Dibor Roberts, convicted on two felony counts, received what amounted to a slap on the wrist Friday, May 16, after Superior Court Judge Michael Bluff sentenced here to six months of unsupervised probation, no fine, and no restitution. Reporter’s Notebook
Roberts Trial
Final Day
By Greg Nix
Larson Newspapers

Dibor Roberts, convicted on two felony counts, received what amounted to a slap on the wrist Friday, May 16, after Superior Court Judge Michael Bluff sentenced here to six months of unsupervised probation, no fine, and no restitution.
Roberts was convicted after the jury deliberated less than two hours.
Bluff reduced the resisting arrest charge down to a misdemeanor, but the felony flight conviction will remain.
Roberts’ fate hung in the balance as attorneys for both sides made their closing statements.
In his closing, Yavapai County Attorney Glen Hammond argued Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office Sgt. Jeff Newnum  was a more credible witness than Roberts.  Hammond pushed the jury to focus on who they thought was more believable.  His argument was that the state never claimed she attempted to elude Newnum, only that she “did not stop” and that made it a crime. 
Hammond said Roberts knew Newnum was an officer and she was under arrest because he pointed his gun at her.  He said there was substantial risk to Newnum because Roberts made him stop in the middle of the road and also caused him to injure his right hand and foot.
His argument was that the state never claimed Roberts attempted to elude Newnum, only that she “did not stop” and that made it a crime. 
Renard faced a tough crowd when he addressed jurors.  At the beginning, some obviously disapproved, grimacing with knotted brows. 
Renard told jurors the case was not about Newnum’s intentions, fears, or worries but about Roberts’.  He said the state had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Roberts “willfully” fled and had to “willfully” attempt to injure Sgt. Newnum. 
“There is not a shred of evidence that [Roberts] intended to flee or fight!” Renard said forcefully.
Under the law, the prosecution is allowed the last word. In his rebuttal, Hammond asked, “Suspend your disbelief? The law is you have to pull over.”  He hammered the point that driving is a privilege, not a right and Roberts had to pull over unless she clearly communicated her intention to drive to a lighted area. 
There was no way Roberts didn’t know Newnum was a legitimate officer, Hammond said.
By the time Hammond finished, many jurors returned to a look of mild anger and hostility towards Roberts.
Once the closing arguments were finished, Bluff instructed the jury to decided Roberts’ guilt based on the evidence, not on any sympathy or prejudice towards her. 
Bluff said arguments by both attorneys were not evidence or law and that Roberts’ guilt must be based on the facts alone. 
It took the jury about two hours to reach their verdict.
Afterwards, one juror told Renard the jury decided on a guilty verdict because “[Roberts] didn’t stop.”
My sense is that Newnum probably isn’t a bad cop but that he got himself into a situation that rapidly got out of his control and he didn’t know what to do.  My sense is that Roberts freaked out and got herself into a situation that she may not have known how to manage.
At the end of the day, you’ve got two human beings who collided in a manner that hurt them both.  Hammond did his job, he got the conviction and was kind enough not to push for jail time, fines, or restitution.