Protection Order FAIL: Two Dead

A Washington woman did everything the system told her to do—get a protection order—and still ended up dead before it was even served.

Quick Take

Anna Child obtained a court-approved protection order against her estranged husband, Robert T. Child, but police had not served it when the killings happened.
Investigators say Robert Child shot Anna Child and her boyfriend, Jason Hilde, with a shotgun in Hoodsport, Washington, about a day after the order was granted.
A neighbor reported hearing gunshots, called 911, and later encountered the suspect, who made a spontaneous statement about the shooting.
Mason County Sheriff Ryan Spurling ordered an internal investigation into whether law enforcement could have done more to prevent the deaths.

Protection order granted, but the enforcement step never happened

Mason County court records cited in reporting show Anna Child filed for a protection order on March 9 after documenting a threatening statement attributed to her estranged husband: “If he can’t have me, no one will.” A judge approved the order on March 10, barring Robert T. Child from coming within 250 feet of her. Law enforcement later said the order had not yet been served on him when the shooting occurred.

That procedural gap matters because a protection order is only as strong as the speed and certainty of enforcement. A judge can sign a paper in minutes, but service can depend on staffing, geography, and prioritization. The available reporting does not specify why service had not occurred by March 11, and the sheriff’s office has not publicly pinned the failure on a single person. The agency response so far has been an internal review rather than immediate public discipline.

What happened in Hoodsport and what authorities say they found

Authorities say Robert T. Child, 60, entered a home in Hoodsport, Washington, on March 11 and shot Anna Child, 46, and Jason Hilde, 46, with a shotgun. Deputies responded around 7 p.m. and found Hilde near the front door with a gunshot wound to the head, while Anna Child was located on a stairway with gunshot wounds. The sequence—order granted Monday, killings Tuesday—underscores how fast domestic violence threats can escalate.

A neighbor, Caleb McGill, told investigators he heard gunshots, called 911, and later encountered the suspect as he left the area. Reporting says the suspect made a spontaneous admission to the neighbor about the shooting and also offered a claim that the victims “pointed a gun” at him. That statement is a factual dispute at this stage, because it conflicts with law enforcement’s account describing him as the aggressor; the court process is where such claims are tested.

Charges, arrest, and the accountability question for local government

Law enforcement arrested Robert T. Child on March 12 and booked him into the Mason County Jail. He faces two counts of first-degree murder and an additional burglary charge, according to the reporting. The case was forwarded to prosecutors for review. Those charges reflect the gravity of what investigators believe happened, but they do not answer the public’s most pressing question: how a documented threat and a signed order still left the victims unprotected.

Sheriff Ryan Spurling ordered an internal investigation into whether more could have been done to prevent the deaths, acknowledging the service failure as a central issue. If the review finds missed steps, the outcome could be changes in how quickly orders are prioritized, tracked, and served—especially in rural areas where deputies may cover wide territory. The research provided does not include results from that internal investigation, so the public record remains incomplete.

A warning sign conservatives recognize: rights on paper mean little without competent execution

This case lands in a hard place for many conservatives: Americans want violent offenders stopped, but they also know government often promises safety it cannot deliver. A protection order is a legal tool, not a force field, and the state’s failure to serve it highlights why competence and accountability in local government matter. The facts here do not justify broad new restrictions on lawful gun owners; they do raise questions about whether officials followed through on an existing court directive.

The limited reporting also offers no evidence of prior incidents involving the suspect beyond what was described in the protection order filing, making it difficult to judge whether this was foreseeable to deputies beyond the explicit threat. What is clear is the timeline: a threat was documented, a judge acted, and service did not happen before two people were killed. For families watching from anywhere in America, that gap is the story—and it is one local governments owe answers for.