Capitol Rioter's Wife Puts Her Felon Husband First, Kids Last

     Jacob Fracker and Thomas Robertson quickly made national news. Both veterans, they both became police officers in the small Virginia town of Rocky Mount, rode together as partners, grew so close that Robertson referred to Fracker as his "son," and even went viral in the summer of 2020 for dancing with Black Lives Matter protestors together. Then, on January 6th, 2021, they stormed the Capitol together. They were both fired, both arrested, and both charged with felonies. Here, their paths split greatly. Robertson was initially released on bond but sent back to jail in July 2021 after authorities discovered he had purchased dozens of weapons and assembled a pipe bomb illegally in his home, which his son tried to lie about and his lawyers tried to downplay, respectively. Robertson took his case to trial and was convicted of five felonies and a misdemeanor carrying a combined maximum of 56 years in prison on April 11th, 2022. Fracker pleaded guilty to conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and faces five years in prison when he is sentenced on August 16th.

     It doesn't seem like Fracker or his family learned much from the experience. In these reports, I do the research I can to try to get the perpetrators side of the story. I did so in the Jacob Fracker case, and the result was about what I expected. I follow crimes of all kinds, from murders to child predator cases to the January 6th cases; cases that stick out, cases that make good stories but also provide valuable lessons. One thing I have learned consistently in each of these examples and one theme I try to convey is that the families of criminals are not victims. In almost all cases, they create an environment that breeds this behavior, aid and abet it, deny it, and then defend and/or minimalize the actions of their friends or relatives when confronted with the fact that someone close to them did something horrible. Case in point: Maria Luisa Fracker. 

     In going through these cases, I always check social media, which is almost always used by the government to help make its case. I've already profiled Riley Kasper and Yvonne St. Cyr, both of whom deleted their social media accounts after the attack (although St. Cyr continued posting on her husband Troy's account); Jacob Fracker, too, deleted his social media, but his wife did not. Jacob tagged Maria Luisa Fracker in a post on January 6th, a post used as evidence by the DOJ, which made her easy enough to find. She lists her home on her profile as Rocky Mount, Virginia, which virtually guaranteed it was her. So, I messaged her:

Me: You started your Facebook page after your husband got busted on felony charges? Seems really tacky.

[Maria] Luisa: I've had a Facebook since 2009 lol [This may be true, but her visible posts only go back as far as February 2021. While she may have had a page, she was not necessarily active. My point stands.]

M: "A Facebook." Funny.

L: ?/If you could be more specific maybe I can help you figure out exactly what you're trying to say/I've had this exact Facebook profile since 2009/Anything my husband does, does not reflect who I am as a person. [More grammar. That will be a "no," on the offer, by the way. On that latter point, I think we'll see soon enough that it actually does reflect on who you are when you refuse to distance yourself from it and stand by the perpetrator.]

M: "A Facebook" is not grammatically correct. It just seems like your husband going to prison would be something you would post about. [I do find it somewhat amusing that we're still talking about grammar in the middle of this conversation.]

L: A Facebook page* [eyeroll emoji]/Why does it "seem" like something I would post about? [At least she used the asterisk correctly.]

M: I don't know. I mean, that's something pretty big.

L: I mean... he's not in prison so I don't know why you think I would share that? [The fact that she seems comforted by him "not being in prison yet" demonstrates some level of psychological coping here. He's been fired, exposed to the global community as a violent white supremacist insurrectionist, convicted of a felony, forced to testify against his former law enforcement partner, permanently barred from ever working in his chosen profession again, and placed at risk of losing any military compensation he may receive. The fact that she doesn't consider any of that noteworthy or considers a few months in prison worse than all of that combined bewilders me and further demonstrates my aforementioned theory on her coping.]

M: Because he will be. Getting convicted of a felony and losing his job wasn't big, either?

L: Why would I blast that on a platform? [There's no doubt this is the woman I'm looking for. Maybe I'm not being clear enough. While I wasn't able to screenshot her page before this conversation was ended in the most cowardly way by her, she was posting inspirational quotes and "funny" memes about coffee and the national debt like a stereotypical middle-aged white woman in the suburbs. THAT'S what the issue is. In a situation as bad as this, a normal person would either address the issue or stay off of social media entirely, not just go on pretending your dull life is still going on as normal. This is a problem I've even seen relatives have: they create a fake little perfect life in their social media echo chamber when reality is much different. What the fuck is the point of that?]

M: Because it should matter to you. Of course, I'm not sure why you would stay married to him. THAT is a reflection of your character. [I said it right at the top.]

L: It does matter, but I'm not going to put it all over social media. I'm allowed to support my husband. That doesn't mean I agree with whatever he did. But as a wife, I can support him. [A few things about that jumped out at me. The first was the grammar. The second was her apparent viewpoint that supporting her husband no matter what was somehow empowering. Based on her first and last name and some family photos, I believe Maria is Hispanic. That would explain this tone in her words, one in which she acts like her husband is some sort of supernatural being and not a person whose shit stinks like yours or mine, because Hispanic culture has the same problem with sex that American and European culture tends to have with race. Fracker was a police officer, and police officers like controlling people they see as helpless; that could explain why they seem to deserve each other: a man who wants to control a woman and a woman who wants a man to control her. Finally, she seems to imply that her husband's actions don't define him. What else is there? Words? Every person's actions absolutely define who they are. Jacob Fracker is a terrorist.]

M: Not really. What kind of role model could he possibly be, and what kind of example are you setting? [The profile indicates they have kids, as does the federal indictment of Fracker and Robertson. One thing I found interesting in reading that document was that, soon after they returned to Rocky Mount, on the night that Fracker gave Robertson his phone to ditch in the Atlantic Ocean when they knew they were nearing arrest, Fracker also dropped his children off at the home of one of Robertson's female relatives. Apparently, he trusted his fellow felon friend's female family member more than he trusted his wife to care for their kids; if anything, that about sums up their relationship.]

L: And I'm sure you yourself are perfect (another rolling eyes emoji)/I just looked at your profile. You're a liberal, says it all (laughing emoji) goodbye. [She blocked me here. That seems like a cowardly move. You either block somebody who reaches out to you right away or you follow through to the end; you don't engage with somebody over the course of three hours and then block them when they hurt your feelings. She really tried to have her cake and eat it too on this issue, much like she did by choosing to stay with her husband while saying she doesn't condone his actions. That should prove what an indecisive, milquetoast, subservient little domestic she is. On that point about condoning his actions: I doubt she really disagrees with what he did. Even after the lies of conservatives cost her husband everything, she still thinks it's her mission to "own the libs." What a fucking cult! I like that it took her that long to check, as well. Who did she think she was arguing with? Someone who wasn't a liberal who just happened to disagree with her husband's actions enough that he went through federal charging documents to reach out to her on Facebook? I do find it funny; that may be the one thing we agree on. Her first point in this last blurb is probably the most laughable. The idea that anyone who has made any mistake cannot criticize objectively bad people is an idiotic one. Child molesters get murdered by drug addicts, robbers, and other crooks in prison all the time. Even murderers look at what a predator did and say, "That's fucked up." No, I'm not perfect, but I can say I've never tried to overthrow the government. A mistake is saying something you shouldn't have or not saying something you should have; a mistake is forgetting to buy a gift for your second cousin on their 38th birthday; felonies are not mistakes; what her husband did is not a mistake. Jacob Fracker planned out a trip to the Capitol with Thomas Robertson, participated in the attempted overthrow and ultimate obstruction of the United States government, and then helped destroy evidence. She wasn't on his mind when he committed his crimes, and yet she sees it in her best interests to keep looking out for him. I hope she wises up quickly.]