I could go on, but the pattern is obvious: Every time Galileo made a close pass to a moon, it clammed up in safe mode. Why? Because the moons are much more massive than we predicted, based upon the deflection of our probes from a solar orbit. But once Galileo entered the increasing strength of the moon’s own gravity, the probe starts to accelerate much more than expected. The probe gets worried and shuts down.
You certainly don't seem to understand how spacecraft work. I'm going to assume that the highlighting and italicizing in all those quotes about Galileo are your emphasis. Why the fixation on the word "anomaly"?
Definition of anomaly: A change or deviation from what is considered typical.
An anomaly does NOT imply an unexplained event. It simply means that something is operating outside of design parameters for some reason. In the case of the computer memory being affected by the radiation around Jupiter, that is to be and was expected. It's called a "single event upset" and happens when an energetic particle flips a bit in a memory cell. This causes a checksum error and causes the computer to go into safe mode so it can self test.
The same problem was responsible for the gyroscope anomalies. This is not something mysterious and is a problem faced by all spacecraft. It is well understood and is the reason that spacecraft are still using 486 CPUs in their computers. Modern CPUs such as the P4 have such small feature sizes that they are easily upset by particle events and so are useless in deep space.
It's not feasible to shield the electronics. A small amount of shielding only makes the problem worse because of the secondaries it generates and enough shielding weighs far too much.
There isn't any connection between how a gyroscope functions and gravity. A variation in the gravitational field will not alter the functioning of a gyroscope. Current gyroscopes do not have any moving parts at all and are implemented on silicon chips.