A Washington State judge approved a protection order meant to save a woman’s life, but the system never delivered it—and 24 hours later, she and her boyfriend were dead.
Story Snapshot
- Robert T. Child, 60, allegedly shot and killed his estranged wife Anna Child, 46, and her boyfriend Jason Hilde, 46, one day after a judge approved her protection order
- The protection order was never served to Robert before the murders, preventing enforcement of no-contact rules and mandatory firearm surrender
- Anna’s petition cited Robert’s chilling threat: “If he can’t have me, no one will” and explicitly stated she did not feel safe
- Mason County Sheriff Ryan Spurling ordered an internal investigation to determine if the tragedy could have been prevented
- Robert faces two counts of first-degree murder and burglary after fleeing the scene and being arrested the following day
When the System Fails at the Finish Line
The machinery of justice processed Anna Child’s protection order petition with appropriate speed. A Mason County judge reviewed her March 9 filing, which detailed explicit death threats from her estranged husband during their ongoing divorce, and approved the order by Monday. The document prohibited Robert Child from approaching within 250 feet of Anna and required him to surrender any firearms. Yet this critical piece of paper—the legal shield designed to protect Anna from the very threat she described—never reached the man it was meant to restrain. By Tuesday evening at 7 p.m., Robert walked into the Hoodsport home carrying a shotgun.
The Neighbor Who Witnessed a Killer’s Excuse
Caleb McGill heard the gunshots that shattered his quiet Hoodsport neighborhood and made the call to 911. What happened next reveals the audacity of a man who had just committed double murder. McGill confronted Robert Child as he emerged from the residence, and Robert offered his defense on the spot: “Dude, they pointed a gun at me, and I killed them.” McGill later described the scene inside as the most gruesome he had ever witnessed. Investigators found Jason Hilde near the front door with a head wound and Anna Child on the stairway, both killed by shotgun blasts. Robert fled in his white pickup truck, leaving behind the weapon and spent shells.
The Threat That Became a Prophecy
Anna Child’s protection order petition contained the kind of threat that domestic violence experts recognize as a lethal warning sign. Robert had told her directly: “If he can’t have me, no one will.” She wrote plainly in her filing that she did not feel safe. These were not vague concerns or overreactions—they were specific predictions of danger that Washington State law is designed to address through ex parte protection orders, which can be issued immediately without the respondent present if irreparable injury is likely. The judge who approved Anna’s order considered these factors and acted appropriately. The breakdown occurred in the gap between judicial approval and law enforcement service.
Why Unserved Orders Leave Victims Exposed
Protection orders in Washington State carry significant legal weight under RCW 7.105, including provisions that align with federal law requiring firearm prohibitions for domestic violence restraining orders. These orders are meant to trigger immediate consequences: no contact, distance restrictions, and mandatory weapon surrender. Yet none of these protections activate until the respondent is formally served with notice. Until that moment, the restrained person legally remains unaware of the court’s prohibitions, cannot be held accountable for violations, and faces no requirement to relinquish firearms. This procedural gap, often driven by resource limitations in rural counties, transforms protective orders into dangerous false promises for victims who believe they are already protected.
When Common Sense Meets Legal Reality
Robert Child was arrested Wednesday evening and booked into Mason County Jail on two counts of first-degree murder and burglary. Sheriff Spurling’s decision to launch an internal investigation into the unserved protection order reflects a question that conservative values of personal responsibility and effective government demand we ask: If the system identified a credible threat serious enough for judicial intervention, why did bureaucratic delays prevent that intervention from taking effect? This is not about creating more laws or expanding government overreach—it is about ensuring the laws already on the books actually protect the people they are written to save. Anna Child did everything right: she recognized danger, sought legal protection, and documented her fears. The system she trusted failed to close the loop.
The dual victims in this case extend beyond Anna and Jason. Their families now grieve preventable deaths, and the Hoodsport community grapples with the realization that a neighbor committed murder within earshot. The internal probe may reveal whether faster service protocols, electronic notification systems permitted under RCW 7.105.150, or priority designations for high-risk orders could have changed the outcome. What remains indisputable is that a woman who articulated her danger with chilling accuracy was killed before the protection meant to save her ever reached the man she feared. That is not just a procedural failure—it is a moral one that demands accountability and reform.
Sources:
Washington State Courts Protection Order Form
Without My Consent: Washington State Restraining Orders Guide
Washington Law Help: Change or End Your Protection Order
