View Single Post
Old 07-16-2007, 01:26 PM   #1
Corky Kneivel
Forum Regular
Corky Kneivel's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 12, 2007
Location: Sacratomato
Posts: 535
Default Ruminations on the disappearance of Martha Doe Roberts

If you are unfamiliar with this case, there are articles posted here (thanks CD!):

After re-watching this case the other day, I was really struck by something that Allen Roberts said and kind of looked at it in a way I hadn't before. Mr. Roberts, who some suspect may be involved in the case, has always maintained he has no complicity in the matter and was very adamant about letting the kidnappers know he would pay for information leading to his wife's recovery. I am paraphrasing here as I am unsure of exactly what he said, but its along the lines of: (to the kidnappers) "I'll give you 50,000 to bring her back to me alive. If she's not alive, I'll give you $25,000 to tell me where her body is".

Originally that statement just seemed to me like a grieving husband saying he'd give a fortune to just have an answer as to his wife's status, alive or dead. It seemed a perfectly natural statement given the perfectly unnatural predicament he found himself in: being extorted financially for his wife's life. However, after this last viewing something occurred to me that hadn't before. Something that, if he was indeed involved in his wife's disappearance, would be very detrimental to the chances of ever finding Martha Doe alive again.

Could Allan Roberts have been very publicly telling the kidnappers that he will give them $25K just to kill her?

Think about it. If the kidnappers and Roberts had previously plotted the kidnapping and (probable) murder of Martha Doe they DEFINITELY couldn't be seen together anymore to further discuss any plans or any contingencies or any unforseen problems that they didn't work out, etc. Allen Roberts movements, who he met with, where his monet was spent, would be clocked 24/7 by the FBI** and jurisdictional authorities. This way he still appears to be the grieving husband yet he is actually giving the "green light" for the murder. Perhaps he is even upping the monetary reward they had previously worked out. Admittedly, this is just oddball speculation based on one statement and there are more questions than answers so I will readily rescind this theory if evidence comes to light disproving it straightaway, or a convincing argument is made against it.

Questions I see arising from this line of thinking:

Why would he ever plan on a kidnapping in the first place?
Could there have been contingencies that she would be returned unharmed if the heat got to much, or the police go too close to figuring it out?
What circumstances would prompt him to decide "enough is enough...we need to have her killed"?
How would he make a surreptitious payment of $25K to the men once they acted on his "go-ahead"? -OR- does he think he could get over on the kidnapper/murderers by giving the go-ahead, and then having them having them arrested during the scheduled payment drop for info. on where to find her body? Remember, in this "complicit" scenario he has no actual desire to know her whereabouts, only that the job is done.
Would he reason that, if the kidnapper/murderers were ever arrested, he could trust them to remain silent regarding his involvement?

Also, after reading the most recent article in the aforementioned thread that stated they know who was making the calls. Does anyone know of any further revelations in this case?

** - The FBI always gets involved in kidnapping cases right? Or is it just ones that cross state lines?
Corky Kneivel is offline   Reply With Quote