Previous Post
Next Post reports that one Raymond Fryberg [above] was found guilty of illegal possession of firearms by a jury in a federal trial. [Click here for the ruling.] The restraining order used to convict Fryberg was granted in 2002, sparked when Fryberg’s son Jaylen, murdered four classmates then committed suicide. The order was requested by Fryberg’s former girlfriend, Jamie Gobin. The two have a child in common. Originally . . .

the restraining order was temporary. There was a hearing to determine if the restraining order should be permanent. Records show that Fryberg was served notice of the hearing, but never showed up. A permanent restraining order was granted. Thus, even though Fryberg was never convicted of a crime of domestic violence, the restraining order permanently prohibited him from owning firearms.

To complicate the matter, the restraining order did not show up in Federal background checks; the tribal court had no requirement to submit it and had not done so.

Browne said the problem started with the protection order, which was sought by Fryberg’s former girlfriend, Jamie Gobin.

A judge granted Gobin the permanent order because Fryberg never appeared at a hearing to contest it. However, the defense contended Fryberg was never notified about the hearing.

The officer who claimed to notify Fryberg was married to Gobin’s sister and reported serving the notice at a nonexistent address, Browne said.

Fryberg’s attorney claims that Fryberg did not know did not know he was prohibited from owning guns. From

Browne says the protection order never made it clear that Fryberg couldn’t own a gun. He even showed KIRO 7 a concealed weapons permit from the state dated Jan. 14, 2013, which was issued after the protection order.

An important point: court records showed that Fryberg plead no contest in 2012 to violating the restraining order. According to, in 2012, Fryberg was found in violation of the order, fined $200 and placed on probation.

We can’t know what might have happened if Fryberg had shown up for the hearing in 2002. It is plausible that the restraining order would not have been made permanent, and that it would have expired after a year.

But that was not the case. Ten years later, he plead guilty to violating the restraining order. We don’t know what happened to cause the plea deal, but most plea deals are the result of dropping more serious charges. I don’t know the workings of the tribal court, so whether that happened or not is pure speculation.

Fryberg was never denied from purchasing a firearm or obtaining a concealed carry permit. The prosecution made the point that even though the restraining order was not in the system, Fryberg signed a statement saying that he would abide by the terms of the Order for Protection. Maybe he never read them.

This is a cautionary tale. When a person buys a firearm from a federal dealer, they have to sign a form 4473. Question h. on the form asks “Are you subject to a court order restraining you from harassing, stalking, or threatening your child or an intimate partner or child of such partner?”

It’s one of 12 questions about the eligibility of a person to purchase a firearm on the 4473 form. Prosecutors emphasized that Raymond Fryberg checked “No” and signed the form. Fryberg can now be sentenced to up to 10 years in jail and fined up to $250,000.

©2015 by Dean Weingarten: Permission to share is granted when this notice and link are included. Link to Gun Watch

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. Nice to see people keep abusing the system. Don’t like your ex? File a TRO with a fake address for him. Due process? Who needs due process?

    • This is par for the course with women these days. If you’re not spending enough money on dumb crap they want, they sleep around and accuse you of beating them. Yay feminism.

  2. If the information about the sister is true then the officer shouldn’t have served the order if he did. Too easy to claim conflicts of interest. Would be curious to know if he was actually served or not.

    • You’ve just described every rez in western Wa. But you forgot to add that the tribal justice system is biased, inbred and as corrupt as the day is long.

  3. You all are missing the point. Maybe the tribal officer never served the order, maybe he did. But regardless, 10 years later, he plead no contest to violating the restraining order. He lied. He broke the law. He can’t say he wasn’t aware that he wasn’t supposed to own guns. He’s going to burn for his own stupidity.

  4. “The restraining order used to convict Fryberg was granted in 2002, sparked when Fryberg’s son Jaylen, murdered four classmates then committed suicide.”

    Consider re-writing this line. It made me originally think that the original restraining order granted in 2002 was sparked by the murders, which didn’t obviously happen until 2014. Apparently the arrest and conviction based on the restraining order was sparked by the murders that happened in 2014.

    • Yeah that needs to be re-written because it’s false as is. A restraining order issued in 2002 can’t be sparked by a murder that occurred in 2014.

      Dean usually does a better job. This particular post is plagued with repeated words and phrases.

      Dean, I enjoy your articles. Please add a proofreader to the process.

  5. There’s too much we don’t know. Why was the original temporary restraining order granted? Why was it made permanent? Why did Fryberg plead no contest to violating a restraining order he didn’t know existed? Why didn’t his lawyer challenge the validity of the permanent order on the grounds that it was technically incorrect (wrong address) and notice was served by an officer with an obvious conflict of interest?

    We know only two things for certain:
    (1) By pleading no contest, Fryberg acknowledged the permanent restraining order regardless of its validity. After that, he should have known that he was forever barred from possessing firearms (and his then lawyer should have made sure he did).
    (2) The court which granted the permanent order was too lazy to report it to the NICS database. A background check system that depends on self-reporting by the person checked is worthless.

Comments are closed.