8-Year-Old Boy Arrested In Double-Homicide - Arizona

[William Anthony]

Another snip for the Court ruling: Tomorrow is going to be interesting. Wonder what will come first the chicken or the egg. Will the States request of count one be dimissed without prejudice be ruled on before CR's competency. :shrug: Remember there is "always" the possibility I have things screwed up to the point my post is Void.

In conclusion, the juvenile court was not, as it believed, precluded by statute and/or court rule from addressing the State’s motion to dismiss Count I without prejudice. We therefore grant relief in part by vacating the court’s contrary ruling and returning this matter to the juvenile court for further proceedings consistent herewith.

You do realize that the court was saying that the juvenile court could allow the state to refile the charges. I am not sure, if that same option would be available if the child was found incompetent from your link.

http://www.lectlaw.com/def/d062.htm

[William Anthony]

Joseph Bell;9158195]Sorry Susie. I am actually answering your post but I thought I needed to bring this back. Neckel admits she lied in the 'interview' to CR. Deliberately. To get him to confess.

"BB: Um, is it, customary or, I guess, customary or acceptable, in, interrogations or, interviews, however you wanna phrase em, um, to, lie to the, subject, whatever that person is. In order to, well, not in order ta do anything but, just, are you allowed ta lie to the subject? Is that…

TA: Yes.

BB: …something you've been trained ta do?

TA: Yes.

BB: Um, and did you do that in this case?

TA: I believe I did, uh, I believe I did at one point, um, saying that someone saw him, and, um, that was the only time.

BB: And why would you do that if he was still a victim?

TA: Trying ta get him ta open up, ta come on ta say no, it was somebody else that did it. L-like I say, very, it was very, much that we thought, well we walked in there and that's where our mindset was, at least I can say my mindset was. Was that he was coverin fer someone.

BB: What ha, uh, so, just, you know, correct me if I'm wrong, but sounds like, yer wanting ta him, to basically, scare him into a position where he will, ultimately tell the truth?

TA: Ultimately tell us who was in there. "

[Its just me]

This is far above my knowledge....but in reading the courts reply it appears to me that if CR is found incompetent and can not be restored to competent withing 240 days both cases has to be dismissed with prejudice. Brewer asked for a speedy trial which more than likely plays a part in the dismissal of both counts with prejudice.

However I think the court can rule Case one be dismissed without prejudice before any conpetency ruling is made. The state requested Count one be dismissed without prejudice and Brewer asked it be with prejudice.

I'm expecting the child to be released soon. I will be very shocked if he is determined to be competent now or within the next 240 days.

It would appear to me that the juvenile court had to follow what was handed down from the appeals court. My link. fep

[Its just me]

I don't have the time to find and post all the interviews that relate to CR being a suspect before he was interviews the second time but IMHOO the defense will have no problem showing he was. There is NO Question there is reasonable doubt. fep

[William Anthony]

This is far above my knowledge....but in reading the courts reply it appears to me that if CR is found incompetent and can not be restored to competent withing 240 days both cases has to be dismissed with prejudice. Brewer asked for a speedy trial which more than likely plays a part in the dismissal of both counts with prejudice.

However I think the court can rule Case one be dismissed without prejudice before any conpetency ruling is made. The state requested Count one be dismissed without prejudice and Brewer asked it be with prejudice.

I'm expecting the child to be released soon. I will be very shocked if he is determined to be competent now or within the next 240 days.

It would appear to me that the juvenile court had to follow what was handed down from the appeals court. My link. fep

That is my point and Rocca may have been acting in the child's best interest by waiting to have the child evaluated for competency, while balancing the interest of the state. If the child is found incompetent and not able to be restored in the statutory allotted time, he can dismiss both counts with prejudice. The appellate court is saying that he can dismiss the case without prejudice at this point (anytime up until the child has been deemed incompetent) and allow the prosecution to refile at a later date. That is why I said that some may be too critical of the judge's actions. That is why the prosecution appealed his decision to wait, imho.

[FDInLaw]

Another court filing. . .

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/STATES%209TH%20SUPPLEMENTAL%20DISCLOSURE.pdf

[FDInLaw]

ST. JOHNS – The Status Conference scheduled on Thursday, January 29, 2009 at 10:00 a.m. remains in place. Early entry to the courtroom will not be allowed due to the scheduling of an earlier hearing. Upon completion of the 9:00 hearing, members of the public and the media will be allowed to enter the courtroom. http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/Press%20Releases/JV2008065%20PRESS%20RELEASE%20JANUARY%2027,%202009 .pdf

[lorettalockhorn]

Thank you for explaining. The issues presented in this case in regard to the admissibility of the alleged confession have been addressed previously, meaning that there is precedent. I have said previously and, therefore, agree that the child should have been given his Miranda rights at the point where the interview turned. Not having a complete record of the child's statements, meaning other than what is provided on the tapes, I am unable to decisively decide when the interview turned. My larger concern is should any of the child's statements be admitted, due to the requirement of the alleged confession being voluntary. There are areas in which the law has legislated morality, such as the Defense of Marriage Act. However, that is not normally the case. If you are saying that you feel it should do so in this case, I am torn. I agree that at some point the interviewers led the child to an alleged complete confession but am not sure at what point. Of course the state has an obligation to its citizens. However, the state has its own legitimate interest in protecting all of its citizens and that protection may or may not be found in morality.

Please don't penalize me for joining the thread/case late. I had no idea that any topics were closed for discussion here, or that you had been assigned to moderate comments.

The State has a responsibility to all citizens, and part of that responsibility is to avoid overzealous and frivolous prosecution and to assure citizens that elected officials strive to perfect investigation techniques. I don't know what the reaction to this case is in the state of Arizona, but voters there should be vigilant; if this case goes forward as it is, they run the risk of having these tactics ingrained in the law.

[FDInLaw]

This child faces a long road. . .
If Roca grants the motion, it would allow prosecutors to refile the charge when the boy is older and try him as an adult. http://www.kpho.com/news/18569777/detail.html

[FDInLaw]

Please don't penalize me for joining the thread/case late. I had no idea that any topics were closed for discussion here, or that you had been assigned to moderate comments.

The State has a responsibility to all citizens, and part of that responsibility is to avoid overzealous and frivolous prosecution and to assure citizens that elected officials strive to perfect investigation techniques. I don't know what the reaction to this case is in the state of Arizona, but voters there should be vigilant; if this case goes forward as it is, they run the risk of having these tactics ingrained in the law.There are no closed topics that I know of, and a lot of late comers! Good to see you posting! :seeya:

We should have a forum soon which will help a lot. :hat:

[Its just me]

Another court filing. . .

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/STATES%209TH%20SUPPLEMENTAL%20DISCLOSURE.pdf


Thanks FDInLaw. I saw that earlier and wondered if any of what the prosecution submitted to the court and Brewer has anything to do with what is scheduled for the 29th. If so it sure doesn't give the defense much time to prepare because it was submitted/provided on the 27th.

[lorettalockhorn]

This child faces a long road. . .
http://www.kpho.com/news/18569777/detail.html

Amen. Still have some things to read (including the middle pages of this thread), but it would seem that there was a rush to prosecution here.

There are no closed topics that I know of, and a lot of late comers! Good to see you posting! :seeya:

We should have a forum soon which will help a lot. :hat:

That would be my thinking.

The forum is a great idea; surely it will be better organized than the labeling on my favorites.

[Its just me]

This child faces a long road. . .
http://www.kpho.com/news/18569777/detail.html

I'm hoping the judge doesn't rule in the way that allows this to happen.

To me it's kind of like giving my child a good ole fashion back behind the barn whooping when he is 16 for something he did when he was too young to get a spanking. I wonder what authorities would do to me if that happened. :eek: I'd probably be charged with cruelty to children or worse. fep

[William Anthony]

Please don't penalize me for joining the thread/case late. I had no idea that any topics were closed for discussion here, or that you had been assigned to moderate comments.

The State has a responsibility to all citizens, and part of that responsibility is to avoid overzealous and frivolous prosecution and to assure citizens that elected officials strive to perfect investigation techniques. I don't know what the reaction to this case is in the state of Arizona, but voters there should be vigilant; if this case goes forward as it is, they run the risk of having these tactics ingrained in the law.

I am not penalizing you for anything and simply stated my opinion on your opinions about precedent and morality. I surely do not think it requires someone to be assigned to moderate comments to be allowed as a member to express their opinion in regard to another member's.

The state does have a responsibility to all of its citizens, which does not require perfection, imho. It only requires that the state shall produce evidence of a sufficient character to allow those accused of crimes to be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. There have been innocent people incarcerated and guilty people freed, as a result of that standard. Should this case proceed to a trial the sufficiency of the evidence will be tested. In the meantime we, as members of this community are allowed to express our opinions of what is being done, based on the limited information we have, imho. It is just my personal belief that we should weigh the pros and the cons of that information. However, others may want to weigh just the pros and others just the cons. I respect their choice and hope they respect my right to voice my opinion, whether it agrees with theirs or not.

[William Anthony]

Amen. Still have some things to read (including the middle pages of this thread), but it would seem that there was a rush to prosecution here.



That would be my thinking.

The forum is a great idea; surely it will be better organized than the labeling on my favorites.

Let's all do out part to keep all the threads open.

[lorettalockhorn]

I am not penalizing you for anything and simply stated my opinion on your opinions about precedent and morality. I surely do not think it requires someone to be assigned to moderate comments to be allowed as a member to express their opinion in regard to another member's.

The state does have a responsibility to all of its citizens, which does not require perfection, imho. It only requires that the state shall produce evidence of a sufficient character to allow those accused of crimes to be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt. There have been innocent people incarcerated and guilty people freed, as a result of that standard. Should this case proceed to a trial the sufficiency of the evidence will be tested. In the meantime we, as members of this community are allowed to express our opinions of what is being done, based on the limited information we have, imho. It is just my personal belief that we should weigh the pros and the cons of that information. However, others may want to weigh just the pros and others just the cons. I respect their choice and hope they respect my right to voice my opinion, whether it agrees with theirs or not.

Exactly. :rolleyes:

[William Anthony]

Exactly. :rolleyes:

Thanks.

[FDInLaw]

Let's all do out part to keep all the threads open.

Snap out of it, friend. . . this is NOT the OJ forum! :punch: ( :D )

We can work together to keep this thread productive, no need to be so paranoid! :hat:

[William Anthony]

Snap out of it, friend. . . this is NOT the OJ forum! :punch: ( :D )

We can work together to keep this thread productive, no need to be so paranoid! :hat:

I am not paranoid, thank you madam.:) I realize the differences and the differences in the pushes.:)

[lorettalockhorn]

Thanks.

Not sure what the deal is, but I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one on the message board, therefore few of my posts will be long the lines of legalese in a state unfamiliar to me. My degree is sociology, years of my career was casework, and I have served as an advocate for rape and abuse victims as well as children for many years. That is my perspective, and if it bothers you, or you simply cannot understand my angle, I suggest you put me on ignore.

[William Anthony]

Not sure what the deal is, but I'm not an attorney, nor do I play one on the message board, therefore few of my posts will be long the lines of legalese in a state unfamiliar to me. My degree is sociology, years of my career was casework, and I have served as an advocate for rape and abuse victims as well as children for many years. That is my perspective, and if it bothers you, or you simply cannot understand my angle, I suggest you put me on ignore.

Nothing about you or your posts bother me in the least bit. I merely thanked you. I don't know why you see that as problem but so be it.

[FDInLaw]

I'm hoping the judge doesn't rule in the way that allows this to happen.

To me it's kind of like giving my child a good ole fashion back behind the barn whooping when he is 16 for something he did when he was too young to get a spanking. I wonder what authorities would do to me if that happened. :eek: I'd probably be charged with cruelty to children or worse. fep

I agree. I hope the PA is turned down here.

[Its just me]

He has to be. Otherwise this case is going to be held over the head of an innocent kid. CR is innocent. But that's another battle if Roca finds for the prosecution.

Let's just see him out of custody, out of Az and with Eryn. Then we can discuss who the real killer/s of Romans and Romero were. Because it wasn't an 8 year old boy./


The Judge is said "Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Roca says the prosecutors' motion will be considered during a status conference on Thursday in St. Johns."

The competency hearing is scheduled for Feb. 6.

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/ORDER%20SETTING%20COMPETENCY%20HEARING.pdf (http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/ORDER%20SETTING%20COMPETENCY%20HEARING.pdf)

If the judge rules today I feel it will be without prejudice and CR can be charged later. I don't know if "considered" means there will be an actual ruling or not. Kind of sounds like it. Hopefully Roca will stick to the orginial decision to wait until after the competency hearing to rule on dropping the charges.
I can only guess but the prosecutor's request to drop the charges for the count 1 against the Dad could be because it is a weak case. My thoughts are it is impossible for an 8 year old to ambush 2 grown men, go get help, call the dad that called 911 in the length of time that the evidence shows as the time frame. So I'm with you Joseph the child is innocent until I hear solid information to prove he is not. fep

[Its just me]

Sorry I don't have the exact link but it is somewhere in the one below. A coworker told LE that Romans appeared to be mad/agitated while driving the forklift at work. IIRC the coworker said it was "yesterday" but I can't say for sure if it was the day of the murders or the day before. My understanding is he was acting dangerous so coworkers complained and he was stopped. Not a quote and only from my memory. fep

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/

[William Anthony]

Every person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or should be.

[Its just me]

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/phoenixmetro/story/Judge-to-dismiss-murder-charge-against-St-Johns/cKqMn0YiDU260fjGKMLrYg.cspx

Judge to dismiss murder charge against St. Johns boy?
Reported by: Associated Press
Last Update: 1/27 8:44 am


In an order filed Monday, Apache County Superior Court Judge Michael Roca says the prosecutors' motion will be considered during a status conference on Thursday in St. Johns.

The boy faces two counts of premeditated murder in the Nov. 5 deaths of his father and another man. Prosecutors want Roca to drop the charge stemming from the death of the boy's father, 29-year-old Vincent Romero.

If Roca grants the motion, it would allow prosecutors to re-file the charge when the boy is older and try him as an adult.

Roca had said he wouldn't rule on the motion until the boy's competency is determined. The state Court of Appeals said last week that nothing precludes Roca from doing so.

I'm pretty sure it was the prosecution who went to the appeals court because Roca declined to rule on the motion. The judge was NOT wrong in waiting for the competency outcome but it just wasn’t the way the prosecution wanted it. An over zealous PA is dangerous...... which is not an opinion but a fact. fep

[Its just me]

Every person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or should be.

You are correct and they should be innocent in the eyes of the prosecutors and LE also. Statement (s) by LE says as soon as the child supposedly confessed all LE were called to stop the investigation. fep

[William Anthony]

You are correct and they should be innocent in the eyes of the prosecutors and LE also. Statement (s) by LE says as soon as the child supposedly confessed all LE were called to stop the investigation. fep

At the time LE has determined that there is probable cause to believe they have arrested the person, who committed the crime, and a judge has ruled that there was, the prosecution and LE move to produce evidence sufficient beyond a reasonable doubt that they have arrested the right person. That does not mean that they have forgotten the presumption of innocence as they are bound by law to turn over any exculpatory evidence.

[Its just me]

At the time LE has determined that there is probable cause to believe they have arrested the person, who committed the crime, and a judge has ruled that there was, the prosecution and LE move to produce evidence sufficient beyond a reasonable doubt that they have arrested the right person. That does not mean that they have forgotten the presumption of innocence as they are bound by law to turn over any exculpatory evidence.

And I guess that means stopping the investigation that could prove they didn't have the right man. FWIW I'm not interesting in going all the way to the Supreme Court with this. I've said all I'm going to say. fep

[William Anthony]

And I guess that means stopping the investigation that could prove they didn't have the right man. FWIW I'm not interesting in going all the way to the Supreme Court with this. I've said all I'm going to say. fep

I would go to the Supreme Court, if I firmly believed someone's Constitutional rights had been violated but I respect your desire. I do not know that as a fact LE said to stop the investigation, as I am sure that they will need to produce evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the child committed the murders. I think the investigation will continue until the case reaches some satisfactory legal resolution. However, a rush to judgment may be a defense.

[FDInLaw]

Prayers for the Judge today, that he will have wisdom and act on it. :rose:

[FDInLaw]

We have our own forum! :)

Thank you Deepwater!!! :seeya:

[William Anthony]

Prayers for the Judge today, that he will have wisdom and act on it. :rose:

Ditto.

[Its just me]

We have our own forum! :)

Thank you Deepwater!!! :seeya:

A Thank You Deepwater from me also. :seeya:

I'd like to post some LE reports. Maybe a new thread for them. :shrug: Don't want to rock the boat and make it sink. :) fep

[FDInLaw]

A Thank You Deepwater from me also. :seeya:

I'd like to post some LE reports. Maybe a new thread for them. :shrug: Don't want to rock the boat and make it sink. :) fep A thread for LE reports / legal documents would be great! I would suggest making it "no discussion." This helps keep it an easy read. MOO

:read: threads are good! :seeya:

[Its just me]

Thanks FDInLaw.

Here is a news link from earlier today.

http://www.azfamily.com/video/localnews-index.html?nvid=326550

[FDInLaw]

Thanks FDInLaw.

Here is a news link from earlier today.

http://www.azfamily.com/video/localnews-index.html?nvid=326550
Thank you for the link! Just posted it on the "News Links" thread as well.

"Something smells badly". . . ITA!!!

[lorettalockhorn]

I would go to the Supreme Court, if I firmly believed someone's Constitutional rights had been violated but I respect your desire. I do not know that as a fact LE said to stop the investigation, as I am sure that they will need to produce evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the child committed the murders. I think the investigation will continue until the case reaches some satisfactory legal resolution. However, a rush to judgment may be a defense.

See page 10; Womack's narrative:

...While speaking with Jason Landreneaux, Sergeant Scruggs and Deputy Soderquist came to the door and asked me to step outside. They advised me Vincent Romero's son had confessed to killing his father (Vincent) and Tim. They told me to shut down the interview and report back to the crime scene...

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/womack.pdf

Personally, I would like to know more about the former Army Ranger, Amos Thinn. In fact, I would like to see a timeline and whereabouts of the family, friends, enemies, frenemies involved here, but especially the people that these two men either couldn't get along with or who were literally and figuratively screwing around with and on. The investigation was incomplete.

[FDInLaw]

Waiting for news. . . .

[William Anthony]

See page 10; Womack's narrative:

...While speaking with Jason Landreneaux, Sergeant Scruggs and Deputy Soderquist came to the door and asked me to step outside. They advised me Vincent Romero's son had confessed to killing his father (Vincent) and Tim. They told me to shut down the interview and report back to the crime scene...

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/womack.pdf

Personally, I would like to know more about the former Army Ranger, Amos Thinn. In fact, I would like to see a timeline and whereabouts of the family, friends, enemies, frenemies involved here, but especially the people that these two men either couldn't get along with or who were literally and figuratively screwing around with and on. The investigation was incomplete.

They told me to shut down the interview and report back to the crime scene... I am not trying to start an argument but that is substantially different than stop the investigation. I think the focus of the investigation at that point was the crime scene. I believe the investigation is ongoing and I am not sure whether or not the child is the sole focus. That is all I am saying.

[FDInLaw]

http://www.kpho.com/news/18593800/detail.html

No news to be had. . .everything on hold.

[William Anthony]

http://www.kpho.com/news/18593800/detail.html

No news to be had. . .everything on hold.

A foreseeable and natural consequence of a judge that is acting in the best interest of the child and society, imho.

[lorettalockhorn]

They told me to shut down the interview and report back to the crime scene... I am not trying to start an argument but that is substantially different than stop the investigation. I think the focus of the investigation at that point was the crime scene. I believe the investigation is ongoing and I am not sure whether or not the child is the sole focus. That is all I am saying.

Oh okay. Maybe Womack will testify as to what the difference is between the terms "shut down" and "stop". Maybe the interviews with some of the people that these men couldn't get along with are out there and simply haven't surfaced.

[lorettalockhorn]

http://www.kpho.com/news/18593800/detail.html

No news to be had. . .everything on hold.

...The boy's legal team said the postponement was in the best interest of their client, but declined to elaborate on why the hearing was reset for Feb. 5...

Sounds promising. Thanks for posting!

[William Anthony]

Oh okay. Maybe Womack will testify as to what the difference is between the terms "shut down" and "stop". Maybe the interviews with some of the people that these men couldn't get along with are out there and simply haven't surfaced.

I don't know but I do know that there is a difference between interview and investigation, as an interview is simply part of an investigation, imho.

[FDInLaw]

Oh okay. Maybe Womack will testify as to what the difference is between the terms "shut down" and "stop". Maybe the interviews with some of the people that these men couldn't get along with are out there and simply haven't surfaced.

I don't know but I do know that there is a difference between interview and investigation, as an interview is simply part of an investigation, imho.

Is this the first time you two have posted together? This is going to fun lol. :D

[lorettalockhorn]

I have stated my position on the case. I am torn and remain so as I realize that the child and society need to be protected.

I do not take issue. I question some of the things that are being said. If that is an inordinate amount in your opinion, maybe, it is because some of the things being said are just not accurate. I do have a tendency to pay attention to detail, which has served me well and I hope it will in the rest of my life's works, thank you. Let us take this conversation for example, which began between another poster and me. At some point for some reason you decided to join the discussion, which is your right as a member of this community to the best of my understanding. In so doing, you relied on what the other poster said. I questioned that, because I thought it premature to close an "investigation." You then wanted to defend the other poster, who graciously supplied a link as to the exact comment from that information. I then saw the difference in what the poster said and what you said in relying and defending that poster. You seem to want to pick an argument with me for some reason. I cannot help it nor will I change my tendency to strive for accuracy. Personally, I feel that accurate posts help to inform the community and do not leave posters with the wrong impression. If rude and uncivil argument is your desire, you will not find it with me. We all make mistakes and I will say that I stand corrected, if necessary.

I beg your pardon; I joined this forum/thread by invitation, and immediately began reading outside sources, having not kept up since shortly after news of the story broke. Why you would presume to think or know that I relied on other posters' information is beyond me. Are you psychic? Whatever; you are inaccurate. Don't see what business or importance it is to you where I get my information, but I imagine most of it is from the same sources as yours. I will not apologize for the fact that my perspective is different from yours.

I don't want to pick an argument with you. Nor would I need to. I get the feeling that you would argue with yourself if need be.

Please refrain from slagging on when and where and what I post unless the information is untrue, or give me infractions or whatever it is you moderators do. You're a moderator, right? And that's why you insist on guiding the thread?

[FDInLaw]

Ouch. . . come on you two. . . we just got this forum! :(

[lorettalockhorn]

Ouch. . . come on you two. . . we just got this forum! :(

Yeah. I really should quit dumping on other posters' well meant and earnest comments.

At any rate, I think Womack's statement is a fairly good indicator that very early on in the investigation, most time and effort was spent in building the case against CR.

Still wondering, is there any information about the friends, enemies and frenemies of Romero and Romans that I haven't found? Any interviews of Amos Thinn, for example?

[William Anthony]

Ouch. . . come on you two. . . we just got this forum! :(

I foresaw this and that is why I made the earlier post about keeping the thread open.

http://ncthakur.itgo.com/chand3a.htm

“The three major aspects of criminal investigation are (1) to identify the criminal, (2) to locate and apprehend him (3) and to prove his guilt in the court. During the course of investigation an investigator depends on three major tools available to him which are instrumentation, information and, interview and interrogation. Instrumentation helps him to identify or eliminate a suspect by the use of scientific technology thereby analyzing the collected physical evidences whereas the information is transformed”

I am completely interested in keeping this thread open and will allow those who want to be uncivilly argumentative to do so alone.

[William Anthony]

I have said that a rush to judgment may be a defense, if it can be shown.

[FDInLaw]

Now that you two have officially met, let's get on with discussing the case. Any idea as to what is going on with the hearings??? What do you expect the Judge to do next???

[William Anthony]

Now that you two have officially met, let's get on with discussing the case. Any idea as to what is going on with the hearings??? What do you expect the Judge to do next???

I think that the judge will await the competency evaluation and, if there is an agreement between both experts, he will have the child evaluated for the 240 days and then issue his ruling based on that. However, if there are conflicting expert reports, I do not know what he is likely to do. My feeling is that he will exercise extreme caution in deciding whether the child will be tried as an adult as to the murder of his father.

[FDInLaw]

Yeah. I really should quit dumping on other posters' well meant and earnest comments.

At any rate, I think Womack's statement is a fairly good indicator that very early on in the investigation, most time and effort was spent in building the case against CR.

Still wondering, is there any information about the friends, enemies and frenemies of Romero and Romans that I haven't found? Any interviews of Amos Thinn, for example?

I invited you, because few jump into a new case with the tenacity that you do. It's good to have you here, my old friend. *smooch*

[FDInLaw]

I think that the judge will await the competency evaluation and, if there is an agreement between both experts, he will have the child evaluated for the 240 days and then issue his ruling based on that. However, if there are conflicting expert reports, I do not know what he is likely to do. My feeling is that he will exercise extreme caution in deciding whether the child will be tried as an adult as to the murder of his father.

I was confused as to why anything was being done before the competency hearing, guess I'm not surprised by today's lack of an outcome but still, I had hopes for some news.

[FDInLaw]

The only good things I can say about this is that Wood has asked for the adjournment. However, CR gets to spend more time in custody.

I've just been listening to the audio of the 'confession'. Q: did you shoot your father? A: i think so. CR keeps telling her about the car, the fact that there were 'others' in the house so he took the gun to protect himself in case 'they' came back. Never once does she question him about this.
Q: how many times did you shoot your father? A: twice.
He was shot 4 times.

Q: how many times did you shoot Tim?

A: 'the gun' went off twice.

Romans was shot 6 times.

CR tells her he saw Romans shaking and cowering. Do you really believe an adult male would just stand there shaking and cowering rather than at least attempt to take the gun off an 8 year old child?
I've asked before but no-one could help. I'm trying to track down a transcript of the 'confession'. If someone can help I'd appreciate it.Excellent questions! I don't understand why he was not questioned further.

[lorettalockhorn]

The only good things I can say about this is that Wood has asked for the adjournment. However, CR gets to spend more time in custody.

I've just been listening to the audio of the 'confession'. Q: did you shoot your father? A: i think so. CR keeps telling her about the car, the fact that there were 'others' in the house so he took the gun to protect himself in case 'they' came back. Never once does she question him about this.

Q: how many times did you shoot your father? A: twice.
He was shot 4 times.

Q: how many times did you shoot Tim?

A: 'the gun' went off twice.

Romans was shot 6 times.

CR tells her he saw Romans shaking and cowering. Do you really believe an adult male would just stand there shaking and cowering rather than at least attempt to take the gun off an 8 year old child?

I've asked before but no-one could help. I'm trying to track down a transcript of the 'confession'. If someone can help I'd appreciate it.

Is this what you're looking for?

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/InterviewDVDChristian.pdf

[lorettalockhorn]

I was confused as to why anything was being done before the competency hearing, guess I'm not surprised by today's lack of an outcome but still, I had hopes for some news.

I was a little befuddled too; looks like we're on hold until Feb. Damn that gag order!

[lorettalockhorn]

I invited you, because few jump into a new case with the tenacity that you do. It's good to have you here, my old friend. *smooch*

hehehe My views are more tenacious than my memory. Glad you invited me, because even though I had heard that there was a gag order, somehow I hadn't realized that so many interviews weren't out there, and once I caught up on reading the transcripts, I was appalled that the investigation may have come to a halt once CR "confessed".

[FDInLaw]

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/northernarizona/story/Source-AZ-boy-accused-of-killing-2-released-from/cKqMn0YiDU260fjGKMLrYg.cspx

[lorettalockhorn]

Glad to hear that he's out of juvie (how did he know about the horrors of juvie?), even for a short while. Does he still have Nellie? A little pet therapy goes a long way!

Looks like most of the comments so far are positive and supportive.

[FDInLaw]

Doing a happy dance here. . . glad the little guy hs been released to him Mom!


Hope that we will soon hear more details about the case.

[Its just me]

Doing a happy dance here. . . glad the little guy hs been released to him Mom!


Hope that we will soon hear more details about the case.

Don't know what went on behind those closed doors but it was "something". I don't know what I expected today but it wasn't this…OH me of little faith...lot of prayers by many for this little guy and the Judge. I am doing a happy dance with you. Waiting to hear if it's just a short visit and what is next. I'm praying for some professional counseling and out of lockup. fep

[Its just me]

We need an icon with a long nose. Not knowing the details of the release is hurting my brain. The only thing I think most likely didn't happen....The PA didn't request the release. My somewhat likely possibilities...A plea deal or strong evidence the child is innocent. The most likely possibility is I don't know poop. :eek: fep

[Its just me]

If I head the reporter correct CR has been determined incompetent by both experts. Latest news. fep

http://www.azfamily.com/video/localnews-index.html?nvid=326794

[sharlock]

We need an icon with a long nose. Not knowing the details of the release is hurting my brain. The only thing I think most likely didn't happen....The PA didn't request the release. My somewhat likely possibilities...A plea deal or strong evidence the child is innocent. The most likely possibility is I don't know poop. :eek: fep
http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w266/kathys_place2000/longnose.gif
Here you go IJM. to use it just put the link below into the reply you are posting and it will show up as the image. So I could give you the link without it turning into the pic I left a space between the first two characters. Just leave the space out and it will work properly.
[ IMG]http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w266/kathys_place2000/longnose.gif[/IMG]

[Its just me]

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w266/kathys_place2000/longnose.gif
Here you go IJM. to use it just put the link below into the reply you are posting and it will show up as the image. So I could give you the link without it turning into the pic I left a space between the first two characters. Just leave the space out and it will work properly.
[ IMG]http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w266/kathys_place2000/longnose.gif[/IMG]

Hahahaha Too too funny. Thanks Sharlock.

[William Anthony]

Just that accuracy thing with me, again. The finding of incompetency does not end the case. There will be a 240 day period (8 months) to determine, whether of not there is a substantial possibility that the child can be restored to competency. If at the end of that time, the child is still incompetent, then there would be a dismissal of the charges, according to my understanding. This is what the prosecution meant, imho, when he said there was a time limit to refile the charges against the child if tried as a juvenile and no time limit to refile, if the child is tried as an adult.

"Pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-291.08(D) (2007), the juvenile court would be required to dismiss both counts of the petition with prejudice should it find that C.R. "is incompetent and there is not a substantial probability that [he] will be restored to competency within two hundred forty days . . .

[Its just me]

Where did CR go when he got off the bus? It seems to consume these coppers in the 'interview' but..he says he was aimlessly wandering the streets (my words, not his). I figure he was up to something he was told not to do or with someone he was told not to hang out with. This slightly older 'Cage' would probably fit the bill.

CR says he was walking up the street, saw a car driving pretty fast. A small white car with black wheel rims. He mentions this all the way through. Over and over. Guess what? Ignored by Avila and Neckel.

At the start he says he saw someone come out of the house, then he changes and says he saw no-one. By the time he said that, I'm reckoning the kid would have been reeling. He says the door on the pickup was open; it would be 'if they were chasing Tim in the car and he had to get out fast.'

Did he come in the front door or the back door? He says the front door because the back was always locked. But earlier he says he went in the house, threw his back pack down, and doesn't mention anything about seeing Romans.

All the way through he talks about 'they', the bad people in the neighbourhood. St. John's has, apparently, the 2nd highest rate of meth use in Az.
Romero's sister was convicted of meth use. I've lost the link to that. It was in Cirosomething County, I can't remember the name. Romero also had a conviction. I'll have to look it up.
Why the back door locked and I reckon I'm right about this - a double bolt or a deadlock. Could be because it was a bad neighbourhood. Or maybe a safe place to produce or distribute meth?

I'm having difficulty logging on here.

Joseph the only information I have on both experts saying CR is incompetent is the news link. I finally got logged on and I'm scared to review any links before I post.
When LE went to the town where Romans was from to talk to his family they first went to the local LE...I'm pretty sure it is written in the LE report that the local LE told that Romans has a history of being a drug dealer. I'll see if I can find the LE report and get some up with links so it's easy to to find them.
The LE went to Romans mothers home. In the officers report (who went with Rodriquez) he noted that he brought attention to Rodriquez that there was a white car. The officer stated he took a picture with his phone. IIRC. I can't remember when CR first told about the white car...could have been when Avila talked to him the first night because it's clear the LE knew when they went to Romans house. I'm not pointing a finger at anyone...just posting what LE reported by "memory" .
Romans mother was very upset and asked if she could call Romans wife. She did and Rodriquez also spoke with her. The officer with Rodriquez reported it sounded as the wife was screaming while talking to Rodriquez and reported this is when Rodriquez was told about the wife talking to Romans right before he was murdered. As I said I'm not pointing fingers but I've live through a door bell rings and being told of a loved one's death and think it's somewhat strange for the wife to be telling this so soon but I know we are all different.
Can't remember the name of the friend where the men worked... but he told LE Romans kept two guns in his truck. One was kept behind the seat which is not reported being taken by LE.
IIRC during the interview CR said the neighbor across the street was bad people. I feel sure Neckel knew the neighborhood well because she lived in sight of the crime scene. I think she stated this more than one time...possibly when she was questioned by Brewer and in her written report she mentions seeing her husband drive up to their house while she was at the scene. Kind of an odd statement to put in a murder investigation report.


I want to "read" all the so called confession. My humble opinion is CR was coached into admitting something I don't think he did. CR would have to be a smart kid to ask "Why would I shoot Tim" if he had shot Tim. An 8 year old doesn't have the mentality to play word games with LE. "Fact".

fep

[William Anthony]

Why didn't he ask, why would I shoot my father? There are plenty of unanswered questions about this case. I find it odd that the child remembered with such specificness that he walked for about an hour and a half and cried for about thirty minutes, when the neighbors said they heard shots around 5 but then the boy says he may have shot at the car, which sped past him as he was walking home, which would mean that the car was still around a half and hour later. I still believe the child is innocent at this stage and that he knows more than what he is saying.

[Its just me]

Go down to the bottom of the page and you go can watch a video. It said CR will be out for at least a week. fep

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/northernarizona/story/Source-AZ-boy-accused-of-killing-2-released-from/cKqMn0YiDU260fjGKMLrYg.cspx?p=Comments

[Its just me]

Why didn't he ask, why would I shoot my father? There are plenty of unanswered questions about this case. I find it odd that the child remembered with such specificness that he walked for about an hour and a half and cried for about thirty minutes, when the neighbors said they heard shots around 5 but then the boy says he may have shot at the car, which sped past him as he was walking home, which would mean that the car was still around a half and hour later. I still believe the child is innocent at this stage and that he knows more than what he is saying.

He started to say more about his dad but was cut offp49. Avila. 'How about if we had somebody that told us you might've shot him?"CR: 'Shot who?'A: 'Your Dad and Tim'.N: 'An accident.'A: 'An accident yeah'.CR: 'Shoot my dad? You can't...'I believe if you study the time line you will see that CR crying for 30 minutes is simply impossible.

[Its just me]

Come on people. He was 8 years old. Read the 'confession'. I could get my dog to confess. CR's in there alone. No one with him or for him.

Read it. It stinks. There are serious questions that need to be asked about the 'investigating officers'. About the whole thing.

I believe this report was filed by a LE officer named Jones. This is a detailed report.

here is a snip of what was said when he and Rodriques was coming back from notifying Romans family and well before CR was interviewed on the video. When Romans wife was called she told about her last phone call with Romans. And they claim CR was not a suspect. fep

We left the area and began driving back to St. Johns. While driving, we discussed the possibilities this information provided, which consisted of two lines of thought: 1) Christian Romero was involved directly in the crime, or 2) Christian Romero was in the home at the time of the crime, and had either witnessed it or come upon the suspect(s) who may have threatened him into not telling what he knew.



http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/jones%20BO.pdf (http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/jones%20BO.pdf)

[William Anthony]

He started to say more about his dad but was cut offp49. Avila. 'How about if we had somebody that told us you might've shot him?"CR: 'Shot who?'A: 'Your Dad and Tim'.N: 'An accident.'A: 'An accident yeah'.CR: 'Shoot my dad? You can't...'I believe if you study the time line you will see that CR crying for 30 minutes is simply impossible.

I agree with there being a problem in the time line and the crying for thirty minutes. If we believe that there is this problem, then there is a problem with the time that the child arrived home and what he did when he arrived home.

[FDInLaw]

Still reading and catching up. Just wanted to post that the boy's mom posted on this myspace page that the boy is with her but they are not sure what is next.

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=435515258

[FDInLaw]

I agree with there being a problem in the time line and the crying for thirty minutes. If we believe that there is this problem, then there is a problem with the time that the child arrived home and what he did when he arrived home.
I don't tend to think in literal terms, so this might be a stretch for some, but could “thirty minutes” be interpreted as what seemed like a long time? Can we really trust a young child, upon a horrific discovery, to be an accurate judge of time? Just five minuted next to his Dad might have felt like an eternity. I wonder if there was any physical evidence that he did sit next to his dad. With blood everywhere you would think there would be. JMO

[William Anthony]

I don't tend to think in literal terms, so this might be a stretch for some, but could “thirty minutes” be interpreted as what seemed like a long time? Can we really trust a young child, upon a horrific discovery, to be an accurate judge of time? Just five minuted next to his Dad might have felt like an eternity. I wonder if there was any physical evidence that he did sit next to his dad. With blood everywhere you would think there would be. JMO

Thank you. I think you have hit upon what I was saying. The child's statement was far too specific, as if rehearsed. However, when questioned by LE, which admittedly contained some lies, the child's answers showed some problems with his first story. I might be incorrect but there seemed to be a problem with the story about the white car other than what I have already suggested. It may have been that the car could not have passed by the boy, or that he couldn't have seen the car. So, where did the idea of the white car come from? I will check the transcript again. I think either the boy looked at the clock when he came home or that story is rehearsed. Do you know where Ms. Romero was at 4:30?

[Its just me]

I don't tend to think in literal terms, so this might be a stretch for some, but could “thirty minutes” be interpreted as what seemed like a long time? Can we really trust a young child, upon a horrific discovery, to be an accurate judge of time? Just five minuted next to his Dad might have felt like an eternity. I wonder if there was any physical evidence that he did sit next to his dad. With blood everywhere you would think there would be. JMO

Anyone who have ever traveled with an 8 year old knows most don't have much judgement of time.
Are we there yet?
No it's about 30 more minutes.
5 minutes later....Are we there yet?

All I remember about the child's clothes IIRC when the LE officer wrote the report about picking them up... Neckel or Avila stated the pants were dirty. I'm feel if there had been blood it would have been told by now.
I think it was the PA who released the video....I read where the Judge stated if the child's photo was released to the public again somebody would/could go to jail or something very similar. I think I can find links if someone needs them. Would do it now but it takes a lot of time I really don't have to spare. fep

[William Anthony]

That is my point but the child's testimony was pretty specific. He said he walked for an hour and a half and, afterward, cried for 30 minutes. This is why I believe that testimony was rehearsed. The question is, if it was rehearsed, why. What was going on at or about 4:30?

[Its just me]

That is my point but the child's testimony was pretty specific. He said he walked for an hour and a half and, afterward, cried for 30 minutes. This is why I believe that testimony was rehearsed. The question is, if it was rehearsed, why. What was going on at or about 4:30?

I'm searching for the stepmom's where abouts around 4:30. There is a video of her at a store buying donuts and she went to the same store a second time to buy something else but for some reason that is not on video...but she produced a receipt later that shows items purchased. I'm thinking this is in Neckel's reports...not got there yet. She then went to Napa and I believe she actually spoke to the EMS crew close to or at the time they got the call.

I did find this in Avila report when she first spoke with the stepmom that evening. The 22.250 is a 22 rifle but I've only seen where the Chipmunk was taken my LE. A friend from where the men worked also states there was a 22 that belonged to the stepmom. I know very little about the different kinds of guns. fep


snip
I asked Tiffany if they kept any guns in the house. She said yes. They were either under the bed in her room or just in the room. Tiffany said they hunted but kept the guns unloaded. She said they a 30.06, a 22.250, a 7mm ought 8 and a chipmunk gun that belonged to Christian. She said it was Vincent's and he gave it to Christian.
Tiffany said she thought Tim kept a handgun in his vehicle. She said Tim had a wife and kids. Tiffany said Tim and Vincent got home from work everyday between 4:45 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/avila.pdf


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22-250_Remington

[William Anthony]

I'm searching for the stepmom's where abouts around 4:30. There is a video of her at a store buying donuts and she went to the same store a second time to buy something else but for some reason that is not on video...but she produced a receipt later that shows items purchased. I'm thinking this is in Neckel's reports...not got there yet. She then went to Napa and I believe she actually spoke to the EMS crew close to or at the time they got the call.

I did find this in Avila report when she first spoke with the stepmom that evening. The 22.250 is a 22 rifle but I've only seen where the Chipmunk was taken my LE. A friend from where the men worked also states there was a 22 that belonged to the stepmom. I know very little about the different kinds of guns. fep


snip
I asked Tiffany if they kept any guns in the house. She said yes. They were either under the bed in her room or just in the room. Tiffany said they hunted but kept the guns unloaded. She said they a 30.06, a 22.250, a 7mm ought 8 and a chipmunk gun that belonged to Christian. She said it was Vincent's and he gave it to Christian.
Tiffany said she thought Tim kept a handgun in his vehicle. She said Tim had a wife and kids. Tiffany said Tim and Vincent got home from work everyday between 4:45 p.m. and 5:00 p.m.

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/avila.pdf


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22-250_Remington

Thank you and I have not opened your link yet, because I am having similar difficulties to those you are having. There is no reason to suspect that the men got home any earlier than usual, which, would mean that, if the child's time line is to be believed, he was there when the men got home. However, as the child said that he walked around for a hour and a half and no one was home, he has implicated himself. I can think of reasons why the child would have wanted to have been placed at the crime scene at 4:30 but that would not square with the time the neighbors heard the shots. As I recall, the video had been turned off on the time of the stepmother's second trip. However, she had the receipt. How was it that she spoke to the EMS, meaning was she there or did they see her and told her, if you know? There are so many unanswered questions about this case. I suppose it is entirely possible that the stepmother thought she would be suspected and made sure she kept the receipt. It is that anal retentive thing of mine. When something does not seem right to me, I want to see what is wrong or satisfy myself that nothing is.

[William Anthony]

The 4:45 arrival home time is more in line with the time of the murders or, if you will, the time the shots were heard by the neighbors. I don't want to think about blood on the boys clothes at this point. This time line thing is bothering me.

[FDInLaw]

Reading through the link Loretta posted yesterday. The boy did a bunch of walking (so he states). Do we know if ample questioning of the neighbors was done? Was the kid normally seen walking around the neighborhood after school?

The time line/interview is bothering me too. . .



http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/InterviewDVDChristian.pdf

[William Anthony]

Reading through the link Loretta posted yesterday. The boy did a bunch of walking (so he states). Do we know if ample questioning of the neighbors was done? Was the kid normally seen walking around the neighborhood after school?

The time line/interview is bothering me too. . .



http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/InterviewDVDChristian.pdf

This is why I do not think the investigation has been closed. I do understand everyone's emotional reactions to this case. I think that Rocca was not given the credit he/she deserved. I am afraid that LE may not be given that either. I will tell you what I am thinking in a pm, if acceptable to you as we do not know who reads these posts.

[Its just me]

In the link I provide above Avila states that CR said he waved at Cage while walking and that Cage lived in the house with 5 dogs and a big red truck. CR didn't know if Cage saw him but it could be pretty easy to see what Cage had to say. imhoo

Same link Avila reports that step mom said VR called her at 4:27 on his way home from work and that her dad had spoke to him approx 15 minute later (on phone)
Also the Stepmom said CR called her at 5:12 and did not reach her and called again at 5:14 and told her his Dad was dead.

fep

[FDInLaw]

This is why I do not think the investigation has been closed. I do understand everyone's emotional reactions to this case. I think that Rocca was not given the credit he/she deserved. I am afraid that LE may not be given that either. I will tell you what I am thinking in a pm, if acceptable to you as we do not know who reads these posts.

Any sincere and honest input is welcome here, regardless of view, as far as I'm concerned. If you feel it necessary, I'll gladly read your thoughts via PM.

I still feel very conflicted over this case. I hope you are right, and an active investigation is still underway.

[FDInLaw]

http://multimedia.boston.com/pub/m/21814761/9_year_old_accused_killer_released_for_a_week.htm? pageid=14155&seek=77.399

[lorettalockhorn]

Thanks for the links about CR's furlough. Still have some catching up to do, but I'm afraid none of what I have left to read will have anything to do about the investigation that was continued after the so-called confession. Maybe it's out there and I just can't find it. (Still hate the gag order!)

Agree with y'all who think that CR's perception of time wouldn't be very evolved. Heck, I know plenty of adults who have a poorly developed inner clock. I can understand him thinking that the few minutes available in the timeline (that he was lying on the floor next to Dad) might have been thirty, and don't really have a problem with that. What does bother me, is what he was doing between getting off the bus and entering the home.

Speaking of the home, what could have been the reasoning behind locking the back door and leaving the front door unlocked? Was Nellie supposed to fend off intruders from her cage? (I would have fled based on the condition of the sty. It bothers me that this child lived in such conditions.)

Thanks too for the information about Tiffany's whereabouts that afternoon. Interesting. I wonder about the receipts too. I normally wouldn't keep one unless I had used a credit card, and maybe she did. Or maybe she had thrown it away and was able to retrieve it.

Don't know if any of y'all have read much about the murders in blogs. I detest reading anything where there are no links to back up what people seem to be willing to swear on their Mama's graves about, but I've read in several that Romero and/or Roman both had involvement with drugs, and that Tim had been arrested before. Haven't found any evidence other than traffic tickets. Anyone? Found articles quoting Tanya speaking of Tim's devotion to his family, but she doesn't remark about the murder investigation. Is she in denial about Tim's philandering?

I'm at a loss as to what CR's motive could have been to do these crimes. Add that to the other facts of the case, and that it just seems physically impossible for him to have carried out such a barrage, and it seems like the only fair shake he's had are the visits with her mother away from juvenile hall.

Partly because I don't believe that CR committed these crimes, I find it appalling that The State would allow for him to be detained until age eighteen or until rehabilitation, and then tried for the crimes. When Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden were tried in Arkansas for killing five students in Jonesboro; a crime which was clearly premeditated, and for which they were clearly guilty, I believe they served only seven and nine years respectively. (Arkansas laws have since changed.) At any rate, their crime is why I have such a hard time understanding the harshness of these Arizona prosecutors.

Sorry for the novel. Thanks again!

[William Anthony]

Just something to think about. If the child's time line is off and the victims did arrive at their usual time, then the child would not have gotten home until nearly 5, the time the neighbors heard the shots. That would mean that he could not possibly have done all the things he said he did before calling the neighbors and he would have walked the neighborhood longer than he estimated and lay down by his father much much shorter than he estimated. His story about arriving at 4:30 and crying for 30 minutes is more in line with the time the neighbors heard the shot. If the story was rehearsed and those time implanted in his mind, then he could have only been the shooter, unless for some yet unexplained reason the victims came home early or Ms. Romero is mistaken as to the time of their usual arrival. However, she was not at home on certain days of the week to know the time they arrived. By the time of his arrival at 4:30 and the arrival of the victims at 4:45, it makes it appear that the child was waiting.

Ms. Romans said she heard the child call her husband. Here in lies the problem. Either the child did it or he is covering for someone. That is why his specificness as to the times troubles me and I agree that an 8 year old's conception of time is distorted or could be distorted by someone.

[William Anthony]

Fortunately you are not the be all and end all on this case. You have your point of view and you're incorrect. I knew you'd come back to where you started, blaming CR.

CR's story was not rehearsed. CR was not lying in wait. CR did not murder 2 adult men, one of whom was his father.

By the way, 'specificness'? Is this a purely US term because I've never heard the word before in my life. 'Specificity', yes. 'Specificness'?

How much time have you spent in your life with 8 and 9 year old boys? Since your childhood? Since you had kids assuming you have them, and I'm guessing grandkids as well. Are you with them day in, day out, every day of your working life?

Why do you automatically assume Ms Romans is telling the absolute and accurate truth and not CR? Because I figure that if this ever comes to trial those phone calls are gonna be played in court.

The competency matter should have been handled long ago. No, I don't think good on Roca. He tried to get rid of it, passing it onto the higher court and they sent it straight back down to him. If he'd done what the higher court says he can do, then he could have ruled on the competency issue quite a while ago.

I've said pretty much all I can say at the moment. CR is out of custody. That's all that matters . I don't know how long for but I hope that finally common sense will be demonstrated and he can stay with Eryn. I'll be waiting for the next installment in court.

I understand the difference in an Australian education and and American one and I have commented on it previously. It appears there are many things that you have never heard of.

http://www.webster-dictionary.net/definition/specificness

There is no such word in the English language that I am aware of as "Grandkids". There are words called "Grandchild or Grandchildren".

You seem to want to make things personal as usual but I will give you an answer to the best of my ability as to how much time I spent around 8 year old children since I became a teenager-only that amount that has been required of me in situations throughout my lifetime. When I was a child, I acted as a child. When I became a man, I acted as a man. I have found this sound advice.

Your view of the information does not square with the information I have received in regard to Rocca. My understanding is that he refused to rule on any of the substantive matters in the case until after the competency evaluation and that he ordered it. It was the prosecution that took his decision to the appellate court.

[William Anthony]

Actually no. I've come back. William you keep going on about how the timeline bothers you and how CR couldn't be doing what he says he was doing.

All right. Give us your timeline of what you think happened. From when CR got off the bus. And no, I'm not interested in pseudo lawyer speech.

I'm asking you to back up what you're saying. Prove it. A detailed time line for what you believe CR was doing.

It's not too much to ask.

I do not know what pseudo lawyer speech is. Since I have has training in that area, I choose to use the jargon. I know you understand that, if you don't use it, you will loose it and a mind is a terrible thing to waste. I have never said that the child couldn't have been doing what he said he was doing. I am simply putting all the information we have received in context and questioning why the child answered with such specificity, if you like that word better. I do not have a time line since I was no where within a reasonable proximity at that time in order to give a credible estimate as to any time line. I have not said who is telling the truth. I said what Ms. Romans said and what she said she heard, followed by if that is true, IIRC. However, I think the phone records will tell whether she is being truthful or not, as to the time she was on the phone with her now murdered spouse.

[Its just me]

Actually no. I've come back. William you keep going on about how the timeline bothers you and how CR couldn't be doing what he says he was doing.

All right. Give us your timeline of what you think happened. From when CR got off the bus. And no, I'm not interested in pseudo lawyer speech.

I'm asking you to back up what you're saying. Prove it. A detailed time line for what you believe CR was doing.

It's not too much to ask.

Joseph this wasn't addressed to me but the time line is important imhoo and I want to share what is in the court "records".
I could not copy and past from the link so I typed Rodriquez's court testimony about the time line. IIRC this is on page 108-109 at the link below. Note in the actual transcript that Rodriquez went on to say that he "had Not" checked Tim's phone to see what time the call actually was made to his wife but it appears Rodriquez thinks Mrs. Romans is a credible witness. If she remembered what was going on surely she'd remember enough about the time to be within a few minutes. I don't have the link handy but this is in line with what time the neighbor reports hearing shots. It fits the story CR first told. He saw Tims truck a few houses down..sees a white car speeding away....he got home and found the bodies and went to get help. I don't think you can but an ounce of credibility in CR saying he cried for 30 minutes...his Dad was dead. According to Rodriquez there is a very short time line. It is much better to work with what was actually said in court than our imagination. What ya say. feppy

Q Were you able to determine from Tim’s wife approximately what time this conversation was taking place?
A She said that according to Tim, they had pulled up to the house, and Vincent had just gotten—gotten off of the vehicle.
Q. Was she able to give you a time?
A About 5:00 she said

Q. About what time did the 9-1-1 call come that dispatched you out to the Romero Residence?
A. Just -- just a little after 5:00, like 5:06. I don’t have the times right now, but it’s like 5:06, 5:07


http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/TRANSCRIPT%20OF%20DETAINED%20ADVISORY%20HEARING%20 NOV%202%202008_VOL2%20PARTA.pdf (http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/TRANSCRIPT%20OF%20DETAINED%20ADVISORY%20HEARING%20 NOV%202%202008_VOL2%20PARTA.pdf)

[FDInLaw]

Fortunately you are not the be all and end all on this case. You have your point of view and you're incorrect. I knew you'd come back to where you started, blaming CR.

CR's story was not rehearsed. CR was not lying in wait. CR did not murder 2 adult men, one of whom was his father.
By the way, 'specificness'? Is this a purely US term because I've never heard the word before in my life. 'Specificity', yes. 'Specificness'?

How much time have you spent in your life with 8 and 9 year old boys? Since your childhood? Since you had kids assuming you have them, and I'm guessing grandkids as well. Are you with them day in, day out, every day of your working life?

Why do you automatically assume Ms Romans is telling the absolute and accurate truth and not CR? Because I figure that if this ever comes to trial those phone calls are gonna be played in court.

The competency matter should have been handled long ago. No, I don't think good on Roca. He tried to get rid of it, passing it onto the higher court and they sent it straight back down to him. If he'd done what the higher court says he can do, then he could have ruled on the competency issue quite a while ago.

I've said pretty much all I can say at the moment. CR is out of custody. That's all that matters . I don't know how long for but I hope that finally common sense will be demonstrated and he can stay with Eryn. I'll be waiting for the next installment in court.

Maybe I'm missing something but, to my knowledge, no creditable witness saw what actually happened that fateful day. These statements are not fact. You may believe them strongly, but they have not been proven to be factual just yet. IMO you are coming at William a bit strong. So far, we do not have any posters that bash the boy like other boards.

[William Anthony]

I knew you'd wimp out. You have no idea how 8 and 9 year old kids act.

It's not personal. You don't know what you're talking about. I do.

Your timeline for what happened. You've been ignoring it for a while.
Come on. You believe CR murdered 2 adult men. And you do.

So your timeline. Tell us how you think the murders occurred.

PS 'Specificness'. Where the hell, in which American dictionary, does this word appear? Because it sure doesn't exist in an English dictionary.

To the contrary, I only go by the information received and question that. I have had some courses in developmental psychology but do not place much store in them as to how 8 year old children act or why, because they are just theories. I really am at a lost to understand how 8 year old children, who live in small town Arizona where the use of and ownership of guns may be a common experience. I do not have an adequate base of information to make a hypothesis that could withstand a scientific test.

The problem is that you do not know what I am talking about, although you think you do, imho.

I do not know how the murders occurred, other than two men were shot to death, which I think is the only thing any of us know for certain at this time.

I provided the link. Did they teach you about Daniel Webster when you were in school in Australia? Did you get the word grandkids as part of your Australian education?

[William Anthony]

If we go with the response and post above that, placing the utmost credibility in the child's time line, we have the child possibly seeing the car with the people that killed the victims around 4:30. However, we have Ms. Romans, saying that she was on the phone with her murdered spouse, nearly a half an hour later. We are all entitled to speculate on what this means. The one thing for sure is that Mr. Romans could not have been dead at the time that his wife was talking to him on the phone. Who killed him afterward is a horse of a different color, imho. If we do not place that degree of credibility in the child's time line, then we have the child, calling Mr. Romans into the house, according to Ms. Romans around 5 and then being murdered. Who murdered the men is a question that should be considered and until it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt the child carries the presumption of innocence.

[FDInLaw]

If we go with the response and post above that, placing the utmost credibility in the child's time line, we have the child possibly seeing the car with the people that killed the victims around 4:30. However, we have Ms. Romans, saying that she was on the phone with her murdered spouse, nearly a half an hour later. We are all entitled to speculate on what this means. The one thing for sure is that Mr. Romans could not have been dead at the time that his wife was talking to him on the phone. Who killed him afterward is a horse of a different color, imho. If we do not place that degree of credibility in the child's time line, then we have the child, calling Mr. Romans into the house, according to Ms. Romans around 5 and then being murdered. Who murdered the men is a question that should be considered and until it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt the child carries the presumption of innocence. What do the phone records show??? Do we know?

[William Anthony]

What do the phone records show??? Do we know?

We can only go by the information that we have. Some can choose to believe some of it and ignore others. I tend to evaluate all of it and, if there is something that seems to be in conflict, I question it without saying who is telling the truth. The thing that concerns me is that Ms. Romans said she heard the child call her husband into the house. I am not saying the child pulled the trigger. I am saying that, if what she said is true, her husband was alive at the time the child was in the house.

[FDInLaw]

We can only go by the information that we have. Some can choose to believe some of it and ignore others. I tend to evaluate all of it and, if there is something that seems to be in conflict, I question it without saying who is telling the truth. The thing that concerns me is that Ms. Romans said she heard the child call her husband into the house. I am not saying the child pulled the trigger. I am saying that, if what she said is true, her husband was alive at the time the child was in the house.

The phone records would be a valuable source to help establish the actual time line. Gonna dig. . .


(Where is Loretta??? She is better at this!)

[William Anthony]

The phone records would be a valuable source to help establish the actual time line. Gonna dig. . .


(Where is Loretta??? She is better at this!)

Thanks. Another thing that concerns me is that the child said he shot both men to keep them from suffering. Did anyone teach this child to dial 911? Something is very amiss and I don't think we shall ever have all the answers.

[William Anthony]

Here I go with that anal retentive thing, again. :)

"8 yr old charged with Double Homicide The Murder of Vincent Romero & Timothy Romans" Underline added for emphasis. :)

[William Anthony]

It's my job. You seem to have forgotten all your snide remarks. And there have been many.

The Merriam Dictionary. I'll look for 'specificness'.

It is your job to actively seek out the companionship of 8 year old children? I am not being snide. Just seeking clarification. I am not interested in getting into a tit for tat situation with you. I have conducted myself in a proper and respectful manner when posting on this thread, even though I have been misunderstood. You have expressed how you feel about me and I truly care about that as much as I care about how much money you earn, which is nothing (meaning the amount of care I have about your feelings about me).

I suggest that you stop the uncivil attacking posts and you have requested this to become a forum. I think that will allow you to open a thread to express your support for the child and I think that there will be many posters, who will post on that thread. I think that there are enough posters here that want to consider the information about the murders of Mr. Romero and Romans, of which the child has been accused. I will not take offense at your speculations or feelings, if you will. I ask that you take none at my posts expressing my concerns about the information. I think this is the adult not juvenile way to act. Thanks and let's get back to relevant postings.

[Its just me]

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/TRANSCRIPT%20OF%20PREADJUDICATION%20HEARING%20NOV% 2019%202008.pdf


Here is a link to the court addressing what can be released to the public. I only did a quick read and it appears it's possible to get information considered public information concerning this case. If this is true maybe someone could request all available information and make it available for us to read. fep

[Its just me]

FWIW....I was taught to get the big ole log out of my own eye before trying to get a splinter out of my neighbors.....it looks as if we "ALL" "everyone" will practice this things would run smoother. Just my opinion but I think it's a dang good one. fep

[Its just me]

I've been looking for information from the autopsy. This is all I've found so far. A copy of the actual autopsy would be great as it would describe the path of the bullet. I've read somewhere ?? that the path of Roman's chest wounds were downward but I can only credit that as rumor right now. Below it states Romans' was shot in the chest twice but it doesn't say in what position he was found. on back or face down. I've read somewhere face down but I don't know. To me it would be important. It could mean coming out of the house or going into the house because according to LE his head was against the door. There is a crime scene photo showing 100 dollar bills and it looks as if the bills are positioned on a person laying down on his back wearing blue jeans. (I'll look for the link) Just sharing. I do think Romero being shot from the top of the stairs and the bottom is interesting. fep

The Pima County Medical Examiner’s Office has released the autopsy reports for two men allegedly shot and killed the by an 8-year-old boy.

Vincent Romero is the child’s father and Tim Romans was a man renting a room at their home.

Romero’s autopsy report reveals he was shot four times.

A bullet grazed his left arm, and penetrated the top of his head, the left side of his head, and the right side of his upper back.

Two of those gunshot wounds caught the eye of Yavapai County’s Medical Examiner Philip Keen.

Keen is Arizona’s senior forensic pathologist.

He said the shape of the wound on Romero’s back may indicate the assailant was slightly to the right and below Romero.

Romero was found face down on a flight of stairs leading to the second floor of his home.

That would place the gunman at the bottom of the staircase.

The shooting happened after Romero came home from work .

In crime scene photos he is shown wearing a hard hat and safety goggles.

He may have a gunshot wound in his back but the report also indicates that “on the front of the hard hat there is a round defect.”

After reading the report Doctor Keen said that tells him a bullet went through the front of his hard hat placing a gunman in front of him.

Tim Roman’s autopsy report outlines six gun shot wounds.

Saint Johns Police found him outside on the front porch.

One bullet struck the right top of his head, a bullet grazed the left side of his head, then there is a wound in the back of his head.

His lung and heart were hit by two bullets, one entered the right side of his chest, the other the left side.

He also has a gunshot would to his forearm.

Pima County Pathologist Cynthia Porterfield wrote “Examination of the entrance wound reveals no evidence of close range firing” for three of Romero’s gunshot wounds and five of Roman’s gunshot wounds.

Doctor Keen says they define “close range”, in part, by determining if there was any gun power residue on the victim’s skin.

He said since there is no gun powder residue it is not in “close range” which would mean the gunman was at least two to two-and-a-half feet away.

Pima County also released the toxicology reports which shows a check for alcohol and drugs in both men came back negative.

Saint Johns Police say the 8-year-old used a single shot 22-caliber rifle to shoot both men.

That means he would have had to reload and fire before each of the ten shots.

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/northernarizona/story/Autopsy-St-Johns-murder-victims-shot-in-thehead/gsb18gJlwkizzVprKFwW0A.cspx


ETA. Crime scene photos. Photo of money I mentioned above is 8th from left.

http://www.kpho.com/slideshow/news/18019101/detail.html

[William Anthony]

I thought I read somewhere in one of the links that the judge was mandated to dismiss the charges without prejudice, it after 240 days the child was still deemed incompetent. However I went back and searched my prior link and found this. What happens, if the child has made progress toward restoration of competency?

http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/legtext/42leg/2R/laws/0359.htm

A. A JUVENILE SHALL NOT PARTICIPATE IN A DELINQUENCY, INCORRIGIBILITY OR CRIMINAL PROCEEDING IF THE COURT DETERMINES THAT THE JUVENILE IS INCOMPETENT TO PROCEED.

B. AT ANY TIME AFTER THE FILING OF A PETITION FOR DELINQUENCY OR INCORRIGIBILITY OR A PETITION THAT SEEKS TO TRANSFER A JUVENILE TO ADULT COURT, A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT, INFORMATION OR INDICTMENT, A PARTY MAY REQUEST IN WRITING OR THE COURT ON ITS OWN MOTION MAY ORDER THAT THE JUVENILE BE EXAMINED TO DETERMINE IF THE JUVENILE IS COMPETENT. THE PRESENCE OF A MENTAL ILLNESS, DEFECT OR DISABILITY ALONE IS NOT GROUNDS FOR FINDING A JUVENILE INCOMPETENT. THE COURT SHALL NOT ORDER A JUVENILE WHO IS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE JUVENILE COURT TO PARTICIPATE IN A TREATMENT PROGRAM FOR THE RESTORATION OF COMPETENCY UNLESS THE COURT MADE A PRIOR FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE PURSUANT TO RULE 3 (f), RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR THE JUVENILE COURT.

C. THE FOLLOWING APPLY TO JUVENILE COMPETENCY EXAMINATIONS THAT ARE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THIS ARTICLE:

1. SECTION 13-4503, SUBSECTIONS B, C AND D.

2. SECTION 13-4505.

3. SECTION 13-4506.

4. SECTION 13-4507, SUBSECTIONS A, B, C AND D, SUBSECTION E, PARAGRAPHS 1, 2 AND 3 AND SUBSECTION F.

5. SECTION 13-4508.

6. SECTION 13-4509.

7. SECTION 3-4510, SUBSECTIONS A, B AND D.

8. SECTION 13-4516.

D. IF THE COURT FINDS THAT THE JUVENILE IS INCOMPETENT BUT IS RESTORABLE TO COMPETENCY, THE COURT SHALL ORDER THE JUVENILE TO UNDERGO AN ATTEMPT AT RESTORATION TO COMPETENCY WITHIN SIX MONTHS AFTER THE INITIAL DETERMINATION. IF THE JUVENILE COURT DETERMINES THAT THE JUVENILE HAS NOT BEEN RESTORED TO COMPETENCY WITHIN SIX MONTHS AND THAT THE JUVENILE HAS MADE PROGRESS TOWARD RESTORATION OF COMPETENCY, THE COURT AFTER A HEARING MAY DO EITHER OF THE FOLLOWING:

1. EXTEND THE TREATMENT PERIOD FOR AN ADDITIONAL SIXTY DAYS FOR GOOD CAUSE IF THE COURT DETERMINES BY CLEAR AND CONVINCING EVIDENCE THAT FURTHER TREATMENT WILL LEAD TO A RESTORATION OF COMPETENCY.

2. DISMISS THE MATTER WITH OR WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

I do not envy judge Rocca.

[FDInLaw]

It was mentioned here but not the actual time:

COMMANDER AVILA: Come on. Tell us the truth.
MR. ROMERO: I'm not --I'm not lying.
OFFICER NECKELS: Did Tim shoot your dad?
MR. ROMERO: I --I don't know.
COMMANDER AVILA: How about if we had somebody that told us that you might've shot him?
MR. ROMERO: Shot who?
COMMANDER AVILA: Your dad and Tim.
OFFICER NECKELS: On accident.
COMMANDER AVILA: On accident, yeah.
MR. ROMERO: Shoot my dad? You can't
OFFICER NECKELS: We had someone --Tim was on the phone, and who he was talking to heard you. What would they hear?
MR. ROMERO: I --I don't know.
OFFICER NECKELS: They heard you.
MR. ROMERO: I didn't
OFFICER NECKELS: Tim told them, "It's Christian."
MR. ROMERO: Unh-unh.
OFFICER NECKELS: I'm telling you that's what we heard. That's what that person told --we --honey, we they copy all those phone calls. Okay? We've got the phone call. Okay? Why would Tim say that?
MR. ROMERO: I don't know.
OFFICER NECKELS: Why would he say your name? You --you told us --okay. You already told us you were holding the gun, and you think the gun might've gone off. Okay? And I think we have a really bad accident that happened here, and I think you're really scared, hon. I do. I think this is the scariest thing that's ever happened to you. Okay?
And I need you to tell me we need you to tell us the truth really, really bad, okay, so so you don't have to be in bigger trouble. Okay? So we need you to tell us the truth because I think it was a really bad accident.
MR. ROMERO: (Nods head affirmatively.) OFFICER NECKELS: Can you tell me the truth? MR. ROMERO: Yeah. OFFICER NECKELS: Okay. Tell me what happened. MR. ROMERO: I think the gun got I think I
think I shot my dad because he was suffering, I think OFFICER NECKELS: Okay. MR. ROMERO: --because I thought that he was
suffering. OFFICER NECKELS: Okay. MR. ROMERO: So I might've shot him. OFFICER NECKELS: Okay. That makes sense. It does. MR. ROMERO: Because I didn't want him to suffer. OFFICER NECKELS: Oh. I don't blame you, hon. Page 49&50

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/InterviewDVDChristian.pdf

[Its just me]

Crime Scene Photos. Notice the difference in the shell casings in photo #1 and # 6 (beween door and rug)


http://www.abc15.com/Photo.aspx?slideshow=a02b70a1-990e-43ba-8dd8-69e6acf5a4e0&photo=7ca1cd22-3f97-494a-acc2-7d48522fe780

Also note the box of bullets in photo 14 (?) are not 22's but 17 HMR

http://www.kpho.com/slideshow/news/18019101/detail.html

[Its just me]

Bringing this forward for review. This is how the AZ appeals court ruled on CR's case.

1 A.R.S. § 8-291(2) (2007) defines "incompetent" as meaning "a juvenile who does not have sufficient present ability to consult with the juvenile’s lawyer with a reasonable degree of rational understanding or who does not have a rational and factual understanding of the proceedings against the juvenile." It also provides: "Age alone does not render a person incompetent." 3

controlling the issue or addressing the issue of competency presuppose that nothing will happen while an individual is incompetent" and the State’s motion dealt with a "substantive" issue. The court also cited what it referred to as "the parallel . . . . adult practice or the criminal court practice under [Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure] 11" of staying proceedings while a competency determination is pending and stated, "The equivalent is, and I feel should be, true in juvenile matters." The State then filed this special action asking us to vacate the juvenile court’s ruling and direct the court to rule on the State’s motion before it had determined C.R.’s competency.

¶3 In the exercise of our discretion, we accept jurisdiction of the State’s special action because it lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See Ariz. R.P. Spec. Act. 1(a). Pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-291.08(D) (2007), the juvenile court would be required to dismiss both counts of the petition with prejudice should it find that C.R. "is incompetent and there is not a substantial probability that [he] will be restored to competency within two hundred forty days . . . ." Although the State has the right to appeal a dismissal order, see A.R.S. § 8-235(A) (2007); Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 103(A), there is a likelihood that such an appeal would be limited to whether reasonable evidence supported the juvenile court’s finding of incompetency. See, e.g., State v. Krantz, 174 Ariz. 211, 212, 848 P.2d 296, 297 (App. 1992) (stating that
4
appellate review of the denial of a motion for redetermination of probable cause must be brought by special action and is not available on appeal). In addition, the issue here does not depend on contested facts and is one of pure law. See Finck v. Superior Court, 177 Ariz. 417, 418, 868 P.2d 1000, 1001 (App. 1993) (accepting jurisdiction because petitioner had no equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal and because question raised was one of pure law).


¶4 The juvenile court apparently believed that it was precluded by A.R.S. § 8-291.01(A) from considering the State’s motion. We disagree. That statute only comes into play after the court has actually found that a juvenile is incompetent to proceed and not when, as here, the court has determined only that there are reasonable grounds to order a competency evaluation. Although it may be the better course of action in many circumstances to delay the consideration of substantive matters until the issue of competency is resolved, no statute or rule requires the court to do so. Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 11, which the juvenile court relied on by analogy, similarly contains no provision that prevents a court from timely addressing a motion to dismiss filed after reasonable grounds for a mental evaluation have been found to
2 Although criminal proceedings are not automatically suspended when the court orders a competency evaluation, Rule 8.4(a) provides that any delay caused by an examination and hearing to determine a defendant’s competency is excluded from the computation of speedy trial limits under Rules 8.2 and 8.3. See also Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 17(B)(1) (same).




exist but before the court has held a hearing to determine a defendant’s competency.2

n conclusion, the juvenile court was not, as it believed, precluded by statute and/or court rule from addressing the State’s motion to dismiss Count I without prejudice. We therefore grant relief in part by vacating the court’s contrary ruling and returning this matter to the juvenile court for further proceedings consistent herewith.
_____________________________

PHILIP HALL, Presiding Judge
CONCURRING:
_______________________________
MAURICE PORTLEY, Judge
_______________________________
PATRICIA K. NORRIS, Judge

[lorettalockhorn]

The phone records would be a valuable source to help establish the actual time line. Gonna dig. . .


(Where is Loretta??? She is better at this!)

Happy Saturday y'all!

Haven't seen any information about any of the phone records. Sure they will help narrow the timeline, but they won't prove what was actually said in the calls, since we know that the police don't copy those calls. (What a pisser.) Maybe Tanya never heard Christian say anything in the background. Maybe Tanya heard someone else calling for help with Vincent and assumed it was CR. If I had an idea that Romero and Romans usually arrived home around a certain time, and that CR was likely to be around or show up, I might use some ruse to get Tim out into the open in order to shoot him.

I've mostly been reading the links at myspace, and haven't checked it for updates yet today.

[lorettalockhorn]

Thanks. Another thing that concerns me is that the child said he shot both men to keep them from suffering. Did anyone teach this child to dial 911? Something is very amiss and I don't think we shall ever have all the answers.

Was ending suffering something that CR had been taught while hunting? For some reason when I first heard/read him say that, it shocked me. Didn't we read somewhere that CR had a phone to dial 911? Was it in his backpack? Was there no landline in the house?

[lorettalockhorn]

Crime Scene Photos. Notice the difference in the shell casings in photo #1 and # 6 (beween door and rug)


http://www.abc15.com/Photo.aspx?slideshow=a02b70a1-990e-43ba-8dd8-69e6acf5a4e0&photo=7ca1cd22-3f97-494a-acc2-7d48522fe780

Also note the box of bullets in photo 14 (?) are not 22's but 17 HMR

http://www.kpho.com/slideshow/news/18019101/detail.html

Have you read the comments about shells, shell casings, etc. here (and at the first link comments about the autopsy)?

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=435515258&blogID=463437844

Apologies if this is redundant.

[Its just me]

On page 16 Officer Neckel states she interviewed the neighbors across the street and they heard shots at approx. 5 oclock.

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/TRANSCRIPT%20OF%20DETAINED%20ADVISORY%20HEARING%20 NOV%202%202008_VOL1%20PARTA.pdf

[William Anthony]

The testimony about the shots to the chest and the bodies not being moved is also troubling. Before anyone misunderstands, I am not saying that the child murdered anyone but it would tend to show that he had at least witnessed the murder or murders.

[William Anthony]

Was ending suffering something that CR had been taught while hunting? For some reason when I first heard/read him say that, it shocked me. Didn't we read somewhere that CR had a phone to dial 911? Was it in his backpack? Was there no landline in the house?

Please, do not misunderstand. While reading your post, a thought came to me, more on a legal point. Let's say that the child did, in fact, come upon the victims and they were still alive and employed what he had been taught on his hunting expeditions. If the is true, is there any possible way to charge this child with murder, meaning was there any criminal intent? Let's take it a step further. Is there anyway to determine which wounds the child inflicted in that circumstance, meaning is there any way to determine, which shots were fatal and who did them, given the above circumstances? Given those possibilities, the question remains as to who did the shooting and why is the child, if he is, trying to cover for some one. The reason I say covering for someone is that, without further information, it is hard for me to rule out Ms. Romans' statement. I had to rethink my statement. I guess if you are shooting someone that is alive to end their suffering, then criminal intent can be attached but the question remains as to which was the fatal shot.

[FDInLaw]

Would it be alright with y'all if I started a thread just for gun discussion? Might be nice to have all that's out there on this subject lumped together in one place. Also, I've seen a lot of discussion on this topic. Some question if the boy could have even committed this act due to the reloading element. IMO this issues will prove key to this case.

[Its just me]

The testimony about the shots to the chest and the bodies not being moved is also troubling. Before anyone misunderstands, I am not saying that the child murdered anyone but it would tend to show that he had at least witnessed the murder or murders.

I'm not following you. The grandmother said CR said his Dad didn't suffer because he was shot in the chest. This was brought out in court by Rodriquez who made the point that CR had to have been there because the Dad was found face down. To my understanding the Dad was NOT shot in the chest.

But the truth is you don't know what is the real story. Here you have Neckel talking about the ambulance arriving and not going to the bodies. Neckel said Rodriquez came out and said there was brain matter. Brewer asks...With regard to whom? Neckel stated "Tim"... Brewers asks...Is that the gentleman on the front porch. Neckel replied. Yes, Sir.
I KNOW there is testimony THAT it was the Dad on the stairs where there was brain matter. :confused: Mind you this officer and Rodriquez are in charge of the case.

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/TRANSCRIPT%20OF%20DETAINED%20ADVISORY%20HEARING%20 NOV%202%202008_VOL1%20PARTB.pdf Page 52

[FDInLaw]

The testimony about the shots to the chest and the bodies not being moved is also troubling. Before anyone misunderstands, I am not saying that the child murdered anyone but it would tend to show that he had at least witnessed the murder or murders.Yep. This one jumped out at me too. . . the autopsy results differ from the testimony here!
Upon examination, there were no shots to the chest. What was deemed an incriminating statement didn't match the facts. IMO the boy started making up stuff in the hopes that the police officers would stop badgering him. My kids have done this before. . .

A line from Anne of Green Gables comes to mind. . . “you wouldn't believe the truth.”

[FDInLaw]

Would just like to comment on this;

"Somebody from the Juvenile facility called Tanya, and said hey we'd thought we'd let you know that the boy is out he's furloughed for one week, and she's in tears," John Andreas said. Tanya is the wife of shooting victim Tim Romans.

"No closure, no closure at all," Andreas said.

Andreas feels that every time the boy is allowed to go home, that he is being allowed to dodge the consequences of the alleged shootings.

"It's double homicide. This isn't stealing a candy bar from a grocery store," Andreas said.

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Nation/2009/01/30/Accused-killer-9-freed-for/1233329949.html

My heart goes out to these folks. It must be really hard. In perspective though, in some states (including Arizona) an adult charged with double homicide can be released on bail. I've been there. . . waited for months for an arrest only to have the one charged let out on bail. A loved one feels robbed, but this is a normal part of our justice system. IMO, in this case it seems like an adult would have more rights, and I'm glad that the boy was released to spend time with his Mom. MOO


Note ~ There is a Memorial thread for both the victims now. Please stop in and post something.

[lorettalockhorn]

Would it be alright with y'all if I started a thread just for gun discussion? Might be nice to have all that's out there on this subject lumped together in one place. Also, I've seen a lot of discussion on this topic. Some question if the boy could have even committed this act due to the reloading element. IMO this issues will prove key to this case.

HAH! What I know about guns will fit right here <>. But I've read quite a bit of discussion on other sites/links about the ammunition sizes, and the jacketed rounds (which didn't appear to attract the interest of LE), etc. A separate thread might be a good idea.

[Its just me]

Have you read the comments about shells, shell casings, etc. here (and at the first link comments about the autopsy)?

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=435515258&blogID=463437844

Apologies if this is redundant.

I have but had forgotten where I read it. Thanks for the link it was good to read it again. Lots of questions.

[lorettalockhorn]

Please, do not misunderstand. While reading your post, a thought came to me, more on a legal point. Let's say that the child did, in fact, come upon the victims and they were still alive and employed what he had been taught on his hunting expeditions. If the is true, is there any possible way to charge this child with murder, meaning was there any criminal intent? Let's take it a step further. Is there anyway to determine which wounds the child inflicted in that circumstance, meaning is there any way to determine, which shots were fatal and who did them, given the above circumstances? Given those possibilities, the question remains as to who did the shooting and why is the child, if he is, trying to cover for some one. The reason I say covering for someone is that, without further information, it is hard for me to rule out Ms. Romans' statement. I had to rethink my statement. I guess if you are shooting someone that is alive to end their suffering, then criminal intent can be attached but the question remains as to which was the fatal shot.

I get what your saying and where the thinking takes you, and your logic. (Subject to reversal of course!) But I think that CR saying that he shot the men whether for suffering or any other reason was simply to satisfy the investigators.

It was the use of the language "to end suffering" or however exactly he stated it, that shocked me.

[lorettalockhorn]

Would just like to comment on this;

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Nation/2009/01/30/Accused-killer-9-freed-for/1233329949.html

My heart goes out to these folks. It must be really hard. In perspective though, in some states (including Arizona) an adult charged with double homicide can be released on bail. I've been there. . . waited for months for an arrest only to have the one charged let out on bail. A loved one feels robbed, but this is a normal part of our justice system. IMO, in this case it seems like an adult would have more rights, and I'm glad that the boy was released to spend time with his Mom. MOO


Note ~ There is a Memorial thread for both the victims now. Please stop in and post something.

Thanks for posting.

[Its just me]

HAH! What I know about guns will fit right here <>. But I've read quite a bit of discussion on other sites/links about the ammunition sizes, and the jacketed rounds (which didn't appear to attract the interest of LE), etc. A separate thread might be a good idea.

What I know can be put in one post but I do think a separate thread would be good. Things not discussed much gets lost. When the Tara forum was active we just about had a thread for every major topic. fep

[FDInLaw]

HAH! What I know about guns will fit right here <>. But I've read quite a bit of discussion on other sites/links about the ammunition sizes, and the jacketed rounds (which didn't appear to attract the interest of LE), etc. A separate thread might be a good idea.Do any of your new pals over on Caylee's thread know anything about guns??? You could ask them to pop in here! :)


I'm gonna start a thread, if y'all want to help stash gun info there that would be great!

[Its just me]

Would just like to comment on this;

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Nation/2009/01/30/Accused-killer-9-freed-for/1233329949.html

My heart goes out to these folks. It must be really hard. In perspective though, in some states (including Arizona) an adult charged with double homicide can be released on bail. I've been there. . . waited for months for an arrest only to have the one charged let out on bail. A loved one feels robbed, but this is a normal part of our justice system. IMO, in this case it seems like an adult would have more rights, and I'm glad that the boy was released to spend time with his Mom. MOO


Note ~ There is a Memorial thread for both the victims now. Please stop in and post something.

Thanks, I know you can relate to them. :rose: I will post my heart felt commiseration. On the flip I can relate to an investigation where LE death investigation reports don't match what was witnessed or autopsy report. Lots of sad and unjust things in our world. fep

[Jacobtk]

Let's say that the child did, in fact, come upon the victims and they were still alive and employed what he had been taught on his hunting expeditions. If the is true, is there any possible way to charge this child with murder, meaning was there any criminal intent?

The DA would have to show malice on the boy's part to justify charging him with murder. At best they could charge him with manslaughter or maybe involuntary homicide, but given his age and the potential reasoning behind doing such a thing, it would look incredibly bad.

Is there anyway to determine which wounds the child inflicted in that circumstance, meaning is there any way to determine, which shots were fatal and who did them, given the above circumstances?

The medical examiner should be able to tell if shots were pre or postmortem. The ME could also tell whether each shot was fatal or superficial.

[tr7fan]

well the atty sez the state has no evidence to prove that it was done by the boy
its funny the whiting agreed to not use the interview AFTER judge rocha refused to admit it twice during the probable cause hearing

[lorettalockhorn]

Thanks, I know you can relate to them. :rose: I will post my heart felt commiseration. On the flip I can relate to an investigation where LE death investigation reports don't match what was witnessed or autopsy report. Lots of sad and unjust things in our world. fep

Thanks for posting about your perspective. If this case every makes it in front of a jury, I think they will also reflect on their personal lives and common sense to find meaning in this situation.

[lorettalockhorn]

The DA would have to show malice on the boy's part to justify charging him with murder. At best they could charge him with manslaughter or maybe involuntary homicide, but given his age and the potential reasoning behind doing such a thing, it would look incredibly bad.



The medical examiner should be able to tell if shots were pre or postmortem. The ME could also tell whether each shot was fatal or superficial.

Hey Jacob, I haven't read such conclusions anywhere. I'd like to know more about the angle of the wound in Romero's back. If it was the shot that took him down, couldn't experts take a reasonable guess as to the height and/or position of the shooter?

[Jacobtk]

Hey Jacob, I haven't read such conclusions anywhere. I'd like to know more about the angle of the wound in Romero's back. If it was the shot that took him down, couldn't experts take a reasonable guess as to the height and/or position of the shooter?

The shot to Romero's back from above. The shooter had to be at the top of the stairs because the bullet went into Romero's abdomen. That would mean the shooter shot Romero as the man went up the stairs and then stepped over him and shot him. The shots that took Romero down apparently were the shots to his head.

[Jacobtk]

well the atty sez the state has no evidence to prove that it was done by the boy
its funny the whiting agreed to not use the interview AFTER judge rocha refused to admit it twice during the probable cause hearing

That makes the probable cause hearing all the more odd. The only reason to hold the boy was the confession, but as you stated Roca refused to admit it initially.

[Its just me]

At the bottom of the page shows Mrs. Romans' hand written description of the phone call just before Mr. Romans was killed. Note she asked TR who was talking. There are statements by LE saying she said she recognized CR’s voice because she had dinner at the Romero's home. I do take into consideration that she had just lost her husband but this is important. It appears she tried to correct the statement. In the officers report near the bottom he explains his version of how much sound the kid's rifle would make. I believe it would be louder than someone calling Tim to come inside unless the kid was near the truck...but that kind of defeats the ambush theory of LE.

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/Hogle.pdf

[Its just me]

The shot to Romero's back from above. The shooter had to be at the top of the stairs because the bullet went into Romero's abdomen. That would mean the shooter shot Romero as the man went up the stairs and then stepped over him and shot him. The shots that took Romero down apparently were the shots to his head.

What is your opinion of the path of Romans' chest wounds. They both seem to be fatal but he would have had to remain upright for both shots. TIA fep

[SaraSidle]

I'm reposting a snip from my post on the Appeals Court ruling:

¶3 In the exercise of our discretion, we accept jurisdiction of the State’s special action because it lacks an adequate remedy by appeal. See Ariz. R.P. Spec. Act. 1(a). Pursuant to A.R.S. § 8-291.08(D) (2007), the juvenile court would be required to dismiss both counts of the petition with prejudice should it find that C.R. "is incompetent and there is not a substantial probability that [he] will be restored to competency within two hundred forty days . . . ." Although the State has the right to appeal a dismissal order, see A.R.S. § 8-235(A) (2007); Ariz. R.P. Juv. Ct. 103(A), there is a likelihood that such an appeal would be limited to whether reasonable evidence supported the juvenile court’s finding of incompetency. See, e.g., State v. Krantz, 174 Ariz. 211, 212, 848 P.2d 296, 297 (App. 1992) (stating that
4
appellate review of the denial of a motion for redetermination of probable cause must be brought by special action and is not available on appeal). In addition, the issue here does not depend on contested facts and is one of pure law. See Finck v. Superior Court, 177 Ariz. 417, 418, 868 P.2d 1000, 1001 (App. 1993) (accepting jurisdiction because petitioner had no equally plain, speedy, and adequate remedy by appeal and because question raised was one of pure law).

great post fep!!!!!!!!!!

[lorettalockhorn]

At the bottom of the page shows Mrs. Romans' hand written description of the phone call just before Mr. Romans was killed. Note she asked TR who was talking. There are statements by LE saying she said she recognized CR’s voice because she had dinner at the Romero's home. I do take into consideration that she had just lost her husband but this is important. It appears she tried to correct the statement. In the officers report near the bottom he explains his version of how much sound the kid's rifle would make. I believe it would be louder than someone calling Tim to come inside unless the kid was near the truck...but that kind of defeats the ambush theory of LE.

http://www.november2008stjohnsdoublehomicide.com/applications/DocumentLibraryManager/upload/Hogle.pdf

Interesting that when she recounts that she asked Tim who that was and she wrote, " ...he said that's Christian!". Why the exclamation mark? She uses other exclamation marks appropriately. But why here?

[tr7fan]

heres the straight dope
the state has no evidence against the boy . hes not gonna be convicted when he hasnt done anything
if you dont beleive me, GO down to the court house and ask whiting what evidence he has and is it enough to convict. pls email me first and tell me before you go to talk to him cause i wanta see him admit theres no evidence against the boy

i just dont believe you think the police chief you got is credible. do a google on him and read about the lawsuits against him. hes got a law degree but went taking pictures BEFORE a warrant was isssued so the pics arent admissible. now hes applied for a job in los lunas,new mexico
as for rodriquez he testifyed in the probable cause hearing that the boy must have been there because he said his dad was shot in the chest.GUESS WHAT no chest wound in vincent, so mr rodriqez was walking right on the line of perjury.. det neckle lied under oath to the judge and he caught her at it( in case you dont what this is its PERJURY UNDER OATH )avila and carlyon - read http://www.joelbarrsstory.com/index.html theres enough in there for a few felonies and disbarment or censure if the state bar was feeling good the day they heard the complaint against carlyon
a little higher up the board her E M has been busy spreading mud in tucson E M. (eagargal) — November 30,2008 @ 2:14PM. Ratings: -8 +3 ...
regulus2.azstarnet.com/comments/index.php?id=269536 - 87k and on board.insessions.com bad mouthing the thomas family specifically eryn her sister brother and father. rather than facing the fact eryn is being as supportive to the boy as a mother can be. of course these are just facts ive tracked down using state records
heres what tiffany has been up to i read she engaged and also has a live in girlfriend
read that here http://axtonromero.blogspot.com/2008/11/tiffany-romero-in-town.html
editor you probably wont post this but its all true

[tr7fan]

heres the straight skinny
the state has no evidence against the boy . hes not gonna be convicted when he hasnt done anything
if you dont beleive me, GO down to the court house and ask whiting what evidence he has and is it enough to convict. pls email me first and tell me before you go to talk to him cause i wanta see him admit theres no evidence against the boy

i just dont believe you think the police chief you got is credible. do a google on him and read about the lawsuits against him. hes got a law degree but went taking pictures BEFORE a warrant was isssued so the pics arent admissible. now hes applied for a job in los lunas,new mexico
as for rodriquez he testifyed in the probable cause hearing that the boy must have been there because he said his dad was shot in the chest.GUESS WHAT no chest wound in vincent, so mr rodriqez was walking right on the line of perjury.. det neckle lied under oath to the judge and he caught her at it( in case you dont what this is its PERJURY UNDER OATH )avila and carlyon - read http://www.joelbarrsstory.com/index.html theres enough in there for a few felonies and disbarment or censure if the state bar was feeling good the day they heard the complaint against carlyon
a little higher up the board her E M has been busy spreading mud in tucson E M. (eagargal) — November 30,2008 @ 2:14PM. Ratings: -8 +3 ...
regulus2.azstarnet.com/comments/index.php?id=269536 - 87k and on board.insessions.com bad mouthing the thomas family specifically eryn her sister brother and father. rather than facing the fact eryn is being as supportive to the boy as a mother can be. of course these are just facts ive tracked down using state records
heres what tiffany has been up to i read she engaged and also has a live in girlfriend
read that here http://axtonromero.blogspot.com/2008/11/tiffany-romero-in-town.html
editor you probably wont post this but its all true

[Jacobtk]

What is your opinion of the path of Romans' chest wounds. They both seem to be fatal but he would have had to remain upright for both shots. TIA fep

My best guess is that the only way a shooter could shoot him that quickly is using a semi-automatic or automatic weapon. It would take some impressive skill to hit a moving (presumably turning or falling) target only inches from the previous shot with a single-shot rifle. It also appears that the wounds have a downward angle, meaning the shooter was taller or somehow above Romans, perhaps shooting out of a car.

[Its just me]

My best guess is that the only way a shooter could shoot him that quickly is using a semi-automatic or automatic weapon. It would take some impressive skill to hit a moving (presumably turning or falling) target only inches from the previous shot with a single-shot rifle. It also appears that the wounds have a downward angle, meaning the shooter was taller or somehow above Romans, perhaps shooting out of a car.

Thanks, I don't know much about guns but I've used them enough to question the 2 chest wounds being from a single shot weapon fired by an 8 year old approx. four feet tall. I haven't looked at the position of the truck yet but the shot that went thru Romans' arm appears to me he was not facing the shooter.

Only time will tell but I'm not expecting a trial of any kind for CR in the near future. He may be recharged for count one when he is older and if he is innocent he go thru life accused of being a murderer. I saw where Brewer asked for a Jury trial and read in the transcripts where it was denied by Judge R. This is a very sad case in every way. fep

[William Anthony]

I did not know which of the above two posts to respond, as they both addressed some thoughts I have. However, I think that there are far too many unanswered questions and, if the case is dismissed with prejudice due to a finding of incompetence, which I am not convinced that is the wrong decision, I feel that this child will more likely than not go through life with the stigma, wrongly or rightly of being the person who murdered, when he was only 8, his father and his father's friend. I can't begin to imagine what this child has undergone in such a short time in his life. Perhaps, that may not be so large an issue, if the child is moved out of Arizona and Mississippi. My heart goes out to all those connected to the case. Yes, even the prosecution. They have a job to do whether or not we agree with it.

At this point, I believe we and they are all lost in the quagmire caused by the concepts of, probable cause, substantial possibility and reasonableness. This may truly be a case where no one wins and everyone's rights are suspended and that might just be the right decision. Where or where is Solomon?

[Its just me]

I've alway thought a victim shot by two different kinds of bullets pointed to two different weapons.
This is not the actual autopsies but they they are listed for the references at the bottom. Below it states that both men had arm wounds by a copper coated bullet and the way I'm reading it the path is pretty much straight thru. It was Romans right arm and Romeros left arm. I got this from the MySpace page http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=435515258&blogID=463437844 fep


The homicides of Timothy Romans and Vincent Romero in St. Johns, Arizona, took place on 5 November, 2008. The following day the eight‑year‑old son of one of the victims was arrested for the murders. On 08 November, 2008, an autopsy of both victims was performed by Cynthia Porterfield, D.O. in Tucson, AZ.
The autopsies were witnessed by Detective Debbie Neckel and Sergeant Lucas Rodriguez from the St. Johns Police Department and Sergeant Richard Guinn and Deputy Robert Watkins from the Apache County Sheriff’s Department.
None of the law enforcement witnesses made a note of two interesting findings by the forensic pathologist.
Tim Romans’ autopsy revealed that he had severe plaque blockage in his left anterior descending artery and moderate plaque blockage in his right coronary artery. He also had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Romans had a package of Marlboro cigarettes in his possession. In addition, a package of Camel cigarettes, Sinex over the counter nasal inhaler, and Visine were found by his left foot. These latter items were not collected by law enforcement.
Romans had five penetrating wounds, none of which had any evidence of close range firing. There was also a graze wound to the side of his head.
There were two head wounds. One was located in front of head 2.35 inches right of center. A one inch laceration was located above this wound. The course of the projectile was downward and right to left. A deformed small caliber bullet was recovered in the left temporal lobe.
The second head wound was at the back of the head 2.75 inches from the top and 2 inches to the right of center. The course was from back to front and right to left. The bullet passed through the right parietal and the left occipital lobe of the brain. A small caliber deformed projectile was recovered.
There were two chest wounds. One was located on the right chest two inches to the right of center and 13.75 inches from the top of the head. The other was located on the left side, 1.6 inches to the left of center, 14.6 inches from the top of the head. The latter projectile penetrated the right auricle of the heart and coursed to the ninth lateral vertebra. Deformed small caliber projectiles were recovered from both wounds.
The projectile paths for the two chest wounds, and the right top of head was downward.
A wound was found on the right forearm. The course of this projectile was through the arm and a reentry into the right side of the chest. The projectile continued to the lower lobe of the right lung. A small caliber copper coated projectile was recovered from the right pleural cavity. None of the law enforcement witnesses found the copper coated bullet to be remarkable.
Finally, there was a grazing wound on the left side of the head. The wound was 1.4 inch by 0.4 inch.
Vincent Romero had two head wounds, neither of which had evidence of close range firing. One, on the right top of head was located 2 inches to the right of the anterior midline. The size was 0.4 inch by 1 inch. This wound was surrounded by shrapnel injuries possibly from the hard hat that Romero was wearing. A small deformed projectile was found in the temporal lobe of the brain. The path was front to back and downward.
The second head wound was located on the left side of the head; 1.6 inches from the top and 6.3 inches left from the anterior midline. The projectile course was left to right and downward through the left temporalis muscle, left parietal bone, left parietal and temporal brain lobes, and soft jaw tissues. A small deformed projectile was recovered.
A right upper back wound had no evidence of close range firing. This wound was located fourteen inches from the top of the victim and 7.7 inches to the right of the body center. This bullet passed through the lower lobe of the right lung, the diaphragm, and the liver. A deformed small projectile was recovered from the mesentery. The path was from back to front and downward.
The projectile paths for these three wounds were downward.
The left arm had a bullet wound to the back 10.6 inches below the shoulder. This bullet left the arm 10.25 inches below the shoulder and grazed the left chest. A small caliber, deformed, copper coated projectile was recovered from the victim’s clothing. Again, none of the law enforcement witnesses found the copper coating significant.
The toxicology screenings of the victims did not yield any positive results.
When Sergeant Rodriguez testified at the 7 November, 2008 detention hearing to hold the child for murder, he testified that the boy had told his grandmother that his father didn’t suffer because the father had been shot in the chest. This was based upon the grandmother’s statement. Rodriguez testified that the father was found face down and had not been moved. Apache County Attorney Brad Carylon implicated that the child suspect had special knowledge which incriminated him. But, there was no chest wound.
The copper coated projectiles noted by Dr. Porterfield are important. A return of search warrant report dated 06 November, 2008, stated that item 7A, a shell, was found in the assumed murder weapon. A scene photograph shows a cartridge laying loose in the breech of the Chipmunk youth rifle. The bullet is not copper coated. The other recovered projectiles might not have been copper coated. That requires examination.
But, neither law enforcement nor prosecution was not interested in facts. They already had their man, although he was only a child.
References
Timothy Romans Autopsy Report ‑ ML 08‑02126, Case #08110735, November 08, 2008
Vincent Romero Autopsy Report ‑ ML 08‑02128, Case #08110735, November, 08, 2008
by Brian McCorkle

http://www.convolutedbrian.com/st-johns-arizona-double-homicide-autopsies.html (http://www.convolutedbrian.com/st-johns-arizona-double-homicide-autopsies.html)

[Its just me]

I did not know which of the above two posts to respond, as they both addressed some thoughts I have. However, I think that there are far too many unanswered questions and, if the case is dismissed with prejudice due to a finding of incompetence, which I am not convinced that is the wrong decision, I feel that this child will more likely than not go through life with the stigma, wrongly or rightly of being the person who murdered, when he was only 8, his father and his father's friend. I can't begin to imagine what this child has undergone in such a short time in his life. Perhaps, that may not be so large an issue, if the child is moved out of Arizona and Mississippi. My heart goes out to all those connected to the case. Yes, even the prosecution. They have a job to do whether or not we agree with it.

At this point, I believe we and they are all lost in the quagmire caused by the concepts of, probable cause, substantial possibility and reasonableness. This may truly be a case where no one wins and everyone's rights are suspended and that might just be the right decision. Where or where is Solomon?

If the child is innocent it is not the right decision...granted it may the only decision available for a juvenile but it's far from right if he's innocent. If there had not been such a rush to judgement the truth most likely would have been determined. The spokesperson for the Romans family is right this is not stealing a candy bar from a grocery store but CR's treatment probably was close to the same in relation to getting a confession. There is a lot lacking in this case. Professionals comes to mind.

OT. I doubt there is a Solomon in the world today....He asked God for wisdom when most today would have chosen riches plus most today depend on self wisdom when true wisdom comes from God.

[William Anthony]

I've alway thought a victim shot by two different kinds of bullets pointed to two different weapons.
This is not the actual autopsies but they they are listed for the references at the bottom. Below it states that both men had arm wounds by a copper coated bullet and the way I'm reading it the path is pretty much straight thru. It was Romans right arm and Romeros left arm. I got this from the MySpace page http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=435515258&blogID=463437844 fep


The homicides of Timothy Romans and Vincent Romero in St. Johns, Arizona, took place on 5 November, 2008. The following day the eight‑year‑old son of one of the victims was arrested for the murders. On 08 November, 2008, an autopsy of both victims was performed by Cynthia Porterfield, D.O. in Tucson, AZ.
The autopsies were witnessed by Detective Debbie Neckel and Sergeant Lucas Rodriguez from the St. Johns Police Department and Sergeant Richard Guinn and Deputy Robert Watkins from the Apache County Sheriff’s Department.
None of the law enforcement witnesses made a note of two interesting findings by the forensic pathologist.
Tim Romans’ autopsy revealed that he had severe plaque blockage in his left anterior descending artery and moderate plaque blockage in his right coronary artery. He also had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Romans had a package of Marlboro cigarettes in his possession. In addition, a package of Camel cigarettes, Sinex over the counter nasal inhaler, and Visine were found by his left foot. These latter items were not collected by law enforcement.
Romans had five penetrating wounds, none of which had any evidence of close range firing. There was also a graze wound to the side of his head.
There were two head wounds. One was located in front of head 2.35 inches right of center. A one inch laceration was located above this wound. The course of the projectile was downward and right to left. A deformed small caliber bullet was recovered in the left temporal lobe.
The second head wound was at the back of the head 2.75 inches from the top and 2 inches to the right of center. The course was from back to front and right to left. The bullet passed through the right parietal and the left occipital lobe of the brain. A small caliber deformed projectile was recovered.
There were two chest wounds. One was located on the right chest two inches to the right of center and 13.75 inches from the top of the head. The other was located on the left side, 1.6 inches to the left of center, 14.6 inches from the top of the head. The latter projectile penetrated the right auricle of the heart and coursed to the ninth lateral vertebra. Deformed small caliber projectiles were recovered from both wounds.
The projectile paths for the two chest wounds, and the right top of head was downward.
A wound was found on the right forearm. The course of this projectile was through the arm and a reentry into the right side of the chest. The projectile continued to the lower lobe of the right lung. A small caliber copper coated projectile was recovered from the right pleural cavity. None of the law enforcement witnesses found the copper coated bullet to be remarkable.
Finally, there was a grazing wound on the left side of the head. The wound was 1.4 inch by 0.4 inch.
Vincent Romero had two head wounds, neither of which had evidence of close range firing. One, on the right top of head was located 2 inches to the right of the anterior midline. The size was 0.4 inch by 1 inch. This wound was surrounded by shrapnel injuries possibly from the hard hat that Romero was wearing. A small deformed projectile was found in the temporal lobe of the brain. The path was front to back and downward.
The second head wound was located on the left side of the head; 1.6 inches from the top and 6.3 inches left from the anterior midline. The projectile course was left to right and downward through the left temporalis muscle, left parietal bone, left parietal and temporal brain lobes, and soft jaw tissues. A small deformed projectile was recovered.
A right upper back wound had no evidence of close range firing. This wound was located fourteen inches from the top of the victim and 7.7 inches to the right of the body center. This bullet passed through the lower lobe of the right lung, the diaphragm, and the liver. A deformed small projectile was recovered from the mesentery. The path was from back to front and downward.
The projectile paths for these three wounds were downward.
The left arm had a bullet wound to the back 10.6 inches below the shoulder. This bullet left the arm 10.25 inches below the shoulder and grazed the left chest. A small caliber, deformed, copper coated projectile was recovered from the victim’s clothing. Again, none of the law enforcement witnesses found the copper coating significant.
The toxicology screenings of the victims did not yield any positive results.
When Sergeant Rodriguez testified at the 7 November, 2008 detention hearing to hold the child for murder, he testified that the boy had told his grandmother that his father didn’t suffer because the father had been shot in the chest. This was based upon the grandmother’s statement. Rodriguez testified that the father was found face down and had not been moved. Apache County Attorney Brad Carylon implicated that the child suspect had special knowledge which incriminated him. But, there was no chest wound.
The copper coated projectiles noted by Dr. Porterfield are important. A return of search warrant report dated 06 November, 2008, stated that item 7A, a shell, was found in the assumed murder weapon. A scene photograph shows a cartridge laying loose in the breech of the Chipmunk youth rifle. The bullet is not copper coated. The other recovered projectiles might not have been copper coated. That requires examination.
But, neither law enforcement nor prosecution was not interested in facts. They already had their man, although he was only a child.
References
Timothy Romans Autopsy Report ‑ ML 08‑02126, Case #08110735, November 08, 2008
Vincent Romero Autopsy Report ‑ ML 08‑02128, Case #08110735, November, 08, 2008
by Brian McCorkle

http://www.convolutedbrian.com/st-johns-arizona-double-homicide-autopsies.html (http://www.convolutedbrian.com/st-johns-arizona-double-homicide-autopsies.html)

I see something in the above post in which I can think of a scenario. However, I am hesitant to speak about it as I am frequently misunderstood. I will say that what I see does not permit me to say one way or another that the child did the shooting but it does make me think that the child saw something.

[Its just me]

I see something in the above post in which I can think of a scenario. However, I am hesitant to speak about it as I am frequently misunderstood. I will say that what I see does not permit me to say one way or another that the child did the shooting but it does make me think that the child saw something.

Ha well it's good to know you saw something.:rolleyes: fep

[William Anthony]

Ha well it's good to know you saw something.:rolleyes: fep

Can we stick to discussing the information and the issues pertinent thereto?

[Its just me]

Can we stick to discussing the information and the issues pertinent thereto?

Sure, If you read I was only replying to the "subject" you brought out in "your" post. Wear your own shoes they don't fit me. fep

[William Anthony]

Can we stick to discussing the information and the issues pertinent thereto?

[Its just me]

Can we stick to discussing the information and the issues pertinent thereto?
The best way to win a war is to not start one. To be able to acknowledge when we are wrong, helps us to get it right, imho. A receptive mind and open heart will allow you to go further than you dreamed.

[martin II]

I've alway thought a victim shot by two different kinds of bullets pointed to two different weapons.
This is not the actual autopsies but they they are listed for the references at the bottom. Below it states that both men had arm wounds by a copper coated bullet and the way I'm reading it the path is pretty much straight thru. It was Romans right arm and Romeros left arm. I got this from the MySpace page http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=435515258&blogID=463437844 fep


The homicides of Timothy Romans and Vincent Romero in St. Johns, Arizona, took place on 5 November, 2008. The following day the eight‑year‑old son of one of the victims was arrested for the murders. On 08 November, 2008, an autopsy of both victims was performed by Cynthia Porterfield, D.O. in Tucson, AZ.
The autopsies were witnessed by Detective Debbie Neckel and Sergeant Lucas Rodriguez from the St. Johns Police Department and Sergeant Richard Guinn and Deputy Robert Watkins from the Apache County Sheriff’s Department.
None of the law enforcement witnesses made a note of two interesting findings by the forensic pathologist.
Tim Romans’ autopsy revealed that he had severe plaque blockage in his left anterior descending artery and moderate plaque blockage in his right coronary artery. He also had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Romans had a package of Marlboro cigarettes in his possession. In addition, a package of Camel cigarettes, Sinex over the counter nasal inhaler, and Visine were found by his left foot. These latter items were not collected by law enforcement.
Romans had five penetrating wounds, none of which had any evidence of close range firing. There was also a graze wound to the side of his head.
There were two head wounds. One was located in front of head 2.35 inches right of center. A one inch laceration was located above this wound. The course of the projectile was downward and right to left. A deformed small caliber bullet was recovered in the left temporal lobe.
The second head wound was at the back of the head 2.75 inches from the top and 2 inches to the right of center. The course was from back to front and right to left. The bullet passed through the right parietal and the left occipital lobe of the brain. A small caliber deformed projectile was recovered.
There were two chest wounds. One was located on the right chest two inches to the right of center and 13.75 inches from the top of the head. The other was located on the left side, 1.6 inches to the left of center, 14.6 inches from the top of the head. The latter projectile penetrated the right auricle of the heart and coursed to the ninth lateral vertebra. Deformed small caliber projectiles were recovered from both wounds.
The projectile paths for the two chest wounds, and the right top of head was downward.
A wound was found on the right forearm. The course of this projectile was through the arm and a reentry into the right side of the chest. The projectile continued to the lower lobe of the right lung. A small caliber copper coated projectile was recovered from the right pleural cavity. None of the law enforcement witnesses found the copper coated bullet to be remarkable.
Finally, there was a grazing wound on the left side of the head. The wound was 1.4 inch by 0.4 inch.
Vincent Romero had two head wounds, neither of which had evidence of close range firing. One, on the right top of head was located 2 inches to the right of the anterior midline. The size was 0.4 inch by 1 inch. This wound was surrounded by shrapnel injuries possibly from the hard hat that Romero was wearing. A small deformed projectile was found in the temporal lobe of the brain. The path was front to back and downward.
The second head wound was located on the left side of the head; 1.6 inches from the top and 6.3 inches left from the anterior midline. The projectile course was left to right and downward through the left temporalis muscle, left parietal bone, left parietal and temporal brain lobes, and soft jaw tissues. A small deformed projectile was recovered.
A right upper back wound had no evidence of close range firing. This wound was located fourteen inches from the top of the victim and 7.7 inches to the right of the body center. This bullet passed through the lower lobe of the right lung, the diaphragm, and the liver. A deformed small projectile was recovered from the mesentery. The path was from back to front and downward.
The projectile paths for these three wounds were downward.
The left arm had a bullet wound to the back 10.6 inches below the shoulder. This bullet left the arm 10.25 inches below the shoulder and grazed the left chest. A small caliber, deformed, copper coated projectile was recovered from the victim’s clothing. Again, none of the law enforcement witnesses found the copper coating significant.
The toxicology screenings of the victims did not yield any positive results.
When Sergeant Rodriguez testified at the 7 November, 2008 detention hearing to hold the child for murder, he testified that the boy had told his grandmother that his father didn’t suffer because the father had been shot in the chest. This was based upon the grandmother’s statement. Rodriguez testified that the father was found face down and had not been moved. Apache County Attorney Brad Carylon implicated that the child suspect had special knowledge which incriminated him. But, there was no chest wound.
The copper coated projectiles noted by Dr. Porterfield are important. A return of search warrant report dated 06 November, 2008, stated that item 7A, a shell, was found in the assumed murder weapon. A scene photograph shows a cartridge laying loose in the breech of the Chipmunk youth rifle. The bullet is not copper coated. The other recovered projectiles might not have been copper coated. That requires examination.
But, neither law enforcement nor prosecution was not interested in facts. They already had their man, although he was only a child.
References
Timothy Romans Autopsy Report ‑ ML 08‑02126, Case #08110735, November 08, 2008
Vincent Romero Autopsy Report ‑ ML 08‑02128, Case #08110735, November, 08, 2008
by Brian McCorkle

http://www.convolutedbrian.com/st-johns-arizona-double-homicide-autopsies.html (http://www.convolutedbrian.com/st-johns-arizona-double-homicide-autopsies.html)

I am new to this thread BUT you have given a truck load of info in your post.

Does anyone know what the finger print dustings on the rifle and the bullet box revealed and when they examined the childs hands under magnification
or chemically did they find gun powder residue. If so which bullet type did it match.

The only way this info would not be left behind is the child had on latex gloves and i don't believe that.

[William Anthony]

The best way to win a war is to not start one. To be able to acknowledge when we are wrong, helps us to get it right, imho. A receptive mind and open heart will allow you to go further than you dreamed.

Sound advice if I ever heard it.

[William Anthony]

Why would this child say that his father was shot in the chest, when he was not other than he might have been trying to get the police to stop badgering him? What would be the normal reaction if a bullet grazed someone on the left side of their chest, other than trying to find cover? What would someone's impression be, seeing a shot fired and the victim grabbing his chest? The person making the observation does not have to be the shooter.

[William Anthony]

I am new to this thread BUT you have given a truck load of info in your post.

Does anyone know what the finger print dustings on the rifle and the bullet box revealed and when they examined the childs hands under magnification
or chemically did they find gun powder residue. If so which bullet type did it match.

The only way this info would not be left behind is the child had on latex gloves and i don't believe that.

Welcome aboard.

[FDInLaw]

I am new to this thread BUT you have given a truck load of info in your post.

Does anyone know what the finger print dustings on the rifle and the bullet box revealed and when they examined the childs hands under magnification
or chemically did they find gun powder residue. If so which bullet type did it match.

The only way this info would not be left behind is the child had on latex gloves and i don't believe that.
Welcome to the case, Martin! :seeya:

Do check out the following myspace page;

http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=435515258&blogID=463437844

A friend (?) of the boy's mother has done an excellent job of collecting data and links, and as such it is a great resource. Many of us are still in research mode here. I'm still working through the boy's interview/confession. . . the end of it really bothers me and I have yet been able to put my finger on it.

[tr7fan]

heres the short story
cooerced testimony thrown out
boy is currenty released to mom for the next week
atty sez the state has no proof to connect the boy to the crime

[Its just me]

heres the short story
cooerced testimony thrown out
boy is currenty released to mom for the next week
atty sez the state has no proof to connect the boy to the crime

I'm thankful he got released to his mom and I hope it is for good but if not I expect him to be by Feb 13. I don't know what brought it about but in reading the court documents it's pretty clear they are at the end of a time frame.
Brewer must have a strong defense or he would not have asked for a jury trial (which was denied)
I read at IS that the step mom did not work that day. Do you know if this is true? TIA fep

[lorettalockhorn]

I am new to this thread BUT you have given a truck load of info in your post.

Does anyone know what the finger print dustings on the rifle and the bullet box revealed and when they examined the childs hands under magnification
or chemically did they find gun powder residue. If so which bullet type did it match.

The only way this info would not be left behind is the child had on latex gloves and i don't believe that.

Hey Martin, I've never read any results of any such tests. LE took the clothes that CR had worn the day of the murders, but also haven't read anything about GSR on them.

[lorettalockhorn]

heres the straight skinny
the state has no evidence against the boy . hes not gonna be convicted when he hasnt done anything
if you dont beleive me, GO down to the court house and ask whiting what evidence he has and is it enough to convict. pls email me first and tell me before you go to talk to him cause i wanta see him admit theres no evidence against the boy

i just dont believe you think the police chief you got is credible. do a google on him and read about the lawsuits against him. hes got a law degree but went taking pictures BEFORE a warrant was isssued so the pics arent admissible. now hes applied for a job in los lunas,new mexico
as for rodriquez he testifyed in the probable cause hearing that the boy must have been there because he said his dad was shot in the chest.GUESS WHAT no chest wound in vincent, so mr rodriqez was walking right on the line of perjury.. det neckle lied under oath to the judge and he caught her at it( in case you dont what this is its PERJURY UNDER OATH )avila and carlyon - read http://www.joelbarrsstory.com/index.html theres enough in there for a few felonies and disbarment or censure if the state bar was feeling good the day they heard the complaint against carlyon
a little higher up the board her E M has been busy spreading mud in tucson E M. (eagargal) — November 30,2008 @ 2:14PM. Ratings: -8 +3 ...
regulus2.azstarnet.com/comments/index.php?id=269536 - 87k and on board.insessions.com bad mouthing the thomas family specifically eryn her sister brother and father. rather than facing the fact eryn is being as supportive to the boy as a mother can be. of course these are just facts ive tracked down using state records
heres what tiffany has been up to i read she engaged and also has a live in girlfriend
read that here http://axtonromero.blogspot.com/2008/11/tiffany-romero-in-town.html
editor you probably wont post this but its all true

Curious as to why if The State has no evidence against CR, they are going ahead with the case. I'd love to see it dropped based on what I've read, but who is pressuring the prosecution?

Didn't read very far at the Romero site; pretty vapid stuff. Maybe I didn't read enough.

[martin II]

Hey Martin, I've never read any results of any such tests. LE took the clothes that CR had worn the day of the murders, but also haven't read anything about GSR on them.

IMO OPINION it is not possible for one to fire a gun in hand without gun power residue not being depsited on the hand of the shooter. that is the first thing le test. It is also possible that residue will be found on the lower sleeve of clothing worn by the shooter. if there was no gun residue analysis report
i assume the DA did not request one or le did not do one.:shrug:

[lorettalockhorn]

I'm thankful he got released to his mom and I hope it is for good but if not I expect him to be by Feb 13. I don't know what brought it about but in reading the court documents it's pretty clear they are at the end of a time frame.
Brewer must have a strong defense or he would not have asked for a jury trial (which was denied)
I read at IS that the step mom did not work that day. Do you know if this is true? TIA fep

I've never read that stepmom was off that day, but according to CR, she wasn't off until 5:00, or due home until 5:00. I read that she works the same place the guys did, but don't remember LE asking about her comings and goings. Sick day maybe? Something that a donut would cure?

[lorettalockhorn]

IMO OPINION it is not possible for one to fire a gun in hand without gun power residue not being depsited on the hand of the shooter. that is the first thing le test. It is also possible that residue will be found on the lower sleeve of clothing worn by the shooter. if there was no gun residue analysis report
i assume the DA did not request one or le did not do one.:shrug:

Agree that there should have been GSR on his hand and clothes; on the hands and clothes of the shooter, period. But don't remember reading that his hands were tested, and the clothes weren't gathered up until the next day at the grandmother's (I think). If there is GSR on them, I would question when they got there, since there is no chain of custody.

I would have liked it if LE had gathered all the weapons in the house and all the ammo, but I don't think they did. I'd be curious as to what weapons had been recently fired. At the risk of speaking ill of the dead, these guys strike me as not getting along with others particularly well, and maybe the types to not bat an eye at a little gun play/horse play. I'm very interested in whoever might have had an ax to grind with Tim over his affair(s) and if there had been any threats as a result.

[FDInLaw]

IMO OPINION it is not possible for one to fire a gun in hand without gun power residue not being depsited on the hand of the shooter. that is the first thing le test. It is also possible that residue will be found on the lower sleeve of clothing worn by the shooter. if there was no gun residue analysis report
i assume the DA did not request one or le did not do one.:shrug:Hey, I just posted this link over on the gun discussion thread:

Gunshot residue found on clothing of boy charged in slayings


http://www.tucsoncitizen.com/daily/breakingnews/106838.php

It bothers me that the boy was the only one tested to my knowledge. . .

[FDInLaw]

Based on tests, the report said the boy's shirt and pants might have come into contact with or were in close proximity to a discharged firearm.

Peter Diaczuk, director of forensic science training at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice's Center for Modern Forensic Practice in New York, said the examination of the boy's clothing isn't particularly telling, other than to confirm the boy was at the crime scene.

"This is neither damning for the defense nor incredibly probative for the prosecution," Diaczuk said. "It's just a matter of tidying up loose ends."

My guess is that they did not find the amount that should be expected considering all the shots that were fired. . . just my gut.


(From link above)

[lorettalockhorn]

Thanks FD; even though the boy admitted to firing the weapon at the scene, I'm not sure that I believe him. The defense could question when the clothing was exposed to the GSR. And if the stepmother's (or whoever has washing duties) ability to do laundry is as poor as the general housekeeping skills, I would wonder if the boy wasn't wearing clothing that he had worn previously when hunting for example. Also I would question the chain of custody since the clothing wasn't immediately seized.

[FDInLaw]

Thanks FD; even though the boy admitted to firing the weapon at the scene, I'm not sure that I believe him. The defense could question when the clothing was exposed to the GSR. And if the stepmother's (or whoever has washing duties) ability to do laundry is as poor as the general housekeeping skills, I would wonder if the boy wasn't wearing clothing that he had worn previously when hunting for example. Also I would question the chain of custody since the clothing wasn't immediately seized.
Excellent point! IMO

[Its just me]

I've never read that stepmom was off that day, but according to CR, she wasn't off until 5:00, or due home until 5:00. I read that she works the same place the guys did, but don't remember LE asking about her comings and goings. Sick day maybe? Something that a donut would cure?

I like the donut cure. LOL I have been reading at IS for several days and I'm sure I saw it posted that she didnt work that day. I don't remember the nic but I'm not familiar enough with the posters to know if it was a troll or what. The stepmom is the hot topic right now and some of their questions are reasonable and go along with what I've read.

You may be correct that she work with the guys but I'm thinking she works as or with a Physical Therapist just a short distance from her home. Close to the grocery store where she purchased donuts and milk after 4 and went back around 5 for spaghetti items for supper. The store’s video showed her purchasing the donuts/milk but there is a mix-up with LE getting her on video purchasing the spaghetti items but Neckel states there is a receipt showing the items were purchased. It’s not an overstatement saying there is some sloppy LE work in the case. Sad. fep

[SaraSidle]

Nothing about you or your posts bother me in the least bit. I merely thanked you. I don't know why you see that as problem but so be it.

me too Loretta. I have a degree in Psych and Criminal Justice and worked the field in both for 15 years at the same time. this is why I have always respected what you say in your posts. we all have something to share and thank goodness we are not on OJ cause that one makes be burn so much I will not give it a moment of my time but the posters here may make a difference I think with all of our experience. let's try anyways and be nice to each other. I mean none of us have the right answers but we can have good ideas together even if we disagree. sara

[Its just me]

My guess is that they did not find the amount that should be expected considering all the shots that were fired. . . just my gut.


(From link above)

It was discussed in detail at IS that it was a very small amount....No one appeared to be disagreeing on the amount so I'm taking it to be truthful.

I totally agree with Loretta's post about the pants. The dirty part and the chain of custody. The same office (s) who questioned CR collected the pants the next morning. fep

[tr7fan]

Curious as to why if The State has no evidence against CR, they are going ahead with the case. I'd love to see it dropped based on what I've read, but who is pressuring the prosecution?

Didn't read very far at the Romero site; pretty vapid stuff. Maybe I didn't read enough.

possible a matter of pride thinking theyll cop out and sign a plea agreement.(the last county atty offered a pleaa agreement almost immediately. i dont think plea agreements are offered very often in double homicide cases
i have a freind that prosecuted in navajo county and copped a plea . then the county atty told him ya know jeff we didnt even have any evidence on ya
if ya didnt do the crime dont cop out is all i can figure. plus the case has attracted national attention . employees saw "all hell broke loose when the cooerced confession was realeased. its too funny the outgoing county atty is the one that released the tape "because it was a public document" i think he did it cause he didnt get reelected. there has not been a single piece of evidence released proving this boy is guilty. alot of hearsay etc.
your pts on chain of custoday of the clothers and the rather unorthodox house cleaning that existed there lol

[William Anthony]

me too Loretta. I have a degree in Psych and Criminal Justice and worked the field in both for 15 years at the same time. this is why I have always respected what you say in your posts. we all have something to share and thank goodness we are not on OJ cause that one makes be burn so much I will not give it a moment of my time but the posters here may make a difference I think with all of our experience. let's try anyways and be nice to each other. I mean none of us have the right answers but we can have good ideas together even if we disagree. sara

Sara,

I think that this case pulls at posters' heart stings, as it should. You have degrees that will allow you to give a valuable insight in this case. I have considered the grandmother's statement that, if any child could do these crimes, it would be this child. IIRC, she also said they did not treat the child right. Irrespective of which story of the child we believe, it appears to me that this child needs help, mentally and/or emotionally.

I believe that the child's Constitutional rights may have been violated. Also, I believe that the loved ones, family members, the victims themselves and society have rights. I know that the law is slanted to favor the rights of the accused and more so when the accused is a juvenile. I shutter to voice some of my opinions and that is all they are, because of the emotional attachment to the child, which I do believe is deserved. Near the end of the alleged confession, the child says he was punished mainly for prevarications. If that is true, I wonder if the child may have been suffering from some mental problems that have thus far gone undiagnosed.

I once knew a person, who laughed all the time. The person seemed to be one of the happiest persons I knew. I was surprised to learn that the person had committed suicide, when they gave all outward signs of being happy the day before. I will state the obvious. What was going through this child's mind when he allegedly walked around the neighborhood for so long, instead of going home and playing with the dog or doing homework, if what he said is true? Did this child see more and is so traumatized by what he saw that he is making up stories? Did this child do what he is accused of? What is the best resolution in this case? Do we as the public have a right to know, being that this child is so young?

[Seashell]

I hope this child is treated fairly and seems to me that his mom and friends are doing a better job than the law.
I hope this case is resolved fairly.

[martin II]

My guess is that they did not find the amount that should be expected considering all the shots that were fired. . . just my gut.


(From link above)

Well if this child fired all of the shots fired his hand skin would definately show large amounts of gunpower residue.
The fact that le has not released this info says something.

[William Anthony]

I hope this child is treated fairly and seems to me that his mom and friends are doing a better job than the law.
I hope this case is resolved fairly.

That depends on the definition of fairly and what context it is used in, imho. I think the family members, loved ones and society also have a need to be treated fairly and I don't think that sloppy investigations done by LE fairly address any of those issues of fairness.

[FDInLaw]

Well if this child fired all of the shots fired his hand skin would definately show large amounts of gunpower residue.
The fact that le has not released this info says something.

That's what I figure, and I believe he was wearing a long sleeve shirt. . . am I right here? There should be a significant amount of residue on his clothing. Loretta brought up an excellent point as well, since the adults in the home appear to be domestically challenged, do you think it's possible that the residue found was from a previous hunting trip???

[William Anthony]

Do we believe the child went to school with dirty clothes on or that the residue would not come off while he was walking after school?

[FDInLaw]

Do we believe the child went to school with dirty clothes on or that the residue would not come off while he was walking after school?That is the question. . . how long does GSR stay on clothing? Does it survive a washing, etc. :shrug:









:read:

[FDInLaw]

Clothing worn by a child accused of murder in St. Johns tested positive for gunshot residue and his fingerprints were found on a box of ammunition, according to lab reports disclosed Monday.

But independent experts question the significance of both pieces of evidence.

The boy's clothing was not collected until the day after his father and a friend were shot and killed, and his skin was never tested for traces of gunshot residue. The boy, who turned 9 last month, frequently hunted with his father and could have held the box of .22-caliber cartridges or come into contact with residue at any time. A report from the Bexar County Criminal Investigation Lab in Texas says more than three-dozen particles of lead, antimony and barium were found on a long-sleeved shirt and denim pants the boy wore the day his father and a friend were killed. Michael Martinez, a forensic scientist who analyzed the garments, concluded that the clothing may have come in contact with, or been close to, a discharged firearm.

However, the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies have stopped using gunshot-residue tests because cross-contamination and other problems can lead to dubious conclusions.

The St. Johns boy is not being identified by The Arizona Republic because of his age.

Police accuse him of killing his 29-year-old father and 39-year-old Tim Romans with a .22 rifle on Nov. 5.

In a videotaped interview, the child first denied responsibility for the killings, then told police that he shot the men to end their suffering after they had been wounded by someone else.

Police reports said the boy later told a social worker that he had kept a tally of his spankings and vowed that 1,000 "would be his limit."

Steven Howard, a Michigan attorney and expert on shooting reconstruction, said tens of thousands of microscopic particles are expelled when a firearm is discharged. Upon learning that the St. Johns boy's clothes were collected a day after the crime - and that his skin was not tested at all - Howard criticized investigators. "Number 1, they're stupid," he said. "Number 2, they're stupid. Number 3, they're stupid. . . . This is just a case of poor police work."

St. Johns police, who viewed the boy as a victim at first, are under a gag order and could not be reached for comment. Prosecutors and defense attorneys also are prohibited from commenting on the case.


Residue controversial

Howard said gunshot residue has become controversial in the forensics world because innocent defendants can be tainted without firing a weapon, especially if they sat in a patrol car, touched a gun or were near the weapon when it was fired. The St. Johns boy was from a hunting family and had been in the room where his father died.

Police records say the boy's pants and shirt were retrieved from a relative's home the day after the slayings. Howard said he would expect to find dozens of particles under those circumstances, "even if he took the clothes and hung them in a closet."

John Cayton, a firearms examiner and former chief criminalist with the Kansas City, Mo., Police Department, said residue testing remains an important tool and described the number of particles found on the boy's clothes as "significant." But he also questioned whether the garments were contaminated elsewhere. Cayton added that it is not uncommon for small-town investigators to overlook evidentiary protocols because they often lack training and experience with homicides.

Boston police scrapped gunshot-residue tests in 2005 and the FBI followed suit a year later after acknowledging widespread contamination in its own lab, according to the Sun of Baltimore. Numerous other agencies have re-evaluated their validity.

Howard contends that gunshot residue is virtually useless in proving guilt, but the lack of particles may exonerate defendants.

Proceedings against the boy have been suspended until his competency to stand trial is determined. Because he may be found incapable of understanding the legal system, Apache County prosecutors have sought to dismiss one homicide count, allowing them to charge him with that crime years from now, when he has matured.

Judge Pro Tem Michael Roca refused to allow the dismissal, prompting prosecutors to file an appeal with the state Court of Appeals. That issue is pending.




http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2009/01/06/20090106stjohns.html

[William Anthony]

That is the question. . . how long does GSR stay on clothing? Does it survive a washing, etc. :shrug:









:read:

Thanks for the understanding.

[Its just me]

Without knowing someone's habits it's impossible to say if they would have or would not have done certain things....but I find it odd that Romero still had on his hard hat and goggles and all the layers of clothes they are reported to have been wearing. Neckel stated that Romans had on a heavy coat. I'm South Georgia and have no knowledge what the weather is in AZ but on our coldest days we take our heavy coats off when we get into our vehicles and I don't ever remember seeing anyone wearing a hard hat when they are not on the job site. fep

[William Anthony]

Without knowing someone's habits it's impossible to say if they would have or would not have done certain things....but I find it odd that Romero still had on his hard hat and goggles and all the layers of clothes they are reported to have been wearing. Neckel stated that Romans had on a heavy coat. I'm South Georgia and have no knowledge what the weather is in AZ but on our coldest days we take our heavy coats off when we get into our vehicles and I don't ever remember seeing anyone wearing a hard hat when they are not on the job site. fep

I think I understand your point and it brought back something that always made me laugh. I had a friend that I went to high school with, who used to wear his hard hat to the bar in order to show the women he had a good job. :) I do agree that it is not the normal course of conduct.

[Owl]

Without knowing someone's habits it's impossible to say if they would have or would not have done certain things....but I find it odd that Romero still had on his hard hat and goggles and all the layers of clothes they are reported to have been wearing. Neckel stated that Romans had on a heavy coat. I'm South Georgia and have no knowledge what the weather is in AZ but on our coldest days we take our heavy coats off when we get into our vehicles and I don't ever remember seeing anyone wearing a hard hat when they are not on the job site. fep

Since Mr. Romero and Mr. Romans were going to help a friend do some handy work maybe Mr. Romero normally left his head gear and goggles in his room so that's what his intent was. Or maybe he liked his hard hat.
I think the high that day in St. Johns was around 50.

[FDInLaw]

Since Mr. Romero and Mr. Romans were going to help a friend do some handy work maybe Mr. Romero normally left his head gear and goggles in his room so that's what his intent was. Or maybe he liked his hard hat.
I think the high that day in St. Johns was around 50.
Welcome to the board! :seeya:


We need more folks that give a hoot (sorry, I couldn't help myself :o )!

[Its just me]

Since Mr. Romero and Mr. Romans were going to help a friend do some handy work maybe Mr. Romero normally left his head gear and goggles in his room so that's what his intent was. Or maybe he liked his hard hat.
I think the high that day in St. Johns was around 50.

You may be correct but it's like I said without knowing someone's habits it's impossible to say what someone would or would not do or even likes. I just find it odd. fep

[Owl]

Welcome to the board! :seeya:


We need more folks that give a hoot (sorry, I couldn't help myself :o )!

Thank you!
There just isn't much new on this case. Maybe we'll know more this week.

[FDInLaw]

Without knowing someone's habits it's impossible to say if they would have or would not have done certain things....but I find it odd that Romero still had on his hard hat and goggles and all the layers of clothes they are reported to have been wearing. Neckel stated that Romans had on a heavy coat. I'm South Georgia and have no knowledge what the weather is in AZ but on our coldest days we take our heavy coats off when we get into our vehicles and I don't ever remember seeing anyone wearing a hard hat when they are not on the job site. fep

I find this odd as well. I once had a hardhat job and I couldn't wait to that that thing off (mind you, this was just a summer job and I was not use to wearing one). Goggles too. . . weird. The house was a mess but not a hazard zone! It would be interesting to know if this was a normal behavior. Maybe it is a sign that Vincent expected trouble? Sadly, hardhats do not stop bullets, as determined by the autopsy.

Shots to the head are another thing that jump out at me. . . both men took them. Unless these shots were rendered after then men were on the ground, I would expect that shots fired by a shorter perpetrator would most likely hit the victims in the abdomen region. Going go back and read over the specifics there. :read:

[William Anthony]

Since Mr. Romero and Mr. Romans were going to help a friend do some handy work maybe Mr. Romero normally left his head gear and goggles in his room so that's what his intent was. Or maybe he liked his hard hat.
I think the high that day in St. Johns was around 50.

Didn't realize you were a newbie. Welcome, welcome, welcome.

[Its just me]

I find this odd as well. I once had a hardhat job and I couldn't wait to that that thing off (mind you, this was just a summer job and I was not use to wearing one). Goggles too. . . weird. The house was a mess but not a hazard zone! It would be interesting to know if this was a normal behavior. Maybe it is a sign that Vincent expected trouble? Sadly, hardhats do not stop bullets, as determined by the autopsy.

Shots to the head are another thing that jump out at me. . . both men took them. Unless these shots were rendered after then men were on the ground, I would expect that shots fired by a shorter perpetrator would most likely hit the victims in the abdomen region. Going go back and read over the specifics there. :read:

I would like to see the crime scene pictures of where the bodies were found. In the ones I've seen I haven't seen any blood. I read about the drops of blood leading up to the front and blood on the victims but nothing I remember about blood at the scene. In one LE report it stated RM had a lot of blood on his face..if he was face down there would have been blood where he lay. I know this is graphic and I'm sorry. fep

[Its just me]

Thank you!
There just isn't much new on this case. Maybe we'll know more this week.

Welcome, I think we lack some of the old stuff about the case. The thread has not been active very long. Lots of us are newbies. fep

[FDInLaw]

I would like to see the crime scene pictures of where the bodies were found. In the ones I've seen I haven't seen any blood. I read about the drops of blood leading up to the front and blood on the victims but nothing I remember about blood at the scene. In one LE report it stated RM had a lot of blood on his face..if he was face down there would have been blood where he lay. I know this is graphic and I'm sorry. fep

I've been wondering about the blood evidence as well. With VR shot in the stairwell, there should be signs of the boy sitting next to the body (if his testimony is true). Also, with casings found on the third and fourth step as well as on the landing. . . foot prints??? Prints on the wall or hand rail? Blood is one of the best preservers of evidence if heeded at the unset of the investigation. I assume we will not see pictures until a trial (if then). . . this sort of thing is very hard on the family if released.

MOO

[lorettalockhorn]

Do we believe the child went to school with dirty clothes on or that the residue would not come off while he was walking after school?

To me, dirty clothes can have two meanings; one being that they were simply unwashed since the last time they were worn, and I don't think GSR would necessarily be noticed if on CR's clothing when he went to school that day. The other meaning would be the presence of actual dirt; it's possible that CR's clothers (which were noted as being dirty when LE retrieved them from the grandparents' house) could have gotten dirty while CR was walking around before going home. I can picture him coming in contact with his friend's dog(s), climbing a tree, making a mud pie, any number of eight year old activities that make eight year olds get dirty.

Without knowing someone's habits it's impossible to say if they would have or would not have done certain things....but I find it odd that Romero still had on his hard hat and goggles and all the layers of clothes they are reported to have been wearing. Neckel stated that Romans had on a heavy coat. I'm South Georgia and have no knowledge what the weather is in AZ but on our coldest days we take our heavy coats off when we get into our vehicles and I don't ever remember seeing anyone wearing a hard hat when they are not on the job site. fep

The question of habit is important. What time does CR normally get off the bus? How much time does he normally have to dally before going home? Doesn't Tiffany normally work on Wednesday, and not normally get home until 5pm? Why was she off that day? What time does she normally get off on Wednesday? Early enough for two shopping trips and a visit with the local first responders before going home? And didn't I read that she made the second trip to the market to buy items that had spoiled in the car? If it was 50 degrees that day it doesn't make sense that anything would have spoiled. And what is the point of one door being locked, but not the other?

[Its just me]

I've been wondering about the blood evidence as well. With VR shot in the stairwell, there should be signs of the boy sitting next to the body (if his testimony is true). Also, with casings found on the third and fourth step as well as on the landing. . . foot prints??? Prints on the wall or hand rail? Blood is one of the best preservers of evidence if heeded at the unset of the investigation. I assume we will not see pictures until a trial (if then). . . this sort of thing is very hard on the family if released.

MOO

I can completely understand from self experience when photos surrounding the death of a loved one became important. In my son's death I had dificulty with the orange markings on the highway.
During my reading I was never focused on this and I could have missed something being said but I only have memory of the blood trail being discussed. There were lots of clothing, the hard hat and I believe TR was said to have on a stocking type cap so there may not have been much blood evidence to report on. fep

[lorettalockhorn]

I find this odd as well. I once had a hardhat job and I couldn't wait to that that thing off (mind you, this was just a summer job and I was not use to wearing one). Goggles too. . . weird. The house was a mess but not a hazard zone! It would be interesting to know if this was a normal behavior. Maybe it is a sign that Vincent expected trouble? Sadly, hardhats do not stop bullets, as determined by the autopsy.

Shots to the head are another thing that jump out at me. . . both men took them. Unless these shots were rendered after then men were on the ground, I would expect that shots fired by a shorter perpetrator would most likely hit the victims in the abdomen region. Going go back and read over the specifics there. :read:

I haven't read and/or don't remember if the autopsy designates the order or shots, but weren't Vincent's arms beneath him, meaning that he didn't have time to even put up his hands in a defensive posture? So was the shot to the back the first shot? Seems to me that the angle of the shot would tell investigators a lot about the height of the shooter.

I've been wondering about the blood evidence as well. With VR shot in the stairwell, there should be signs of the boy sitting next to the body (if his testimony is true). Also, with casings found on the third and fourth step as well as on the landing. . . foot prints??? Prints on the wall or hand rail? Blood is one of the best preservers of evidence if heeded at the unset of the investigation. I assume we will not see pictures until a trial (if then). . . this sort of thing is very hard on the family if released.

MOO



I would have expected the photos that have been released to be somewhat bloody, but haven't noticed blood or gray matter either one.

[Owl]

To me, dirty clothes can have two meanings; one being that they were simply unwashed since the last time they were worn, and I don't think GSR would necessarily be noticed if on CR's clothing when he went to school that day. The other meaning would be the presence of actual dirt; it's possible that CR's clothers (which were noted as being dirty when LE retrieved them from the grandparents' house) could have gotten dirty while CR was walking around before going home. I can picture him coming in contact with his friend's dog(s), climbing a tree, making a mud pie, any number of eight year old activities that make eight year olds get dirty.



The question of habit is important. What time does CR normally get off the bus? How much time does he normally have to dally before going home? Doesn't Tiffany normally work on Wednesday, and not normally get home until 5pm? Why was she off that day? What time does she normally get off on Wednesday? Early enough for two shopping trips and a visit with the local first responders before going home? And didn't I read that she made the second trip to the market to buy items that had spoiled in the car? If it was 50 degrees that day it doesn't make sense that anything would have spoiled. And what is the point of one door being locked, but not the other?

According to the school the boy gets off the bus between 2:45pm and 3:00pm.
I think the back door was always dead-bolted.

[FDInLaw]

According to the school the boy gets off the bus between 2:45pm and 3:00pm.
I think the back door was always dead-bolted.
That leaves a lot of time to kill (no pun intended).

[William Anthony]

To me, dirty clothes can have two meanings; one being that they were simply unwashed since the last time they were worn, and I don't think GSR would necessarily be noticed if on CR's clothing when he went to school that day. The other meaning would be the presence of actual dirt; it's possible that CR's clothers (which were noted as being dirty when LE retrieved them from the grandparents' house) could have gotten dirty while CR was walking around before going home. I can picture him coming in contact with his friend's dog(s), climbing a tree, making a mud pie, any number of eight year old activities that make eight year olds get dirty.



The question of habit is important. What time does CR normally get off the bus? How much time does he normally have to dally before going home? Doesn't Tiffany normally work on Wednesday, and not normally get home until 5pm? Why was she off that day? What time does she normally get off on Wednesday? Early enough for two shopping trips and a visit with the local first responders before going home? And didn't I read that she made the second trip to the market to buy items that had spoiled in the car? If it was 50 degrees that day it doesn't make sense that anything would have spoiled. And what is the point of one door being locked, but not the other?

I meant going to school with unwashed clothes. I did not find the fact that they were collected dirty the next day as significant and there is no information what activities he engaged in after LE left, to my understanding. I do not know how long or the adhesive properties of GSR. Going by the information as to what he said he was doing before getting home, I think that the only time that could have caused any past GSR to become dislodged from his clothing was when he waived. I don't know about this child but I had play clothes, school clothes and Sunday go to meeting clothes.

Like you, I have some concerns about the second trip to the store. However, this would mean that Ms. Romans and Ms. Romero would have to be in some conspiracy since the information is that Mr. Romans was alive when the child came home. There are many unanswered questions.

[Its just me]

To me, dirty clothes can have two meanings; one being that they were simply unwashed since the last time they were worn, and I don't think GSR would necessarily be noticed if on CR's clothing when he went to school that day. The other meaning would be the presence of actual dirt; it's possible that CR's clothers (which were noted as being dirty when LE retrieved them from the grandparents' house) could have gotten dirty while CR was walking around before going home. I can picture him coming in contact with his friend's dog(s), climbing a tree, making a mud pie, any number of eight year old activities that make eight year olds get dirty.



The question of habit is important. What time does CR normally get off the bus? How much time does he normally have to dally before going home? Doesn't Tiffany normally work on Wednesday, and not normally get home until 5pm? Why was she off that day? What time does she normally get off on Wednesday? Early enough for two shopping trips and a visit with the local first responders before going home? And didn't I read that she made the second trip to the market to buy items that had spoiled in the car? If it was 50 degrees that day it doesn't make sense that anything would have spoiled. And what is the point of one door being locked, but not the other?

I don't have a problem with CR's clothes being dirty...to me it points to him not sitting in the house waiting for his dad to come home...he got dirty after he got off the bus. Children don't usually get dirty at school. IIRC CR said his stepmom didn't get home until 5 on Mondays and Wednesdays. fep

[lorettalockhorn]

According to the school the boy gets off the bus between 2:45pm and 3:00pm.
I think the back door was always dead-bolted.

Yes, but the front door is left unlocked. Why? So CR can let himself in? If Tiffany has time to gallivant around town, why not simply be at home to greet him?

As for the time between getting off the bus and whenever he actually got home; as a former eight year old, the sister of four former eight year olds, and the mother/step-mother of five former eight year olds, and a former Akela, I can well imagine CR being engaged in important eight year old pursuits.

[FDInLaw]

Yes, but the front door is left unlocked. Why? So CR can let himself in? If Tiffany has time to gallivant around town, why not simply be at home to greet him?

As for the time between getting off the bus and whenever he actually got home; as a former eight year old, the sister of four former eight year olds, and the mother/step-mother of five former eight year olds, and a former Akela, I can well imagine CR being engaged in important eight year old pursuits.
I was a major mud pie fiend myself.


It would be nice to know more details. . . what does "dirty" mean in this case? Like you state, this could help establish the boy's alibi. It is possible though that the boy got dirty at school or went to school in an unkempt manner. This is Arizona we are talking about. . . they might have a dirt/sand playground. Most small towns in the state are bit on the dusty side. MOO

[Its just me]

And didn't I read that she made the second trip to the market to buy items that had spoiled in the car? If it was 50 degrees that day it doesn't make sense that anything would have spoiled. And what is the point of one door being locked, but not the other?

The items were purchased close to 5 pm and it was colder during the night and would not have reached a high of probably around 50 degrees until the afternoon the next day. I'm not sure even fish would have been stinking by the next day...but I'm not positive when Neckel went to the house to look around and the receipt of the groc. was found. fep

[lorettalockhorn]

I meant going to school with unwashed clothes. I did not find the fact that they were collected dirty the next day as significant and there is no information what activities he engaged in after LE left, to my understanding. I do not know how long or the adhesive properties of GSR. Going by the information as to what he said he was doing before getting home, I think that the only time that could have caused any past GSR to become dislodged from his clothing was when he waived. I don't know about this child but I had play clothes, school clothes and Sunday go to meeting clothes.

Like you, I have some concerns about the second trip to the store. However, this would mean that Ms. Romans and Ms. Romero would have to be in some conspiracy since the information is that Mr. Romans was alive when the child came home. There are many unanswered questions.

The most important detail about the clothes (dirty or clean, GSR or not) is that they were gathered well after the crime. There is no chain of custody, therefore there is no proof when the GSR was deposited.

I haven't seen any phone records; at this point I'm only assuming that it was CR that Mrs. Romans claimed to have heard. Or that she heard anything at all. Even if the records bear out the time of the call, we have to take Mrs. Romans' claim of hearing CR or anyone at face value. Mrs. Romans seems to have plenty of motive here; Tim made her a cuckhold. And wasn't discreet about it.

[Its just me]

The most important detail about the clothes (dirty or clean, GSR or not) is that they were gathered well after the crime. There is no chain of custody, therefore there is no proof when the GSR was deposited.

I haven't seen any phone records; at this point I'm only assuming that it was CR that Mrs. Romans claimed to have heard. Or that she heard anything at all. Even if the records bear out the time of the call, we have to take Mrs. Romans' claim of hearing CR or anyone at face value. Mrs. Romans seems to have plenty of motive here; Tim made her a cuckhold. And wasn't discreet about it.

Mrs. Roman's claim of hearing CR seems to change each time it was told. Kind of a red flag for me. fep

[lorettalockhorn]

I have sympathy for the victims, but the families seem overly bloodthirsty IMO, even to the point of criticizing the boy's furloughs. They don't seem to notice the discrepancies in the investigation (but maybe they know much, much more than we do), don't seem troubled by the lackadaisical investigation, and don't seemed panicked that there may be a killer(s) walking the streets, while a child's life is in ruins and he is virtually left alone to internalize the horrors of the discovery of the bodies. Kudos to Mr. Brewer for offering to foot the bill for counseling.

[William Anthony]

The most important detail about the clothes (dirty or clean, GSR or not) is that they were gathered well after the crime. There is no chain of custody, therefore there is no proof when the GSR was deposited.

I haven't seen any phone records; at this point I'm only assuming that it was CR that Mrs. Romans claimed to have heard. Or that she heard anything at all. Even if the records bear out the time of the call, we have to take Mrs. Romans' claim of hearing CR or anyone at face value. Mrs. Romans seems to have plenty of motive here; Tim made her a cuckhold. And wasn't discreet about it.

I understand your point but chain of custody, according to my understanding, does not become relevant until after items are collected. I think I know what you mean.

I do not think that cheating is always a motive for murder, although it can be. Why would she implicate the child and why would the grandmother say that this child was capable of doing it? The conspiracy theory, if there is one, seems to widen. What is there that is not being said?

[Its just me]

PHOENIX — It is very unlikely that the videotaped confession of an 8-year-old Arizona (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/national/usstatesterritoriesandpossessions/arizona/index.html?inline=nyt-geo) boy who is charged with killing his father and another man will be admissible in court, legal and child-psychology experts say.


Mother Baffled in Arizona Murders (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/13/us/13child.html?ref=us) (November 13, 2008)
ST. JOHNS, Ariz. — A week after the police charged an 8-year-old boy in the premeditated shooting deaths of his father and another man, the boy’s mother, teachers and others who know him say they are no closer to understanding the roots of such a heinous crime.
“I don’t believe he did this,” said the mother, Erin Bloomfield, 26, who has shared custody of her son with his father, Vincent Romero, 29, since the couple divorced six years ago. She said she talked to the boy every week and visited an average of once a month, driving the 20 hours to St. Johns from her home in Mississippi.
Ms. Bloomfield had just returned from her latest visit when she got a call about the shooting and immediately returned to St. Johns, a windy hamlet of horse ranches, low-slung houses and double-wide trailers about 170 miles east-northeast of Phoenix. The largest buildings are a few churches and schools along the single main road, which has no stoplights.
“People like their independence and freedom here,” said Wendy Guffey, 60, a substance abuse counselor at a local health clinic. “It’s sort of the redneck ethic. A lot of people haul their own water and live off generators and candles out here. Back to the land.”
Many of her clients struggle with unemployment, drugs and tedium. “A lot of people around here say there’s nothing to do,” Ms. Guffey said.
Ms. Bloomfield described her son as a “normal boy” who played video games nonstop and doted on his new dog, a boxer. But in recent months, she said, he “seemed to be changing.”
“There was a distance with me after a while,” she said.
Whenever she spoke with her son, Ms. Bloomfield said, “I had to go through Tiffany,” a reference to his stepmother, Tiffany Romero. “Tiffany would always sit there while he talked to me on the phone, and after a while, he became more and more distant.”
She worried, she said, that the boy might be being abused although she had no proof.
Before Judge Michael P. Roca of Apache County Superior Court blocked anyone connected to the case from talking to the news media, Police Chief Roy Melnick of St. Johns said there was no evidence that the boy had been abused at home or in school.
A person answering the door at the Romero home on Tuesday said Tiffany Romero would not discuss the case because of Judge Roca’s order.
Ms. Bloomfield said that after her son told her that his father and stepmother quarreled often, “I called Tiffany about that, and I think I got my son into trouble.”
“The next time I talked to him about it,” she added, “he said that Tiffany told him that ‘what happens in this house stays in this house.’ ”
Ms. Bloomfield also said that her son was close to his father, and that the two regularly played softball and basketball, and went hiking and hunting together, sometimes joined by the other man who was killed, Timothy Romans, 39. Mr. Romans worked in construction with Mr. Romero and rented a room in the family house.
Ms. Bloomfield confirmed that after first seeking permission from their parish priest, her ex-husband recently bought their son a .22 rifle for hunting, a common pastime of young boys and their fathers in this town of about 4,000 people.
The boy “took his religious faith very seriously,” said Sister Angelina Chavez, who has known him since he was a baby and taught his religious class every Monday at St. Johns Catholic Church. It is the church where the Romeros were married in September, and where hundreds of townspeople turned out for Mr. Romero’s funeral on Monday. “I just don’t know what happened to him spiritually, emotionally,” she said.
“This is going to take a while to get over,” Sister Angelina said. “Parishioners have come to me asking why it happened. I just don’t know.”
Ms. Bloomfield expressed disgust at rumors sweeping the town, among them that her son killed his father because he had not been allowed to go trick-or-treating on Halloween. “This town is too small,” she said. “Everybody thinks they know what happened. They’re saying all kinds of things about my son. They have smashed him down to nothing.”

cont...

snips from above: fep

Ms. Bloomfield described her son as a “normal boy” who played video games nonstop and doted on his new dog, a boxer. But in recent months, she said, he “seemed to be changing.”
“There was a distance with me after a while,” she said.
Whenever she spoke with her son, Ms. Bloomfield said, “I had to go through Tiffany,” a reference to his stepmother, Tiffany Romero. “Tiffany would always sit there while he talked to me on the phone, and after a while, he became more and more distant.”


Ms. Bloomfield said that after her son told her that his father and stepmother quarreled often, “I called Tiffany about that, and I think I got my son into trouble.”
“The next time I talked to him about it,” she added, “he said that Tiffany told him that ‘what happens in this house stays in this house.’

[William Anthony]

I have sympathy for the victims, but the families seem overly bloodthirsty IMO, even to the point of criticizing the boy's furloughs. They don't seem to notice the discrepancies in the investigation (but maybe they know much, much more than we do), don't seem troubled by the lackadaisical investigation, and don't seemed panicked that there may be a killer(s) walking the streets, while a child's life is in ruins and he is virtually left alone to internalize the horrors of the discovery of the bodies. Kudos to Mr. Brewer for offering to foot the bill for counseling.

I don't know how much amount of bloodthirstiness is appropriate under these circumstances. This is the one case where I might believe that the deprivation of rights might be the best solution. I guess I mean a compromise of rights might be the best solution.

[FDInLaw]

snips from above: fep

Ms. Bloomfield described her son as a “normal boy” who played video games nonstop and doted on his new dog, a boxer. But in recent months, she said, he “seemed to be changing.”
“There was a distance with me after a while,” she said.
Whenever she spoke with her son, Ms. Bloomfield said, “I had to go through Tiffany,” a reference to his stepmother, Tiffany Romero. “Tiffany would always sit there while he talked to me on the phone, and after a while, he became more and more distant.”


Ms. Bloomfield said that after her son told her that his father and stepmother quarreled often, “I called Tiffany about that, and I think I got my son into trouble.”
“The next time I talked to him about it,” she added, “he said that Tiffany told him that ‘what happens in this house stays in this house.’It's normal for kids to struggle with major transitions, such as a parent getting remarried. If the reports of regular verbal disputes are true, this just adds to it. This little guy might have found himself in the middle of his parent's fighting and was treated harshly as a result. Can't help but feel for the little guy. It's obvious that he was not in a very nurturing environment. . . I don't mean to be harsh, this is just my opinion. These things in mind though, I don't find it odd that he was distant. The little guy had a lot going on and his behavior is normal (don't take my word for it, ask a child psychologist).

Did he kill his Dad and Tim? I'm still not convinced that the evidence clearly suggests this.

[lorettalockhorn]

I understand your point but chain of custody, according to my understanding, does not become relevant until after items are collected. I think I know what you mean.

I do not think that cheating is always a motive for murder, although it can be. Why would she implicate the child and why would the grandmother say that this child was capable of doing it? The conspiracy theory, if there is one, seems to widen. What is there that is not being said?

I haven't read any conspiracy theories. Do tell! I shudder at the thought, but as far as I can tell the only conspiracy that I can determine so far is what LE and the prosecution are attempting to perpetrate.

Yes, LE's chain of custody begins when items are collected. I would imagine that plenty of folks had access to the boy's clothing before they were collected.

[William Anthony]

snips from above: fep

Ms. Bloomfield described her son as a “normal boy” who played video games nonstop and doted on his new dog, a boxer. But in recent months, she said, he “seemed to be changing.”
“There was a distance with me after a while,” she said.
Whenever she spoke with her son, Ms. Bloomfield said, “I had to go through Tiffany,” a reference to his stepmother, Tiffany Romero. “Tiffany would always sit there while he talked to me on the phone, and after a while, he became more and more distant.”


Ms. Bloomfield said that after her son told her that his father and stepmother quarreled often, “I called Tiffany about that, and I think I got my son into trouble.”
“The next time I talked to him about it,” she added, “he said that Tiffany told him that ‘what happens in this house stays in this house.’

I recently came across a link by Dr. Keith in regard to this crime and he attributed a change to many circumstances not just to what the child is experiencing environmentally but also to physical, chemical and medication problems, IIRC. I will look for the link. That was easy.

http://health.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/12/dr-keith-can-an-8-year-old-be-a-murderer/

[lorettalockhorn]

It's normal for kids to struggle with major transitions, such as a parent getting remarried. If the reports of regular verbal disputes are true, this just adds to it. This little guy might have found himself in the middle of his parent's fighting and was treated harshly as a result. Can't help but feel for the little guy. It's obvious that he was not in a very nurturing environment. . . I don't mean to be harsh, this is just my opinion. These things in mind though, I don't find it odd that he was distant. The little guy had a lot going on and his behavior is normal (don't take my word for it, ask a child psychologist).

Did he kill his Dad and Tim? I'm still not convinced that the evidence clearly suggests this.

I'm still baffled as to why the step-mother wasn't a victim. Other than Tim moving in, she's the interloper here.

[FDInLaw]

I'm still baffled as to why the step-mother wasn't a victim. Other than Tim moving in, she's the interloper here.

This is a biggie for me too. . . I just don't get it! You would think that she would be the number one target.


MOO

[William Anthony]

I haven't read any conspiracy theories. Do tell! I shudder at the thought, but as far as I can tell the only conspiracy that I can determine so far is what LE and the prosecution are attempting to perpetrate.

Yes, LE's chain of custody begins when items are collected. I would imagine that plenty of folks had access to the boy's clothing before they were collected.

The child is innocent until proven guilty. However, you have a grandmother, saying the child is capable. You have Ms. Roman's saying she heard or was told that the child was home before her husband was murdered. You have an alleged confession that some believe was coerced and questions about the stepmother's whereabouts and whether food would spoil. I can think of no greater instance of a conspiracy.

You are correct about plenty of people having access to the clothing but the more germane question in my mind is who handled the clothing and could someone unseen have handled them. Given the information we have received about GSR, I do not see it as definitive of anything.

[William Anthony]

This is a biggie for me too. . . I just don't get it! You would think that she would be the number one target.


MOO

Why?

[lorettalockhorn]

I understand your point but chain of custody, according to my understanding, does not become relevant until after items are collected. I think I know what you mean.

I do not think that cheating is always a motive for murder, although it can be. Why would she implicate the child and why would the grandmother say that this child was capable of doing it? The conspiracy theory, if there is one, seems to widen. What is there that is not being said?

Meant to say also, that cheating, trysts, jealousy seems to be far too often a motive for murder. At least in the US (I'm thinking you don't live in the US after the debate about the word specificness appearing in your dictionary). OJ and Scott Peterson come immediately to mind. And interestingly the grandmother who insists that CR is capable of this crime is also one of the people who had access to his clothing, isn't she?

[FDInLaw]

Why?For one, she is the reason behind all the recent changes in his life. Also, it's been stated that she spanked/disciplined him. If he was angry about being spanked, why wasn't she a target? Did the trip to the store save her life? Chilling thought.

Personally, I don't think he is behind the murders, just talking it through.

[William Anthony]

Meant to say also, that cheating, trysts, jealousy seems to be far too often a motive for murder. At least in the US (I'm thinking you don't live in the US after the debate about the word specificness appearing in your dictionary). OJ and Scott Peterson come immediately to mind. And interestingly the grandmother who insists that CR is capable of this crime is also one of the people who had access to his clothing, isn't she?

I don't understand your examples, using Simpson and Peterson. Are you saying that Ms. Romans was jealous of the relationship between Mr. Romans and Mr. Romero or that the murderer she must have hired was too stupid to wait until Mr. Romans was alone?

No, it is my understanding that the poster with whom I had the debate about the word specificness is not from America that is why I could understand the source of his confusion. Are you from America? It is no my dictionary, since I have not written one yet. Here are some links.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Specificness

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/specificness

I understand that it may not be used in the modern vulgar vernacular, which does not make it wrong, but my personal choice, as I was growing up on reading, tended to be with those of the 18th century writers or earlier. I like convoluted sentences that require me to think. I tend to write but do not speak in that style. I guess we have not read the same things, or, if we did, it effected us differently. Were you able to find the word grandkids in any dictionary, if you cared to look?:)

[William Anthony]

For one, she is the reason behind all the recent changes in his life. Also, it's been stated that she spanked/disciplined him. If he was angry about being spanked, why wasn't she a target? Did the trip to the store save her life? Chilling thought.

Personally, I don't think he is behind the murders, just talking it through.

I think that, if the child did it, he was focusing on the ones that ordered the spanking and, perhaps, she told him she had no choice while she was spanking him. My parents told me they spanked me, because they loved me. I asked them could they love me less.:) It may have been that the trip to the store did save her life.

[lorettalockhorn]

I don't understand your examples, using Simpson and Peterson. Are you saying that Ms. Romans was jealous of the relationship between Mr. Romans and Mr. Romero or that the murderer she must have hired was too stupid to wait until Mr. Romans was alone?

No, it is my understanding that the poster with whom I had the debate about the word specificness is not from America that is why I could understand the source of his confusion. Are you from America? It is no my dictionary, since I have not written one yet. Here are some links.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Specificness

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/specificness

I understand that it may not be used in the modern vulgar vernacular, which does not make it wrong, but my personal choice, as I was growing up on reading, tended to be with those of the 18th century writers or earlier. I like convoluted sentences that require me to think. I tend to write but do not speak in that style. I guess we have not read the same things, or, if we did, it effected us differently. Were you able to find the word grandkids in any dictionary, if you cared to look?:)

Um I would imagine that Mrs. Romans' jealousy would have been over Tim's relationship and marriage proposal to the barmaid. Although I suppose she may have been jealous of the amount of time they spent together at the bar. And I thought of OJ and Scott Peterson because those cases both (at least on the surface) seem to be about jealousy and (in SP's case) getting rid of the wife so that he could carry on with another woman. Sorry to confuse you; didn't realize it was that much of a stretch.

I'm checking the American Heritage Dictionary (on my toolbar). Grandkids; yes, specificness; no. Maybe I'm spelling it wrong.

[FDInLaw]

Um I would imagine that Mrs. Romans' jealousy would have been over Tim's relationship and marriage proposal to the barmaid. Although I suppose she may have been jealous of the amount of time they spent together at the bar. And I thought of OJ and Scott Peterson because those cases both (at least on the surface) seem to be about jealousy and (in SP's case) getting rid of the wife so that he could carry on with another woman. Sorry to confuse you; didn't realize it was that much of a stretch.

I'm checking the American Heritage Dictionary (on my toolbar). Grandkids; yes, specificness; no. Maybe I'm spelling it wrong.Your reference is clear to me. Certainly, statistically, there are more murders due to jealously than those because of too many spankings. There were other possible motives in the mix, and they all should be taken seriously.

MOO

[FDInLaw]

Have there been more details about this released?

Police had responded to calls of domestic violence at the Romero home, but authorities were searching records Saturday to determine when those calls were placed, Melnick said.

http://news.aol.ca/article/father-shot-killed-by-8-year-old-son/413193/

[William Anthony]

Um I would imagine that Mrs. Romans' jealousy would have been over Tim's relationship and marriage proposal to the barmaid. Although I suppose she may have been jealous of the amount of time they spent together at the bar. And I thought of OJ and Scott Peterson because those cases both (at least on the surface) seem to be about jealousy and (in SP's case) getting rid of the wife so that he could carry on with another woman. Sorry to confuse you; didn't realize it was that much of a stretch.

I'm checking the American Heritage Dictionary (on my toolbar). Grandkids; yes, specificness; no. Maybe I'm spelling it wrong.

Grandkids comes up misspelled on my computer every time and specificness does not. Do you know of another way to spell grandkids. I guess it depends on your reference. Since the popular theory is that SP and Simpson did the murders, are you saying that Ms. Romans, who was miles away did the murders or that she hired a stupid contract killer? I am not saying that your stretch is too far. I was just trying to understand you thought process in this area as it would mean that Ms. Romans had a reason to lie and that the grandmother would have a reason to add support to her lie and that the mother would have some reason to say lie about the child's change in behavior and that LE would have a reason to not believe that Ms. Romans was telling the truth and still coerce the alleged confession.

[FDInLaw]

Grandkids comes up misspelled on my computer every time and specificness does not. Do you know of another way to spell grandkids. I guess it depends on your reference. Since the popular theory is that SP and Simpson did the murders, are you saying that Ms. Romans, who was miles away did the murders or that she hired a stupid contract killer? I am not saying that your stretch is too far. I was just trying to understand you thought process in this area as it would mean that Ms. Romans had a reason to lie and that the grandmother would have a reason to add support to her lie and that the mother would have some reason to say lie about the child's change in behavior and that LE would have a reason to not believe that Ms. Romans was telling the truth and still coerce the alleged confession.

I'm holding a cranky tot. . . can you post where Ms. Roman's alibi is documented. TIA! I figure that she was most likely somewhere else, since Tim was renting a room there, but was it ever actually checked out?

[William Anthony]

Your reference is clear to me. Certainly, statistically, there are more murders due to jealously than those because of too many spankings. There were other possible motives in the mix, and they all should be taken seriously.

MOO

I am sorry for not making my self clear. I was speaking to the 1,000 alleged spankings and the fact that the child is rumored to have said that the 1,000th would be the last. I would equate that amount of spanking to abuse and would see it as being consistent with spousal abuse syndrome.

[William Anthony]

I'm holding a cranky tot. . . can you post where Ms. Roman's alibi is documented. TIA! I figure that she was most likely somewhere else, since Tim was renting a room there, but was it ever actually checked out?

I think the phone records may show her whereabouts. I am mindful of the gag order in this case and don't want to jump to any premature conclusions.

[FDInLaw]

I think the phone records may show her whereabouts. I am mindful of the gag order in this case and don't want to jump to any premature conclusions.
The gag order is for individuals directly connected to the case (LE, witnesses, etc.) is it not? In other words, those with first hand knowledge. I'm certain that does not include us (you and me). We can talk about the case and speculate all we want if I am not mistaken. Maybe a legal eagle can jump in here and set this straight? At any rate, I have yet to read the police reports, autopsy and such things in other cases I follow. There is a lot of whining over on IS about the gag order but it sure seems to me that a lot of info is available. Just my perspective.


MOO

[William Anthony]

Um I would imagine that Mrs. Romans' jealousy would have been over Tim's relationship and marriage proposal to the barmaid. Although I suppose she may have been jealous of the amount of time they spent together at the bar. And I thought of OJ and Scott Peterson because those cases both (at least on the surface) seem to be about jealousy and (in SP's case) getting rid of the wife so that he could carry on with another woman. Sorry to confuse you; didn't realize it was that much of a stretch.

I'm checking the American Heritage Dictionary (on my toolbar). Grandkids; yes, specificness; no. Maybe I'm spelling it wrong.

Here is another link and you will note that the author is speaking of language and uses the word specificness.

http://online.sagepub.com/cgi/searchresults?src=selected&andorexactfulltext=and&journal_set=spjcl&fulltext=specificness

[William Anthony]

The gag order is for individuals directly connected to the case (LE, witnesses, etc.) is it not? In other words, those with first hand knowledge. I'm certain that does not include us (you and me). We can talk about the case and speculate all we want if I am not mistaken. Maybe a legal eagle can jump in here and set this straight? At any rate, I have yet to read the police reports, autopsy and such things in other cases I follow. There is a lot of whining over on IS about the gag order but it sure seems to me that a lot of info is available. Just my perspective.


MOO

Your understanding is correct, to the best of my knowledge. What I am saying is that information may be leaked but there does not seem to be any leaked on the phone records. I have no problem with anyone speculating about the case and I just offer other information that we have received in regard to that speculation. I have no idea as to whose, if any, speculations are correct and that is not my point. I look at all the information I have at hand to consider what this means. What I am saying is that I do not make assumptions about information that I have not received and with new information there is a great probability that I will change some of my prior statements. At this point, I do not see the probability of a conspiracy to convict this child, based on the information I have received, but new information might surface.

[Its just me]

Here is another link and you will note that the author is speaking of language and uses the word specificness.

http://online.sagepub.com/cgi/searchresults?src=selected&andorexactfulltext=and&journal_set=spjcl&fulltext=specificness


Move on...what does this do with the price of onions. (case) fep

[Its just me]

The gag order is for individuals directly connected to the case (LE, witnesses, etc.) is it not? In other words, those with first hand knowledge. I'm certain that does not include us (you and me). We can talk about the case and speculate all we want if I am not mistaken. Maybe a legal eagle can jump in here and set this straight? At any rate, I have yet to read the police reports, autopsy and such things in other cases I follow. There is a lot of whining over on IS about the gag order but it sure seems to me that a lot of info is available. Just my perspective.


MOO

You are correct there is a lot of public information for a gag order to be in place and all has been provided by the prosecution.

[Seashell]

It all depends on Roca now and his ruling. I believe CR wil be out of custody soon. Romans and Romero's autopsies show that most of their wounds were on a downward trajectory. Romans: 2 chest wounds and right top of head were downwards. Romero: 2 head wounds, 1 back wound also downward. There is also the fact that 2 different types of bullets are identified, one being copper. Doesn't that point you to 2 shooters? It does to me.

CR is about 4ft tall. How is he going to be shooting down at 2 adult men. Was he upstairs when he shot his father? On the balcony when he shot Romero? He's a real sharpshooter, this 8 year old. Or maybe he just lugged a step ladder around with him while the men lay conveniently on the ground waiting for him to shoot them again.

Oh wait. This is the same child who then spilled his guts to Officer Avila, she of the incredibly effective interrogation method, less than a day later.

The whole thing stinks. CR is innocent and has always been. 2 shooters, 2 adult shooters, each taking out one of the victims. The motive? IMO take your pick: drug related (and no, it's not necessary they were both king pins in the drug trade). Very interesting personal relationships among the adults. Anyone got any other ideas? Not the boy. There are online petitions you can join if you want to help in any way. You can go on-line to Apache County 'police' and make your thoughts known there. E-mail DA Carlyon and tell him your thoughts.

Even an on-line discussion of the case will help.
i have read and re read so much of this case and something tells me from instinct that its more than likelly the child is also witness to whatever happened.
Call it gut feeling or whatever.
What you posted above sounds more like what has happened.

[William Anthony]

Move on...what does this do with the price of onions. (case) fep

You are quite correct but I do not understand why you did not so state to the poster who obviously felt the need to discuss it.

Originally Posted by lorettalockhorn View Post
Meant to say also, that cheating, trysts, jealousy seems to be far too often a motive for murder. At least in the US (I'm thinking you don't live in the US after the debate about the word specificness appearing in your dictionary). OJ and Scott Peterson come immediately to mind. And interestingly the grandmother who insists that CR is capable of this crime is also one of the people who had access to his clothing, isn't she?

I was simply addressing a point that another poster felt an interest in discussing. Unless you are a moderator, please do not order me to do anything?

[William Anthony]

i have read and re read so much of this case and something tells me from instinct that its more than likelly the child is also witness to whatever happened.
Call it gut feeling or whatever.
What you posted above sounds more like what has happened.

I don't know whether the child fired any shots or not and I believe that the child is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I too tend to believe that the child saw something, whether or not he was, in fact, the murderer.

[Its just me]

I haven't read any conspiracy theories. Do tell! I shudder at the thought, but as far as I can tell the only conspiracy that I can determine so far is what LE and the prosecution are attempting to perpetrate.

Yes, LE's chain of custody begins when items are collected. I would imagine that plenty of folks had access to the boy's clothing before they were collected.

I agree. I don't believe anyone here at CL has offered much in the way of theories of any kind...except it's possible the child is innocent. It pretty obvious to anyone who has paid attention to what the LE and prosecution has/has not done in this case...it is far from being top notch and discussing where they appear to be lacking in the investigation is not accusing anyone discussed of anything. imhoo. fep

[William Anthony]

Please, allow me to speculate on what all the speculations mean in a context that the child is innocent and as to why LE brought the charges? It was not meant offensively to anyone. It was my feelings that, based on what is contained in some of the posts, a conspiracy is indicated.

[lorettalockhorn]

Your reference is clear to me. Certainly, statistically, there are more murders due to jealously than those because of too many spankings. There were other possible motives in the mix, and they all should be taken seriously.

MOO

I understood your reference to stepmom figuratively being Target Number One as well. Don't know if that's because I'm accustomed to your posts and know that you don't question the picayune details of others' opinions (even when they agree with you) or what.

[Its just me]

I recently came across a link by Dr. Keith in regard to this crime and he attributed a change to many circumstances not just to what the child is experiencing environmentally but also to physical, chemical and medication problems, IIRC. I will look for the link. That was easy.

http://health.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/12/dr-keith-can-an-8-year-old-be-a-murderer/

Good article. There is probably another professional in some field who will say the opposite but the last paragraph in the article is interesting and is what I believe.
For anyone who has not read the article the author is no way saying the child is guilty of murder. fep

quote:
The truth of this 8-year-old and his alleged violence is knowable. The key to finding it is in asking enough questions and never buying into the myth that killers are born. They are made. And when one is made by age 8, enough bad has happened in eight years to make the unthinkable actually occur.

[William Anthony]

This is a biggie for me too. . . I just don't get it! You would think that she would be the number one target.


MOO

Again, I have been misunderstood and hope that you did not misunderstand me. I asked why, because it was something I had not considered. It is that anal retentive thing of mine that causes me to pay attention to details. After you explained I gave reasons why I had not considered it, which does not mean either of us are wrong. It just means that we should be able to discuss our views civilly without others not understanding what we mean and commenting thereon based on what they feel a poster is doing, which may cause strife were there should be none. Thanks.

[FDInLaw]

I understood your reference to stepmom figuratively being Target Number One as well. Don't know if that's because I'm accustomed to your posts and know that you don't question the picayune details of others' opinions (even when they agree with you) or what.
You and your vocabulary! Heck, I still wouldn't know what a yenta or fishwife were without you. . . you're a gas! :biggrin: *smooch*

You crack me up on a daily bases and it nice to find you here (thank you for accepting the invite). You know I'm not detailed oriented an often mix up words/people. . . :o

One thing challenging about this case is how current it is, we don't know if through our speculation we might stumble onto something important. We might though!

The sap in me wants to share the following with everyone. . . I was reading a short devotion today and stumbled upon this (forgive the religious nature) and find it applicable;

Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,
Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy;
~ Francis of Assisi


Let's look for the best in one another! :seeya:

[William Anthony]

Good article. There is probably another professional in some field who will say the opposite but the last paragraph in the article is interesting and is what I believe.
For anyone who has not read the article the author is no way saying the child is guilty of murder. fep

quote:
The truth of this 8-year-old and his alleged violence is knowable. The key to finding it is in asking enough questions and never buying into the myth that killers are born. They are made. And when one is made by age 8, enough bad has happened in eight years to make the unthinkable actually occur.

Thanks. I repeat for the umpteenth time that I believe the child is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and, personally speaking, that presumption attaches until the appellate process has been exhausted. I think the article gives us an understanding of possibilities.

[Its just me]

Please, allow me to speculate on what all the speculations mean in a context that the child is innocent and as to why LE brought the charges? It was not meant offensively to anyone. It was my feelings that, based on what is contained in some of the posts, a conspiracy is indicated.

Your feelings were wrong... saying posts contained a theory that includes Mrs. Romans, Mrs. Romero, the grandmother, the neighbors, etc. etc. is speculating on our intellect. :no: fep

[William Anthony]

You and your vocabulary! Heck, I still wouldn't know what a yenta or fishwife were without you. . . you're a gas! :biggrin: *smooch*

You crack me up on a daily bases and it nice to find you here (thank you for accepting the invite). You know I'm not detailed oriented an often mix up words/people. . . :o

One thing challenging about this case is how current it is, we don't know if through our speculation we might stumble onto something important. We might though!

The sap in me wants to share the following with everyone. . . I was reading a short devotion today and stumbled upon this (forgive the religious nature) and find it applicable;

~ Francis of Assisi


Let's look for the best in one another! :seeya:

I personally don't put much stock in what a sssisi says. :) Just an attempt at humor to lighten the mood. :)

[William Anthony]

Please, allow me to speculate on what all the speculations mean in a context that the child is innocent and as to why LE brought the charges? It was not meant offensively to anyone. It was my feelings that, based on what is contained in some of the posts, a conspiracy is indicated.

Your feelings were wrong... saying posts contained a theory that includes Mrs. Romans, Mrs. Romero, the grandmother, the neighbors, etc. etc. is speculating on our intellect. :no: fep

"It was my feeling". I have not said that they contained a conspiracy theory but my feeling based on the posts is that one is indicated.

[Its just me]

[quote=Its just me;9160419]

"It was my feeling". I have not said that they contained a conspiracy theory but my feeling based on the posts is that one is indicated.

When you get that feeling again just jump over it because not a one here is so naive we think a conspiracy involving all the in-laws and outlaws is possible. fep

ETA: There is a problem with how the quotes are showing up.

[William Anthony]

[quote=William Anthony;9160422]

When you get that feeling again just jump over it because not a one here is so naive we think a conspiracy involving all the in-laws and outlaws is possible. fep

So, then what are your thoughts that account for their alleged incriminating statements? Are they all just out to get this child for different reasons?

[FDInLaw]

ST. JOHNS, Ariz. -- An Arizona boy charged in the shooting deaths of his father and another man kept a ledger of his spankings and told a Child Protective Services worker that when he reached 1,000, that would be his limit, according to a newly released police report.
In an affidavit for a search warrant, Sgt. Lucas Rodriguez writes that the boy "is believed to have made ledgers and or communicated in the form of writings about his intentions." He said the boy tallied the spankings on a piece of paper.

http://www.kpho.com/news/18154062/detail.html


Did they ever actually find the tally??? :shrug:

[FDInLaw]

I didn't catch this the first time I read it. . .

In a police interview, the boy said he had been spanked five times the night before the shootings because he did not bring home some papers from school.

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24715024-5001021,00.html


YIKES! :(

[Its just me]

[quote=Its just me;9160427]

So, then what are your thoughts that account for their alleged incriminating statements? Are they all just out to get this child for different reasons?

I attribute what I read to poor LE investigation and reporting. Why has this happened. I don't know but it could be one or more of the following.

1. Stupid
2. Smart but Just lacking in training.
3. Lazy
4. Covering up the real truth.

I attribute the actions of the DA...A rush to judgement. I think the reason is one from the above list.

In case the reason for how this case has been handled is one of the first 3 I think there is a clue some where to the truth. If it is #4 there is a slip up somewhere. There is more than one inconsistent statement by the LE and witnesses. If the child can be accused of murder because he was inconsistent...shouldn't the LE and witnesses be held to the same standards? fep

[Its just me]

http://www.kpho.com/news/18154062/detail.html


Did they ever actually find the tally??? :shrug:

I haven't seen it listed in any court documents. Someone posted at IS that it wasn't found. It could be part of the court documents but not named. :shrug: fep

[lorettalockhorn]

You are quite correct but I do not understand why you did not so state to the poster who obviously felt the need to discuss it.



I was simply addressing a point that another poster felt an interest in discussing. Unless you are a moderator, please do not order me to do anything?

Apologies for bringing up that particular skirmish, I misread and thought that you are not from the US and that is why the thought of love gone sour might be foreign to you.

[FDInLaw]

I haven't seen it listed in any court documents. Someone posted at IS that it wasn't found. It could be part of the court documents but not named. :shrug: fepIf this is true, then all they have to establish motive is the testimony of a CPS worker. . . lovely.

Does the step-mother have kids of her own?

[Its just me]

I didn't catch this the first time I read it. . .

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,24715024-5001021,00.html


YIKES! :(

I don't know if this was 5 spankings or 5 licks. Which ever it was done by the step mom but the dad told her to spank him. I know Mr. Romero is deceased but it's pathetic if it's the truth. When/If CR needed a spanking for anything he should have been done by his Dad. fep

[Its just me]

If this is true, then all they have to establish motive is the testimony of a CPS worker. . . lovely.

Does the step-mother have kids of her own?

I don't think so. She looks to be in her late 20's or early 30's. IIRC Neckel asked her about her exhusband but nothing was said about any children. fep