Woman who shot husband to death is facing freedom
By William Kenny
Times Staff Writer
A former Mayfair child day-care facility owner who shot her husband to death in 2006 and has spent the last five years in state prison will soon become a free woman.
The Pennsylvania Board of Probation and Parole on Jan. 26 granted Karen Grauber, 43, her imminent release just weeks after she completed the minimum portion of her five- to 10-year prison sentence for her voluntary manslaughter conviction.
Grauber remains behind bars at the State Correctional Institution-Cambridge Springs for the moment, but she will be discharged by late March, according to information provided to the family of her late husband, shooting victim Anthony Grauber.
The board ruling adds to an eventful several months for Karen Grauber, whose case was featured last Halloween in an hour-long documentary on the cable TV network Oxygen. The program was part of the network's Snapped series - highlighting women who kill or attempt to kill their husbands - and continues to replay periodically on the network.
The board granted Karen Grauber parole on her first application for it. Last year, the state's Department of Corrections denied her application for early release into a work-related program.
Anthony Grauber's brother Paul and other family members opposed Karen's early release and parole. They now have serious questions about the fairness of the parole process and concerns about how Karen's release will impact the lives of the five children who she and Anthony had been raising before the shooting.
The children now range in age from 10 to 21.
"It doesn't seem like five years. A lot of us in the family still feel like it was yesterday. To see her out on the street, how the family is going to react, I just don't know," Paul Grauber said.
The shooting followed months, perhaps years, of discord in the relationship of a couple who lived with their children in a suburban-style single home on Rowland Avenue in Holmesburg.
Though they had separated, Anthony Grauber had been helping his wife renovate an office building into a new day-care center at 7425 Frankford Ave.
Karen Grauber owned two other successful day-care centers, one at Cottman Avenue and Roosevelt Boulevard and the other at a church in Port Richmond.
On Jan. 2, 2006, the newest place was within days of opening. Shortly after midnight, Anthony and Karen Grauber argued there. Both had guns. Karen pulled out hers and shot Anthony once fatally in the chest. She called 911, admitted to pulling the trigger and was arrested at the scene.
At her murder trial, Karen Grauber claimed that she had long been victimized by physical and sexual abuse by her husband. She said she believed that he was going to beat and rape her again that night, so she shot him.
A jury didn't agree unanimously on a murder conviction and settled on voluntary manslaughter, a less-common offense in which the suspect kills as a result of an honest but mistaken belief that his or her life is in danger.
Though disappointed that the murder charge didn't stick, Paul Grauber was more than satisfied with the five- to 10-year prison sentence ordered for Karen.
"I was happy about that. I certainly didn't want a hung jury and have her back out on the street," Paul Grauber said. "I was thinking in my own mind that there was no way a judge would give her the minimum five years. She not only killed my brother, she had other crimes. But (the sentences) all ran consecutive."
The same jury also convicted Karen Grauber of possessing an instrument of crime, although she was licensed to carry the gun she used to shoot her husband.
Last October, the Northeast Times sent a registered letter to Karen Grauber requesting to interview her about her case. She denied the request but replied with an abstract, often indiscernible letter.
That was about the same time that the Department of Corrections - the branch of state government overseeing operations of its prisons - rejected her bid for early release.
Anthony Grauber's parents, his brother Paul and other family members submitted written statements to the DOC expressing their opposition to her release. The state's Office of the Victim Advocate, an agency created by the state legislature in 1995, helped them with the process.
At the time, Paul Grauber said, the advocate told his family that the same statements could be re-filed with the Board of Probation and Parole when Karen became eligible to apply for that.
To this day, Paul Grauber claims, his family doesn't know if its statements ever were entered into the record of Karen's parole proceedings. Further, he adds, the family would have been more diligent about contacting the parole board had the victim advocate not suggested to them that Karen was an unlikely parole candidate.
"Verbally, they told us they doubted she would get parole this soon," said Paul Grauber, who claims to have spoken with "dozens of people" from the victim advocate office via telephone and in person since Karen's trial and sentencing.
Paul Grauber claims that the victim advocate even mentioned specific reasons that would've worked against Karen's bid for parole, although he has no written record of it.
Karen Grauber's record of behavior is not considered public information, according to a parole board spokesman. Similarly, the record of her parole proceedings is not public, although Paul Grauber, his parents and other registered victims would be able to find out if their statements were added to Karen's file.
Carol Lavery, Pennsylvania's chief victim advocate, said that Paul Grauber's account of his dealings with her office contradict some of the agency's policies.
"(Advocates) talk in general. What they normally are saying is that with a person who has misconducts (in prison), the likelihood of that person being granted parole is a lot less," Lavery said.
Advocates aren't supposed to discuss specific case details.
"They should not engage in that. They should not be guessing or laying odds on things," Lavery said. "Is it possible that some people misinterpret? Yes. And is it possible that an advocate in speaking misrepresents the language? Yes."
The Office of Victim Advocate deals with thousands of criminal cases, Lavery said, so it's impractical for individual advocates to be assigned to specific cases. The theory is that people who call the agency can get quicker answers to their questions under the current setup.
The agency also has a complaint mechanism in place so that callers can speak with a supervisor upon request and launch a review of a specific case.
Problems with the advocate office aside, Paul Grauber and his family have their own questions about the wisdom of the parole board's decision.
In its formal statement, the board cited Karen Grauber's positive institutional behavior and her acceptance of responsibility for the offenses committed among the factors contributing to the board's ruling.
Yet, the victim's family notes, Karen never admitted guilt in court and she sought to defend herself by portraying the victim as the antagonist. Further, the defense presented no physical or medical evidence to substantiate her claims of abuse. And Karen waited until the trial to allege that her husband had raped her repeatedly for years, although she failed to mention it to police interviewers after her arrest or in court prior to the trial.
Anthony Grauber's family also has serious questions about what Karen really was doing in prison for the last five years.
In one odd instance about nine months ago, the Grauber children and Anthony's family learned of a Facebook page that had been set up by Karen or for her by a third party.
The page included messages purportedly from Karen directed toward her children. Under the terms of Karen's parole, she is permitted to have contact with her children only under court supervision.
The page also contained a photo of Anthony Grauber.
Soon after the victim's family discovered the page, it was removed from the site. Karen Grauber has had no contact with the children since then, Paul Grauber said.
Reporter William Kenny can be reached at 215-354-3031 or bkenny@bsmphilly.com