Share this:

A district court judge who hinted last week he wasn’t persuaded by arguments for dismissing the animal cruelty case against Cody Roberts filed an order Tuesday explaining why he was instead sending the high-profile case toward a trial. 

District Court Judge Richard Lavery’s six-page order stated that “the plain language” of an exemption for predators like wolves written into Wyoming’s animal cruelty laws didn’t provide “a blanket license” to do anything to an animal. The “specific, enumerated exemptions” are for “hunting, capture, killing or destruction” of predators “in any manner” not otherwise illegal.

Cody Roberts poses with a wolf he took possession of in February 2024. The animal was subsequently taken to the Green River Bar. (Screenshot/Instagram)

At a hearing last week, Roberts’ attorney Robert Piper described the entirety of the wolf’s time in Roberts’ possession as being an extended period of “capture.”

Lavery didn’t agree in his response to a motion to dismiss the case.

“[T]his case does not arise out of the capture of the wolf,” Lavery wrote, “but out of Defendant’s alleged conduct after capturing the wolf but before it was killed.” 

The judge quoted legal precedent that established courts are “not at liberty to add words to a statute that the legislature chose to omit.”

Roberts allegedly acquired a wolf by striking it with a snowmobile until “barely conscious” on Feb. 29, 2024. Photos from that night showed him posing for pictures with the wolf and even kissing it. The wolf’s behavior suggests that it was gravely injured, according to biologists who’ve reviewed video of the muzzled animal while it was prone and listless on the floor of the Green River Bar

The incident touched off a wave of global outrage that inundated Sublette County with threats and caused Wyoming state agencies to suspend social media accounts peppered with upset comments.

Wyoming Game and Fish released this image, screenshotted from video evidence collected during the investigation into Cody Roberts, a Wyoming man who was fined $250 for possessing a live wolf. The agency released the image as part of a public records request made by WyoFile. (Wyoming Game and Fish Department)

During the initial law enforcement response, Wyoming Game and Fish Department wardens cited Roberts with a $250 discretionary fine for possessing wildlife instead of sending him to court in pursuit of steeper charges. 

At the time, the state agency contended what Piper is now arguing: That predatory animal species are exempt from animal cruelty statutes. 

Sublette County law enforcement officials disagreed. Last summer, prosecutor Clayton Melinkovich convened a grand jury that later indicted the 44-year-old Daniel resident for felony animal cruelty, punishable by up to two years imprisonment. He has pleaded not guilty and remains free on bond.

Roberts’ trial is scheduled to begin March 9.

Mike Koshmrl reports on Wyoming's wildlife and natural resources. Prior to joining WyoFile, he spent nearly a decade covering the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem’s wild places and creatures for the Jackson...

Leave a comment

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *