s trial.
7.
The defendant had a right to examine the grand jury testimony of the state’s experts who testified concerning the results of scientific tests that allegedly connected the defendant to the crime(s) charged. The defendant also had a right to examine the testimony of the state’s witnesses who testified to details of the circumstances that allegedly connected the defendant to the crime(s) charged.
The defendant had a right to examine the grand jury testimony of the state’s experts who testified concerning the results of scientific tests that allegedly connected the defendant to the crime(s) charged. The defendant also had a right to examine the testimony of the state’s witnesses who testified to details of the circumstances that allegedly connected the defendant to the crime(s) charged.
These points, the motion claimed, would need to be addressed in order for Barbara’s defense to prepare for her trial.
In a separate motion filed the same day, it was requested that Barbara’s bond funds should be released upon either indictment or no bill by the grand jury. The funds, the motion said, should be immediately remitted to the law offices of Coggin & Stallings, attorney Rodney Stallings’s office.
As the grand jury was convening, Rodney Stallings received a letter from Barbara’s psychologist, who had spoken to him on October 30, saying that Barbara was in dire fear of being indicted and jailed until her trial. She was afraid that she would not have her medications or get psychological support, the letter said.
The psychologist said that Barbara’s condition was fragile due to multiple physical and mental problems, and said that Barbara had stated in the past that she would rather die than spend years in prison. The psychologist told Stallings that she did not believe that Barbara could survive in such an environment. In the psychologist’s professional opinion, to place Barbara there would be an act of gross negligence and disregard of human life.
Barbara’s psychiatrist also wrote that she was concerned that Barbara would not be able to get adequate medical and psychiatric treatment at her current level of need from the prison system in Alabama, which could be permanently detrimental to her health. Barbara took five medications on a daily basis, the doctor stated, and saw a psychiatrist or a psychotherapist every week. The doctor asked that the court consider Barbara’s special needs when making their disposition toward her.
Another of Barbara’s doctors saw her regularly for her back pain, which followed surgery due to the many injuries she had received through the years in multiple auto accidents. He wrote detailing her genuine need to sleep with a pillow, which evidently had not been provided by the jail.
These letters and recommendations were duly furnished to the court, attached to a notice to the court of medical issues, which Stallings immediately began preparing.
After much legal maneuvering and preliminary work, the grand jury got down to the serious business of reviewing the case against Barbara Ann Roberts.
There were three counts listed on the indictment. In the first count, murder committed during a robbery, Barbara was alleged to have intentionally caused Darlene’s death by shooting her with a shotgun during the time that Barbara was in the course of committing a theft of property, namely Darlene’s purse. Barbara was accused of having used force or threatening the use of force against Darlene in order to escape with the property, while armed with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.
The second count charged that Barbara caused Darlene’s death by shooting her with a shotgun during abduction, or attempted abduction, with the intent to inflict injury on Darlene or to violate or abuse her sexually.
The third count found that Barbara caused Darlene’s death by shooting her with a shotgun during her abduction with the intent to terrorize her or another person, to wit: Vernon Roberts.
On November 2, 2006, Barbara Ann Roberts was indicted by the state of Alabama on the three counts, one count of murder during robbery and two counts of murder during kidnapping. The grand jury foreman signed the true bill released by the grand jury, and Circuit Judge Randall L. Cole ordered Barbara and Schiess, who was also indicted, picked up by law enforcement and returned to jail, to be held with no bail until the time of their trials.
To keep both defendants in this sensational case from being housed in the same facility, Barbara was transferred to the DeKalb County Jail in Fort Payne, Alabama, the adjoining county in the Ninth Judicial District of Alabama, and Schiess remained housed in the Cherokee County Jail.
Other books
Janet by E. L. Todd
Restore Me (Book 2.5 Kin Series) by Foor, Jennifer
Sinful Reunion by Crystal Cierlak
Away We Go by Emil Ostrovski
Mia's Return by Tracy Cooper-Posey
Lessons in Laughing Out Loud by Rowan Coleman
The Screaming Season by Nancy Holder
City Of Ruin by Mark Charan Newton
Down and Out in Bugtussle by Stephanie McAfee
