Dec. 7th thru 14th

[Crispy]

We hit 1,000 on the other thread, so I figured I'd start a new one.

[Justice_Dawg]

Thank you, Crispy. Let's take a moment and remember Pearl Harbor.


Posted by Justice Dawg from other thread:
It's Mayberry hon.

They said NOTHING but a spot of blood on the pants.
I am at looking at NO GSR. They test for that before they test for blood.

No evidence! Dismiss this case. I am wondering if they are holding off on that in order to figure out where the boy will be living with his mother. If they will even let her leave Arizona while this is still in investigation stages. I doubt they will. And if they have made sure that the mother is prepared to raise this boy. Just thoughts. Good night, friends.


I hope they release him. Right now, I bet Mississippi is looking good to them!

[Crispy]

Yep, they turned the house back over to Tiffany. They said she was the owner. They also said that they didn't find any life insurance policies for Vincent. I think another officer or someone else was handling Tim and his family.

ETA: My eyes hurt and it's late...see ya later on today!!

[Justice_Dawg]

Does anyone else think the men were being chased?

Questions:
Why the bigger bullet hole found on the truck?
Why 1 different casing found in the door jam?

My biggest questons:

Why did Tanya Lawyer up ASAP?

Why wasn't Tiffany at work, and when she was shopping (between 4 pm and 5pm), why didn't she take the boy with her?

[Dallasnc]

Does anyone else think the men were being chased?

Questions:
Why the bigger bullet hole found on the truck?
Why 1 different casing found in the door jam?

My biggest questons:

Why did Tanya Lawyer up ASAP?

Why wasn't Tiffany at work, and when she was shopping (between 4 pm and 5pm), why didn't she take the boy with her?

Morning Justice!

I don't know about being chased. I find it strange that Vince would leave the door to the truck open when he went into the house. I also find it strange that they would wear their hard hats and saftey glasses after work. It also bothers me that the house was released so quickly.

I have the same questions about Tiffany shopping and Tanya Lawyered up also. I hope the LE did also and the answers are in their files. IIRC, the child stated that Tiffany was late 2 times a week. If she didn't work that day, why wouldn't she shop earlier in the day, to be home when the child got home?

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/northernarizona/story/Report-Boy-accused-in-double-Arizona-murder-fired/S9WunsSuO0OBIoq7y9zEIA.cspx
Now the lawyer thing is really confusing. Who would she sue? An eight year old child? There is a account set up for donations for college funds. He was the bread winner, according to the above article. What do you think the lawyer is for?

[Dallasnc]

The "Links" thread is for LINKS ONLY.

Don't try to add links to your post that have no relation to the subject.

Check the link you do post for copyright but also one on here led to an ERROR PAGE.

If I don't catch you SOMEONE will report you - at least I hope they will.

STAY ON TOPIC

I'm sorry, Coldwater. It must have been my bad link, seeing how it was removed. It was suppose to be a link to the comments from posters I was posting. I'll try to check them from now on. I don't want do break the rules.

[Justice_Dawg]

Morning Justice!

I don't know about being chased. I find it strange that Vince would leave the door to the truck open when he went into the house. I also find it strange that they would wear their hard hats and saftey glasses after work. It also bothers me that the house was released so quickly.

I have the same questions about Tiffany shopping and Tanya Lawyered up also. I hope the LE did also and the answers are in their files. IIRC, the child stated that Tiffany was late 2 times a week. If she didn't work that day, why wouldn't she shop earlier in the day, to be home when the child got home?

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/northernarizona/story/Report-Boy-accused-in-double-Arizona-murder-fired/S9WunsSuO0OBIoq7y9zEIA.cspx
Now the lawyer thing is really confusing. Who would she sue? An eight year old child? There is a account set up for donations for college funds. He was the bread winner, according to the above article. What do you think the lawyer is for?
Hi You!!!

The "bread winner" wanted to marry Candy. ???
Didn't Brewer say that was "Motive" ?

------------------------From the article:
Andreas said detectives believe Tim walked around his Dodge 4x4 pick-up truck to the front of the house where the child shot him six times.
-----------
Why was the passenger door open then?

[Dallasnc]

Hi You!!!

The "bread winner" wanted to marry Candy. ???
Didn't Brewer say that was "Motive" ?

------------------------From the article:
Andreas said detectives believe Tim walked around his Dodge 4x4 pick-up truck to the front of the house where the child shot him six times.
-----------
Why was the passenger door open then?

In a hurry or inconsiderate????????

[bkwits]

Good Morning Everyone,

After reading Brewer's interviews or depostionns with the cops, I'm having having even more trouble believing that the child did this.

Does anyone else think that maybe the child went in the house just after Vincent was shot and while the shooter was outside waiting for Tim.

Child found dad called Tim, and that's when Tim was shot. Then child runs to neighbors. ????

[Justice_Dawg]

In a hurry or inconsiderate????????

Under fire.

[Justice_Dawg]

Page 13 FIRST INTERVIEW:

BB: Okay. And so you interview him with, Tiffany there?
TA: Yes.
BB: Um, and, what time was it, approximately?
TA: Maybe six, thirty, somewhere in there.
----------------
Page 14
BB: You thought that he was telling you the truth.
TA: One thing he said, and, um, he said that he, when he first started talkin ta me he said that when he got home from school, he found them, and then I told him, I says well, you wouldn’t be able ta find them when you got home from school cuz he hadn’t even left work yet. He just went ‘n walked around a little bit. But I, thought nothing, um, what he said was, he kinda like, got quiet and, I told him, I says, you know, yer mom’s gonna yell at you and be mad at you if you, uh, tell me the truth. And he says well, I walked around a little bit. And, um, then he went home and he found em.
:cursing::cursing::cursing:

[Dallasnc]

The phone call has been reported as confirmed to have started at 4:52 PM, in which it is was stated that Vince was walking into the house. It was also stated that it lasted for 2 minutes and 30 seconds, ending with a reason for Tim for getting off the phone to go into the house. If this is proven as fact, then Vince entered the house, was walking up the stairs and was shot 4 times in 2 1/2 minutes. IMO

When was the 911 call and what else happened in that time?

[Kara]

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showpost.php?p=12501623&postcount=983

BB: Um, and, uh, but you didn’t notice anything unusual when you were pickin up the clothes.
DN: Nothing.
BB: I mean, no, stains from wet pants er anything like that.
DN: No.
BB: Um, no sox?
DN: No sox.
BB: No underwear?
DN: No underwear.
BB: And no, other shirt.
DN: No other shirt.BB: (unk), okay. Um, a-a-as far as the, um, uh, the collection of the evidence, you indicated that you both, had gloves on.
__________________

From the now closed thread....

Does it strike y'all as wrong that this boy was wearing no underwear or socks? And evidently attended school w/o either of those clothing items? Blue jeans with no underwear has to be uncomfortable....

Also, the mismatched bullet hole in the truck that was blamed on a stray gunshot at a party (I read that somewhere on the old thread, posted last night I believe)...how many of you attend parties where there are stray gunshots??

[bkwits]

http://boards.insessiontrials.com/showpost.php?p=12501623&postcount=983



From the now closed thread....

Does it strike y'all as wrong that this boy was wearing no underwear or socks? And evidently attended school w/o either of those clothing items? Blue jeans with no underwear has to be uncomfortable....

Also, the mismatched bullet hole in the truck that was blamed on a stray gunshot at a party (I read that somewhere on the old thread, posted last night I believe)...how many of you attend parties where there are stray gunshots??


It is not certain that the child wasn't wearing underwear or socks. They (the two cops) just didn't pick up any with his clothes. The boy was still in PJs when he was being interrogated, so maybe he still had his underwear and socks on from the night before. After all, he wasn't in his own home, so maybe fresh underwear wasn't available. IMO

[IAMME]

OMG!!! I cannot go out again until this case is resolved lol. You guys generate ALOT of information in less than 24 hours!!

I don't find it odd that he isn't wearing undies, my son hasn't wore undies since he was about that age, he is 13 now, his father doesnt wear them either....don't ask me to explain it. Now socks is a whole nother thing IMO, I dont know anyone that doesnt wear socks.

A thought for everyone that keeps pointing to the gun being left out, the boy says in the interview that his stepmother has him carry the guns upstairs and put them away all the time because his dad can never remember to put his things away (explains alot about the house) so it doesnt seem like it is an odd thing for there to be guns out around the house, for all we know VR could have gotten the gun out to shoot at some sort of animal that was in the trash the night b4 and left it there by the door.......I know a man that keeps three guns, different calibers, standing beside his door just for that purpose, of course that man doesnt have children....

Off to read the transcripts...

[bkwits]

OMG!!! I cannot go out again until this case is resolved lol. You guys generate ALOT of information in less than 24 hours!!

I don't find it odd that he isn't wearing undies, my son hasn't wore undies since he was about that age, he is 13 now, his father doesnt wear them either....don't ask me to explain it. Now socks is a whole nother thing IMO, I dont know anyone that doesnt wear socks.

A thought for everyone that keeps pointing to the gun being left out, the boy says in the interview that his stepmother has him carry the guns upstairs and put them away all the time because his dad can never remember to put his things away (explains alot about the house) so it doesnt seem like it is an odd thing for there to be guns out around the house, for all we know VR could have gotten the gun out to shoot at some sort of animal that was in the trash the night b4 and left it there by the door.......I know a man that keeps three guns, different calibers, standing beside his door just for that purpose, of course that man doesnt have children....

Off to read the transcripts...

I know what you mean about not going out until the case is solved. LOL. My excuse is that there is 6 inches or more of snow on the ground here. But I am getting little jobs done around the house.

It seems to me that Vincent was very nonchalant about his guns and ammo. Tiffany complained about him leaving them around the house and always dropping bullets upstairs.

I think the child had been wearing socks and underwear to school. He probably still had them on when he went for the "interview" that morning. IMO

[Kara]

I guess I'm reading that snippet wrong... I read it to mean the boy wasn't wearing under or socks...only jeans and a dark shirt. :shrug:

[LindaNJ1216]

I guess I'm reading that snippet wrong... I read it to mean the boy wasn't wearing under or socks...only jeans and a dark shirt. :shrug:

My kid would not wear underwear for the longest! :w00t: He only recently started wearing them because of an unfortunate incident with ripped pants.

Socks and shoes are the first thing he takes off when returning home from school. ....He's not really big on clothes either, never was. When he's in the house he's usually wearing boxers or or silk lounging pants.

[bkwits]

I guess I'm reading that snippet wrong... I read it to mean the boy wasn't wearing under or socks...only jeans and a dark shirt. :shrug:

Those were the clothes that they recovered the next day, laying at the foot of Granma's bed. He had some sort of PJ bottom (couldn't tell about the shirt from the video) on when they "interviewed" him. The relatives prob just put him to bed in his undies and socks, and he wore them the next day.

[IAMME]

Does anyone know how long a voicemail can be, on average? I know on my phone that it "times out", and I have left other messages where I am leaving my message and then it says...."you have 15 seconds to finish you message" or whatever..

[Crispy]

I googled it and found anywhere from 1 minute to 5 minutes. The average I found was 3 minutes.

[Kara]

Does anyone know how long a voicemail can be, on average? I know on my phone that it "times out", and I have left other messages where I am leaving my message and then it says...."you have 15 seconds to finish you message" or whatever..
I dunno....I've never talked so long that I've been cut off...but from what I've seen as long as you're talking it lets you....

I should have refreshed the thread before responding. :)

So...what is tomorrow's hearing going to cover? (if anybody knows)

[Crispy]

It says that tomorrow is just a status hearing. The boy doesn't even have to appear and the one prosecutor is going to appear by phone, so it doesn't sound like anything big. Maybe they will just go over when they have to have evidence in and the dates and such. jmo

[Kara]

It says that tomorrow is just a status hearing. The boy doesn't even have to appear and the one prosecutor is going to appear by phone, so it doesn't sound like anything big. Maybe they will just go over when they have to have evidence in and the dates and such. jmo
TY! I was hoping it would be more informational than that. We need some real information on this case.

[Details]

How about the "status" of the forensic testing, results, handing them over to the defense? That seems a likely thing to see tomorrow.

[secrets]

I found the link with the wedding photos, if you think it is ok I will post it here.

[Crispy]

I don't guess it would hurt to post the link. That's jmo.

Hopefully we will know tomorrow how long before the forensics will come in, or if they are already in. I will be at my sons school most of the day tomorrow volunteering for Santa Shop!! :thumbsup:

[secrets]

Ok, this is the link of the wedding photos:

http://sierrablancophotography.blogspot.com/2008/09/tiffany-and-vince-wedding-st-johns-az.html

By the way, the name of the step mother is TIFFANY ANN DEVALL, you can check her out here (I believe this is her ) http://www.supreme.state.az.us/publicaccess/notification/partylist.asp?id=

I had no time left to post last week, and next week will be the same, I started a new job, get up 5 am back home 9 pm, out of town job training.
I still read every evening for the updates though, can't go to bed before that. :ohmy:

[bkwits]

There was a reference in the transcripts to Tiffany having cervical cancer or possibly having it. Did anyone else catch that?

[Crispy]

Those pics are really pretty. BTW, the step moms last name is Duvall. At least that is what was in the witness list.

ETA: I caught that. They were supposed to go get a screening test done.

[Kara]

Ok, this is the link of the wedding photos:

http://sierrablancophotography.blogspot.com/2008/09/tiffany-and-vince-wedding-st-johns-az.html

By the way, the name of the step mother is TIFFANY ANN DEVALL, you can check her out here (I believe this is her ) http://www.supreme.state.az.us/publicaccess/notification/partylist.asp?id=

I had no time left to post last week, and next week will be the same, I started a new job, get up 5 am back home 9 pm, out of town job training.
I still read every evening for the updates though, can't go to bed before that. :ohmy:
Very pretty...but that is a lot of red on a wedding dress. What was it I read about the color red being a not good thing in a catholic wedding ceremony??

[secrets]

Those pics are really pretty. BTW, the step moms last name is Duvall. At least that is what was in the witness list.

ETA: I caught that. They were supposed to go get a screening test done.

Well, they've got it wrong (again:tonguewag:)
http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/d/e/v/Jeffrey-L-Devall-AZ/PHOTO/0112photo.html

[Crispy]

Oh, thanks for the info!! Don't you just love the :tonguewag: guy? LOL

[secrets]

My fav,:tonguewag: LOL

[muska]

There was a reference in the transcripts to Tiffany having cervical cancer or possibly having it. Did anyone else catch that?

I saw that but thought it was unclear....like she wanted Vincent to go with her for a check-up or something. The person, Curley, wouldn't give Vincent time off and it caused some problem between them at work. The officer, Neckel?, seemed confused AT BEST about whatever the medical problem was. I think it must have been resolved because at some point after Vincent's death, Tiffany said, in an interview, that they wanted kids together. She didn't sound worried about an illness.

[muska]

The wedding pictures are beautiful and everyone looks so happy. No matter how it turns out, it sure is heartbreaking.

[bkwits]

I saw that but thought it was unclear....like she wanted Vincent to go with her for a check-up or something. The person, Curley, wouldn't give Vincent time off and it caused some problem between them at work. The officer, Neckel?, seemed confused AT BEST about whatever the medical problem was. I think it must have been resolved because at some point after Vincent's death, Tiffany said, in an interview, that they wanted kids together. She didn't sound worried about an illness.

Sounds like maybe it was a biopsy or something like that.

[IAMME]

I know this has been discussed but I cant find it, maybe I am just tired but what time did the 911 call come in?

I just want to clear this up in my head, maybe I am mistaken....

4:27 VR calls TR
4:52 Tim calls Tanya
5:12 CR calls TR

The Romans call was at 4:52, THEN the boy supposedly shot Tim 6 times, reloading with each shot.....THEN he ran to the neighbors, and told a teenager there that he thought his dad was dead....THEN the teen called his father, who came home from work, and then took both boys to the scene, and THEN he the teens father called 911.........and then approx ten minutes later he asked to call his stepmother on the neighbors cell. Do I have that right? Did I miss anything?

[Crispy]

For some reason 5:06 stands out in my head from the first hearing transcripts.

In the video he says he ran to a girls house and told the girl and then she told her brother and her brother called the dad. The dad came home.

[IAMME]

OH!! and he also had to have shot his dad in that time frame, within the 2.5 minutes during the phone call between tanya and tim. Shot him and came back downstairs and called tim, all of that in less than 2.5 minutes, bc she said she was on the phone already when they pulled in the drive and vincent went inside........right?

[IAMME]

I just re-read the first transcripts, and they said the 911 call came in at 5:06 or 5:07, werent really sure.

I also found something else VERY interesting in there, they testify that Tiffany gets off work at 5:00 and that Vincent gets off at 4:20, and home around 5.

If she gets off work at 5, how was she at the store at 4:20??? I wonder if she has to clock in and out....:blink:

Also I think it is interesting that Tanya says that Tim calls her everyday after work (according to the testimony) but that the call wasn't made until 4:52 when VR called Tiffany at 4:27, I would guess that he was on the phone to the GF in that in between time, I wish we could look at all the phone calls made...........


IMO

[IAMME]

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=61820199

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=434188436

[incidentally]

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=61820199

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=434188436

IAMME,

I'm up with a horrible backache and saw this post. Since I've taken a prescribed muscle relaxant, maybe I'm just high :blink:, so I ask you, is the first link Tim's wife (is that what you are asserting?) and I can't quite figure out the other link.

Thanks for any clarification.

Tally

[secrets]

IAMME,

I'm up with a horrible backache and saw this post. Since I've taken a prescribed muscle relaxant, maybe I'm just high :blink:, so I ask you, is the first link Tim's wife (is that what you are asserting?) and I can't quite figure out the other link.

Thanks for any clarification.

Tally

Well, the first link is TR girlfriend, and for the second the bar where she worked?

[Justice_Dawg]

Associated Press - December 8, 2008 2:14 AM ET

http://www.kswt.com/Global/story.asp?S=9474115&nav=menu613_2_6

[Justice_Dawg]

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=61820199

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=434188436

Eryn

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=65893706

[Kara]

Associated Press - December 8, 2008 2:14 AM ET

<snipped>
Thanks for the link but AP articles are copyrighted completely. Unlike most articles, you cannot quote any portion of them. You may want to ask CW to edit your post.

Also, for those who are posting the boy's name, you may want to check with CW as he is a minor and this website typically does not allow you to post the names of minors or rape victims.

moo

[Justice_Dawg]

Thanks for the link but AP articles are copyrighted completely. Unlike most articles, you cannot quote any portion of them. You may want to ask CW to edit your post.

Also, for those who are posting the boy's name, you may want to check with CW as he is a minor and this website typically does not allow you to post the names of minors or rape victims.

moo

OK, I did. TY

[Justice_Dawg]

Well, they've got it wrong (again:tonguewag:)
http://familytreemaker.genealogy.com/users/d/e/v/Jeffrey-L-Devall-AZ/PHOTO/0112photo.html

Now under that name she has a criminal record. :ohmy:

[Justice_Dawg]

I am thinking....

They found a spot/smear of blood on his pants. (No big deal, he was in the house by his father.)

Now about the GSR. GSR blows 3 -4 feet in a cloud with every shot.
Why don't his cloths have any GSR on them?

[muska]

Neckels claimed that the boy wasn't a suspect at all before his interview and that they were afraid for his safety. If they thought he had seen this brutal shooting and was covering for someone, wouldn't it have made more sense to have someone he trusted talk with him in a relaxed setting. I understand that they claim they were worried that one of the relatives had done this and didn't know who to trust, but they could have had him talk with the priest, or class teacher or a friend's mother or whoever. If they weren't suspicious of him, why was there a need for the recording? I think they considered him a suspect from the start. And even if Neckels didn't quite suspect the boy at the beginning, I sure bet whoever her boss is, whoever set up the interview ....I bet that person did.

Neckels said that when she came out, Rodriquez said that what the boy said matched the crime scene. Maybe in Fantasyland. He based that statement on Tim running toward the house but didn't consider anything that didn't match. Wow.

[Kara]

I am thinking....

They found a spot/smear of blood on his pants. (No big deal, he was in the house by his father.)

Now about the GSR. GSR blows 3 -4 feet in a cloud with every shot.
Why don't his cloths have any GSR on them?Are the GSR testing results back? I evidently missed that.

[Justice_Dawg]

Are the GSR testing results back? I missed that.

BB asked if "ANYTHING" was found on the boys cloths.
She said just a spot of blood.

They test for GSR first. SOP

[Kara]

BB asked if "ANYTHING" was found on the boys cloths.
She said just a spot of blood.

They test for GSR first. SOP
Okay....but the results of those tests haven't been revealed, have they?

[Justice_Dawg]

Okay....but the results of those tests haven't been revealed, have they?

Yes, the officer answered NOTHING was found on the cloths but a spot of blood.

IF GSR WAS found she would have said YES, we found GSR.

[Kara]

Yes, the officer answered NOTHING was found on the cloths but a spot of blood.

IF GSR WAS found she would have said YES, we found GSR.

Ahhh...thank you! That must have gone right over my head. :)

[incidentally]

Well, the first link is TR girlfriend, and for the second the bar where she worked?

Thank you secrets.

[Justice_Dawg]

Can you please post a link, I entered her name and came up with nothing...Thanks

Which name did you use? One of them is her and the other isn't. :biggrin:

[Justice_Dawg]

Ahhh...thank you! That must have gone right over my head. :)
In a stairwell like that the 4 ft cloud x 4 shots would have drenched him.
To me..That says innocent All Day Long :thumbsup:

JMHO!

[LindaNJ1216]

Yes, the officer answered NOTHING was found on the cloths but a spot of blood.

IF GSR WAS found she would have said YES, we found GSR.

I think the officer was referring to visual inspection not forensics

[muska]

Channel 3 has a reporter stating that the he thinks the plea offer is like a "hail Mary pass" from the prosecutor. The reporter thinks the prosecutor thinks the case is getting away from them.

Reporter also says that the confession was already in trouble and the fact that Neckles knew the boy makes it a lot worse. He suggests "professional and ethical problems" in having her as a police interviewer.

[Justice_Dawg]

I think the officer was referring to visual inspection not forensics

Sure, the answer came after being asked if she "noticed anything on his cloths that night" LOL!!!

HAIL MARY!

[PensiveOne]

Another link from azfamily, seems they will be covering the hearing today.

http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/stories/st-johns-local-news-120608-interview-transcripts.394067bb.html

[bkwits]

Neckels claimed that the boy wasn't a suspect at all before his interview and that they were afraid for his safety. If they thought he had seen this brutal shooting and was covering for someone, wouldn't it have made more sense to have someone he trusted talk with him in a relaxed setting. I understand that they claim they were worried that one of the relatives had done this and didn't know who to trust, but they could have had him talk with the priest, or class teacher or a friend's mother or whoever. If they weren't suspicious of him, why was there a need for the recording? I think they considered him a suspect from the start. And even if Neckels didn't quite suspect the boy at the beginning, I sure bet whoever her boss is, whoever set up the interview ....I bet that person did.

Neckels said that when she came out, Rodriquez said that what the boy said matched the crime scene. Maybe in Fantasyland. He based that statement on Tim running toward the house but didn't consider anything that didn't match. Wow.

Excellent observations. :thumbup:

[Crispy]

On a break from volunteering. About the GSR, Neckel said this:

But, you know, moving towards *****, um, um, we haven’t gotten the, the gunpowder residue on the clothing back yet. Um, we, I was there when DPS did their, we called DPS in and they’d done a whole investigation, um, the, the, heighth, of the gunpowder residue is being sent off to the lab, I saw the tags, um, so that, has changed since the day you asked me in court, that’s been since then, um, the level of the shooter, um, the heighth of the shooter, um, that will be coming in DPS’s, report,

http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Neckel.pdf

[Keegan]

Correct me if I am wrong but I t hink the FBI stopped doing gun powder residue testing because it isn't accurate. In fact, there are some cases on appeal because gunpower residue testing was used.

[Justice_Dawg]

On a break from volunteering. About the GSR, Neckel said this:

But, you know, moving towards *****, um, um, we haven’t gotten the, the gunpowder residue on the clothing back yet. Um, we, I was there when DPS did their, we called DPS in and they’d done a whole investigation, um, the, the, heighth, of the gunpowder residue is being sent off to the lab, I saw the tags, um, so that, has changed since the day you asked me in court, that’s been since then, um, the level of the shooter, um, the heighth of the shooter, um, that will be coming in DPS’s, report,

http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Neckel.pdf

Well, Wood said his staff did the measurements also. He said they don't jive.
Guess we shall see.

[steffaroob4]

ST. JOHNS -- (http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopstory/stories/st-johns-local-news-120608-interview-transcripts.394067bb.html)A judge has refused to discuss a prosecution motion to drop a murder charge against an eastern Arizona 8-year-old accused of killing his father and another man.

Judge Michael Roca said Monday during a hearing in St. Johns that he doesn't want to address the motion while a competency issue in the case is still pending.

A state expert is expected to evaluate the boy on Dec. 17

[Justice_Dawg]

ST. JOHNS -- (http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopstory/stories/st-johns-local-news-120608-interview-transcripts.394067bb.html)A judge has refused to discuss a prosecution motion to drop a murder charge against an eastern Arizona 8-year-old accused of killing his father and another man.

Judge Michael Roca said Monday during a hearing in St. Johns that he doesn't want to address the motion while a competency issue in the case is still pending.

A state expert is expected to evaluate the boy on Dec. 17
A defense win. IMO:thumbsup:

[Details]

Oh yeah. No pressuring the defense to take the deal for a little bit longer, which means a little bit longer for the forensics - or lack thereof - to come in.

[LindaNJ1216]

A defense win. IMO:thumbs up:

A defense win? :confused: You have the ability to spin anything, I'm impressed!

[steffaroob4]

Roca is also considering (http://www.ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1004950)a request to allow the boy to spend more time out of juvenile custody, as was the case during Thanksgiving when he spent two days with his mother.

[Justice_Dawg]

Roca is also considering (http://www.ktar.com/?nid=6&sid=1004950)a request to allow the boy to spend more time out of juvenile custody, as was the case during Thanksgiving when he spent two days with his mother.

I knew Brewer would ask for it. :biggrin:

JMHO!!!!!

[GentleBreeze]

ST. JOHNS -- (http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopstory/stories/st-johns-local-news-120608-interview-transcripts.394067bb.html)A judge has refused to discuss a prosecution motion to drop a murder charge against an eastern Arizona 8-year-old accused of killing his father and another man.

Judge Michael Roca said Monday during a hearing in St. Johns that he doesn't want to address the motion while a competency issue in the case is still pending.

A state expert is expected to evaluate the boy on Dec. 17

A great minded Judge. There is no reason at this time to even consider removing one of the charges or even to consider how the charges will be ruled upon until the mentally age competency hearing is even finalized.

IMO, that also means he will not set a final deadline now on when discovery has to be turned over either, knowing that the boy may be deemed age incompetent at this time, where the trial will not even be held now. He knows if the boy is ruled mentally age incompetent to assist in his trial now then the DA will have 8 months to have him assessed again and if he is found competent, THEN the Judge will set up final deadlines for discovery that will coincide with the rules of evidence when they must be turned over before A trial.

imoo

[wolfi_2]

Well, Wood said his staff did the measurements also. He said they don't jive.
Guess we shall see.


I watch this case for about three weeks from Germany, I Read nearly all post to this case in this forum, so I had just one question what does it mean: -He said they don't jive- ?

thanks

[GentleBreeze]

A defense win? :confused: You have the ability to spin anything, I'm impressed!

No win for anyone. It is a wash for both until the competency evaluation is complete and accepted by the Judge. They are at a stand still until that is resolved.

imoo

[Justice_Dawg]

I watch this case for about three weeks from Germany, I Read nearly all post to this case in this forum, so I had just one question what does it mean: -He said they don't jive- ?

thanks

LOL, they don't "match". Better?:biggrin:

[muska]

Well, Wood said his staff did the measurements also. He said they don't jive.
Guess we shall see.

Where did you see that? Thsnks

[Justice_Dawg]

A great minded Judge. There is no reason at this time to even consider removing one of the charges or even to consider how the charges will be ruled upon until the mentally age competency hearing is even finalized.

IMO, that also means he will not set a final deadline now on when discovery has to be turned over either, knowing that the boy may be deemed age incompetent at this time, where the trial will not even be held now. He knows if the boy is ruled mentally age incompetent to assist in his trial now then the DA will have 8 months to have him assessed again and if he is found competent, THEN the Judge will set up final deadlines for discovery that will coincide with the rules of evidence when they must be turned over before A trial.

imoo

The Hail Mary failed. :tonguewag:

[wolfi_2]

LOL, they don't "match". Better?:biggrin:


Better !

thank´s again

[LindaNJ1216]

The Hail Mary failed. :tonguewag:

Only in your dreams:tonguewag:

[LindaNJ1216]

Well, Wood said his staff did the measurements also. He said they don't jive.
Guess we shall see.


got a link?

[Justice_Dawg]

got a link?

It's on the links page. :tonguewag:

I love that icon.

[LindaNJ1216]

Correct me if I am wrong but I think the FBI stopped doing gun powder residue testing because it isn't accurate. In fact, there are some cases on appeal because gunpowder residue testing was used.

I don't believe the FBI has stopped doing it

[Keegan]

I don't believe the FBI has stopped doing it
I hate having to do my own research.

FBI lab scraps gunfire residue - Agency won’t do analysis, putting evidence in doubt BY JULIE BYKOWICZ BALTIMORE SUN REPORTER ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED MAY 26, 2006 The FBI is no longer analyzing gunshot residue in its investigations, a blow to once highly regarded evidence used to suggest that a suspected criminal had fired a weapon. Lawyers, scientists and law enforcement officials across the country said they were astonished by the decision and said it could mean the end of using such evidence.


http://news.lawreader.com/?p=127

[muska]

A great minded Judge. There is no reason at this time to even consider removing one of the charges or even to consider how the charges will be ruled upon until the mentally age competency hearing is even finalized.

IMO, that also means he will not set a final deadline now on when discovery has to be turned over either, knowing that the boy may be deemed age incompetent at this time, where the trial will not even be held now. He knows if the boy is ruled mentally age incompetent to assist in his trial now then the DA will have 8 months to have him assessed again and if he is found competent, THEN the Judge will set up final deadlines for discovery that will coincide with the rules of evidence when they must be turned over before A trial.

imoo


What do you mean by "discovery"? Is that GSR, trajectories etc.? If that type of evidence suggests the boy is innocent, would prosecution have a reason to hold it back?

[Justice_Dawg]

I don't believe the FBI has stopped doing it

:rolleyes:

In Priority Shift, FBI Halts Gunshot Residue Analysis

The FBI is no longer analyzing gunshot residue in its investigations, a blow to the once-highly regarded evidence used to suggest that a suspected criminal had fired a weapon.

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/may/28/nation/na-fbi28

---------------

You amaze me. :tonguewag:

[Justice_Dawg]

I hate having to do my own research.



http://news.lawreader.com/?p=127

I had your back. :thumbup:

[LindaNJ1216]

I hate having to do my own research.



http://news.lawreader.com/?p=127


Very interesting, thank you

[Justice_Dawg]

Jibe.

They don't 'jibe.' ;)

Why thank you very much. The Jersey in me will never leave!!! :ohmy:

[bkwits]

Jibe.

They don't 'jibe.' ;)

They don't jive either. :w00t:

[LindaNJ1216]

:rolleyes:

In Priority Shift, FBI Halts Gunshot Residue Analysis

The FBI is no longer analyzing gunshot residue in its investigations, a blow to the once-highly regarded evidence used to suggest that a suspected criminal had fired a weapon.

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/may/28/nation/na-fbi28

---------------

You amaze me. :tonguewag:

Why oh why have you been spouting off about it? :confused:

[Justice_Dawg]

Why oh why have you been spouting off about it? :confused:

Cuz ther lookin' fer it in Mayberry.

:tonguewag:

[Kara]

On a break from volunteering. About the GSR, Neckel said this:

But, you know, moving towards *****, um, um, we haven’t gotten the, the gunpowder residue on the clothing back yet. Um, we, I was there when DPS did their, we called DPS in and they’d done a whole investigation, um, the, the, heighth, of the gunpowder residue is being sent off to the lab, I saw the tags, um, so that, has changed since the day you asked me in court, that’s been since then, um, the level of the shooter, um, the heighth of the shooter, um, that will be coming in DPS’s, report,

http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Neckel.pdf

Now I'm really confused. Does this mean there was gunshot residue found and they are trying to determine the height of it (even though the FBI casts major doubts upon the accuracy of GSR testing)???

Also, it seems that I read somewhere that the value of ballistic evidence in regard to firing pin marking (not lans and grooves) is in question. Will a rifle shell show lans and grooves or only firing pin markings?

[Justice_Dawg]

And it never should. :thumbup:

Any word on what has happened with the hearing today?

Just the denial of the Motion to dismiss count 1 until the childs' comp. hearing is complete. It's set for Dec 17th.

And a motion from defense for more time out of detention for the boy. The judge hasn't ruled on that yet.

[bkwits]

Now I'm really confused. Does this mean there was gunshot residue found and they are trying to determine the height of it (even though the FBI casts major doubts upon the accuracy of GSR testing)???

Also, it seems that I read somewhere that the value of ballistic evidence in regard to firing pin marking (not lans and grooves) is in question. Will a rifle shell show lans and grooves or only firing pin markings?

That remark by the officer Neckels, is very confusing. Is she talking about GSR on the walls? Otherwise how could they tell the height of the shooter?

[Justice_Dawg]

Is the judge going to rule on that today?

Or wait until the seventeenth?

I hope by the end of the hearing today he will rule on it.

The 17th is the evaluation. Who knows how long it will take to get a report back.

[muska]

The confession is worthless. Voice identification is considered inaccurate in the best conditions, let alone over the phone from within the house. Now GSR findins may be invalid as well?

Who will ask to have the confession thrown out and when will that happen?

[Justice_Dawg]

Thank you for all the info. :thumbup:

Anytime. :biggrin:

[GentleBreeze]

In Priority Shift, FBI Halts Gunshot Residue Analysis

The FBI is no longer analyzing gunshot residue in its investigations, a blow to the once-highly regarded evidence used to suggest that a suspected criminal had fired a weapon.

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/may/28/nation/na-fbi28

---------------

You amaze me.

I thought the testing was sent to a state agency. Where does it say it was sent to the FBI?

It doesn't mean state run agencies are doing the same unless you can provide a link that says all of them have stopped.

imo

[Justice_Dawg]

I thought the testing was sent to a state agency. Where does it say it was sent to the FBI?

It doesn't mean state run agencies are doing the same unless you can provide a link that says all of them have stopped.

imo

Are you paying attenion?
Someone asked if the FBI discounts GSR. That is what we were answering.
Nobody said anything about STATE testing..but know what? FBI is a step ahead.. always.

[Justice_Dawg]

The confession is worthless. Voice identification is considered inaccurate in the best conditions, let alone over the phone from within the house. Now GSR findins may be invalid as well?

Who will ask to have the confession thrown out and when will that happen?

Seems like the hammer is down in that court room It's too quiet.

[tif]

I've been lurking here since a few days after this story hit the news. I don't normally take news stories too personally, but like many of you I just can't stop thinking about this one.

Just so you know where I stand, I'm inclined to believe that the boy gave a false confession. However, I in no way feel any certainty about this.

I decided to post because I haven't seen anyone bring up the issue of whether the boy may actually feel responsible for the deaths because he wished or prayed for his father to die. It's normal for children this age, and even older, to think they can make something happen by wishing or praying for it. It's even normal for adults to feel guilty if they scream "I wish you were dead" during a heated argument and then the recipient of that wish dies in an accident.

Is there any information on when Tim's call with his wife ended and when the call to the friend's father began. If we had that time period and subtracted the time it would have taken the boy to get from his house to his friend's house, talk to them and begin the call to the father, we would have the time period when he was supposedly killing Tim.

[Justice_Dawg]

http://www.abc15.com/content/news/northernarizona/story/Judge-wont-discuss-dropping-murder-count-in-St/Bj3O3Mw7IUuvsuM4_vC-UQ.cspx

The boy might be traveling to Phoenix for the evaluation and the judge reportedly wants it to be an overnight stay.

An evaluation of the boy's mental health may or may not be conducted on that day, but both the competency hearing and mental health evaluation will be held.

The next hearing after the evaluation will be held on December 22 at 9 a.m.

---------Bottom of article

In closed chambers, the defense and prosecution talked with the judge about whether to let the boy out of the detention center because the process is taking so long.

[steffaroob4]

Check it out, you can see the red flags (http://www.abc15.com/media/news/4/d/4/4d4d5cc2-ce80-4b86-aaa5-81e2b8d93ea2/Original.jpg) plus the yellow marker in the yard in the pic.

[Crispy]

We don't know when the father was called and came home. We do know that Tim was on the phone with his wife for approx. 2 minutes 30 seconds. at 4:52. The 911 call came in at 5:06.

[muska]

Channel 3 just said that DNA and forensic evidence are not due back until the end of January!

[muska]

We don't know when the father was called and came home. We do know that Tim was on the phone with his wife for approx. 2 minutes 30 seconds. at 4:52. The 911 call came in at 5:06.

Wasn't it the older boy's father who made the 911 call? I'm pretty sure I read that.

[tif]

We don't know when the father was called and came home. We do know that Tim was on the phone with his wife for approx. 2 minutes 30 seconds. at 4:52. The 911 call came in at 5:06.

If the 911 call was the one from the friend's father, in only 11 minutes and 30 seconds the boy would have had to:


Shoot Tim six times while reloading
Get to his friend's house
Tell his friend what happened
Wait while the friend called the father
Wait for the father to get home and call 911


That seems improbable.

[Justice_Dawg]

Check it out, you can see the red flags (http://www.abc15.com/media/news/4/d/4/4d4d5cc2-ce80-4b86-aaa5-81e2b8d93ea2/Original.jpg) plus the yellow marker in the yard in the pic.

What do you think is there?

[Justice_Dawg]

Channel 3 just said that DNA and forensic evidence are not due back until the end of January!

I heard that.

[steffaroob4]

What do you think is there?

I don't know, my guess is the yellow markers are for the blood. I wonder if the red flags lead to the bullet hole in the truck, I just don't know. Do you think there is no eveidence there because they used flags?

[IAMME]

If the 911 call was the one from the friend's father, in only 11 minutes and 30 seconds the boy would have had to:


Shoot Tim six times while reloading
Get to his friend's house
Tell his friend what happened
Wait while the friend called the father
Wait for the father to get home and call 911


That seems improbable.


Even MORE improbable is he would have had to shot his father 4 times, and then ran downstairs and yelled for tim and waited for tim to get off of the phone all in less than 2.5 minutes. And they didnt just wait for the father to call 911, it is my understandign that after the father got there that he then took the kids to the scene and THEN called 911. :ohmy:

[steffaroob4]

Reusable crime scene flags (http://www.evidentcrimescene.com/cata/photo/photo.html) are the economical way to mark the crime scene or tracking area

[IAMME]

Does anyone know if they can retrieve voicemail records from a phone if the message has been deleted? Is there ANY way to tell if a call actually went through or if it went to voicemail? Because I believe it is MORE probable that the wife called the phone or had someone call the phone and left a voicemail in that 2.5 minutes, leaving her with an alibi and allowing her to pass the blame on to the child. Tim was shot more times, leading me to believe that his murder was more "vengeful" (not sure thats the best word) and we know that she certainly had a good motive, she is also being uncooperative, and she has lawyered up awfully fast....IMO

[Kara]

<snipped>
In closed chambers, the defense and prosecution talked with the judge about whether to let the boy out of the detention center because the process is taking so long.

Given the age of the defendant and the "danger" he poses to society, I don't understand why he is being held at all right now.

Even if they feel foster care would be preferable to being in his mother's care and custody....he shouldn't be locked up. If he is adjudicated to be guilty there is plenty of time for lockdown when he's being treated.

[Kara]

Does anyone know if they can retrieve voicemail records from a phone if the message has been deleted? Is there ANY way to tell if a call actually went through or if it went to voicemail? Because I believe it is MORE probable that the wife called the phone or had someone call the phone and left a voicemail in that 2.5 minutes, leaving her with an alibi and allowing her to pass the blame on to the child. Tim was shot more times, leading me to believe that his murder was more "vengeful" (not sure thats the best word) and we know that she certainly had a good motive, she is also being uncooperative, and she has lawyered up awfully fast....IMO
Interesting theory, but I believe Tim made the call to his wife, not vice versa.

[Justice_Dawg]

I don't know, my guess is the yellow markers are for the blood. I wonder if the red flags lead to the bullet hole in the truck, I just don't know. Do you think there is no eveidence there because they used flags?

I blew it up. Looks like a casing by the front yellow marker.

[Justice_Dawg]

Reusable crime scene flags (http://www.evidentcrimescene.com/cata/photo/photo.html) are the economical way to mark the crime scene or tracking area

Flags are the blood.

JMO

[Justice_Dawg]

given the age of the defendant and the "danger" he poses to society, i don't understand why he is being held at all right now.

Even if they feel foster care would be preferable to being in his mother's care and custody....he shouldn't be locked up. If he is adjudicated to be guilty there is plenty of time for lockdown when he's being treated.
ita !!!!!!!!

[IAMME]

Interesting theory, but I believe Tim made the call to his wife, not vice versa.


from the transcripts:

BB: Okay. Um, the, other information that you had, was, that there had been a phone call made to, um, apparently to, Tim, by his ex, er by his wife. Is that right?
DN: Either, he called her or she called him, I don’t remember…
BB: Wha, yeah, one way (unk)…
DN: …yeah, but they were on the cell phone, yes.
BB: And, and that infer, information was brought to you by, uhh, the wife.

Like BB says later in that transcript "We are hanging everything on Tanya's credibility":ohmy:

[Justice_Dawg]

from the transcripts:

BB: Okay. Um, the, other information that you had, was, that there had been a phone call made to, um, apparently to, Tim, by his ex, er by his wife. Is that right?
DN: Either, he called her or she called him, I don’t remember…
BB: Wha, yeah, one way (unk)…
DN: …yeah, but they were on the cell phone, yes.
BB: And, and that infer, information was brought to you by, uhh, the wife.

Like BB says later in that transcript "We are hanging everything on Tanya's credibility":ohmy:

Scary!!:angry:

[IAMME]

That would make sense also, bc we also know that VR called Tiffany at 4:27 to tell her that he was leaving work......

[Justice_Dawg]

So help me get this straight:

If the call was made at that time from Tim's cell phone (and that is the cell phone recovered at the scene and hasn't been tampered with) then indeed all of that did happen in that amount of time, take away who the shooter was. Actually, it seems even more improbable that the boy coming home and seeing the car drive away would have to be added into the mix (along with the crying for a short time at the body.)

I am now even more confused than when I started. It really does not seem at probable for that to have taken place.

Does anyone know how long it took the neighbor's father to get home after his son called him?

I have one senario that might just work and it would take an accomplice:

Tim and Vincent arrive at home PRIOR to the call being made, say around 4:45. Gunman is lying in wait in the home and kills Vincent and when Tim goes in to check what is going on runs toward the house and is shot along the way. The shooter then takes the cell phone and calls the wife to establish an alibi. The boy walks up as they are leaving. The boy then sees the car drive off and then finds the bodies, runs to the neighbors house, etc...

I just don't see enough time to shoot and relaod all of those times and then rush over to the neighbor's house-not all covered in blood. I just don't get it.

What do you the rest of you sleuths think?

JMO

I think there was a car parked on the concrete slab, where the yellow markers are.
I think the boy was walking down the road on the other side of this photo, so he didn't see the car until it was leaving.
http://www.abc15.com/media/news/4/d/4/4d4d5cc2-ce80-4b86-aaa5-81e2b8d93ea2/Original.jpg

How's that? :tonguewag:

[Details]

from the transcripts:

BB: Okay. Um, the, other information that you had, was, that there had been a phone call made to, um, apparently to, Tim, by his ex, er by his wife. Is that right?
DN: Either, he called her or she called him, I don’t remember…
BB: Wha, yeah, one way (unk)…
DN: …yeah, but they were on the cell phone, yes.
BB: And, and that infer, information was brought to you by, uhh, the wife.

Like BB says later in that transcript "We are hanging everything on Tanya's credibility":ohmy:We are hanging everything on the victim's cheated on and soon to be dumped wife's credibility? They may not have known about the reported affair, the reports that Tim was just about to propose, and maybe they really think that the wife is just purely clueless about all of this, even as Tim is apparently completely ready to commit to someone else - but that's sure not something I'd like to hang my entire case on.

Because if she wasn't clueless, if she knew about the affair, if she had a notion of the proposal - or simply noticed the natural extra distance Tim had from her as he was falling in love with another woman, they just let someone who is the natural prime suspect with a huge motive, determine the direction of their case.

[Crispy]

They are in college. I believe late teens, early 20's

[bkwits]

Yes. And all along they and everyone else has bee focusing on Vincent being the primary victim with Tim being "collateral damage." Perhaps Tim really was the intended victim??? He certainly was shot more than Vincent.
IMO

I've been thinking this also. I am intrigued by the bullet hole in Tim's truck. LE doesn't seem too concerned about that, but how many people drive around with a bullet hole in their truck? :confused:

[GentleBreeze]

If the 911 call was the one from the friend's father, in only 11 minutes and 30 seconds the boy would have had to:


Shoot Tim six times while reloading
Get to his friend's house
Tell his friend what happened
Wait while the friend called the father
Wait for the father to get home and call 911


That seems improbable.


Shooting and reloading doesn't take but seconds each time. Even giving him a full minute for each shot there is plenty of time to shoot six times. Count off 60 seconds and it is longer than some think.

The friend of the boy's that he went to lived right close by.

The father could have been nearby in town. The town is tiny. It only took LE 2 minutes to get to the scene from their station.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

I've been thinking this also. I am intrigued by the bullet hole in Tim's truck. LE doesn't seem too concerned about that, but how many people drive around with a bullet hole in their truck? :confused:

I think they have people that already knew about the hole in his truck. His coworkers would have already seen it when it was in the parking lot and he may have even took some of his coworkers outside to show them when it happen.

I think LE knows by now the bullet hole in his truck did not happen then but at some earlier date.

imoo

[Crispy]

Nobody has said where Tims children were.
The dog, according to the boy, was in the kennel and I believe he said when he went in he let her out.

The judge put a stay on the 45 day time limit to either move forward or dismiss. I wonder if it will start again when the competency hearing is concluded. jmo

[Justice_Dawg]

DN: I, that was a phone interview, that took place San Carlos ta Mesa so I don’t believe there was, they had any way to, record that phone interview.
BB: Who was in San Carlos?
DN: Um, well, we thought Tanya was in St., San Carlos…
BB: Oh, okay.
DN: …and, end up that, Tim Romans’ mother was there, and she called Tanya and this, conversation may have taken place on her cell phone ta Tanya’s cell phone, and Sergeant Rodriguez actually, um, spoke ta Tanya that way.

[GentleBreeze]

I have another question. Tiffany has a dog, doesn't she? Is that what the kennel is for? Does anyone remember where the dog was in all of this?

They had a Boxer puppy so it looks about the right size crate for one.

Tiffany has the puppy. It was mentioned on a blog site when she went to visit family she brought the puppy with her.

[bkwits]

I think they have people that already knew about the hole in his truck. His coworkers would have already seen it when it was in the parking lot and he may have even took some of his coworkers outside to show them when it happen.

I think LE knows by now the bullet hole in his truck did not happen then but at some earlier date.

imoo

I know. It supposedly happened at a bar, IIRC. It still intrigues me that a man would have a bullet hole in the door of his truck and then be shot later. Was someone gunning for him?

[IAMME]

Okay I don't know how relevant (or accurate) this is but by googling SRP's address in st johns and using that and the address in the transcripts, and plugging those into mapquest it appears that it is a 6 minute drive. VR called Tiffany at 4:27, so they "could" have been home as early as 4:33.

[bkwits]

Gentle,

Why are you so sold so early in the game on who the murderer is? Just because he confessed? It seems like you are very willing and quick to dismiss any notion that someone else may have done this.

The amount of information that has been uncovered in the past few days certainly brings up a LOT of reasonable doubt. Now I know this isn't a courtroom, but expect that you are a reasonable person.

Do you not have an open mind on this?

I am trying to have an open mind (even though I feel the child needs to be protected and not incarcerated no matter what happened) but am finding it more and more difficult to feel that this child could have ever done this, especially alone.

What could possibly change your mind? And if you are wrong, do you feel the least bit guilty of cheering on a prosecution team that has rushed to judgement?

The ONLY evidence that is in right now is the confession and Tanya's statement. That's it! Is that already enough for you to feel it is warrented to keep the kid locked up for who knows how long until all of this is sorted out?

IMO



Very thoughtful post.

[Justice_Dawg]

They had a Boxer puppy so it looks about the right size crate for one.

Tiffany has the puppy. It was mentioned on a blog site when she went to visit family she brought the puppy with her.

Here is a REAL LINK!

http://axtonromero.blogspot.com/2008/11/tiffany-romero-in-town.html

[Crispy]

Okay I don't know how relevant (or accurate) this is but by googling SRP's address in st johns and using that and the address in the transcripts, and plugging those into mapquest it appears that it is a 6 minute drive. VR called Tiffany at 4:27, so they "could" have been home as early as 4:33.

Well, in the video the boy said he walked around til 4:30 and one of the women did say that if he was walking around like that then he would have seen his dad go by or his dad would have seen him. Who knows? I'm confused.

[Justice_Dawg]

Okay I don't know how relevant (or accurate) this is but by googling SRP's address in st johns and using that and the address in the transcripts, and plugging those into mapquest it appears that it is a 6 minute drive. VR called Tiffany at 4:27, so they "could" have been home as early as 4:33.

Stopped by at the bar?
GF called at AFTER 5 to see if he was alive?

[IAMME]

Stopped by at the bar?
GF called at AFTER 5 to see if he was alive?

I'm sorry, you lost me.......:confused:

[LindaNJ1216]

Given the age of the defendant and the "danger" he poses to society, I don't understand why he is being held at all right now.

Even if they feel foster care would be preferable to being in his mother's care and custody....he shouldn't be locked up. If he is adjudicated to be guilty there is plenty of time for lockdown when he's being treated.


By ALL accounts this boy love and was close to his dad. If he could murder him there is nothing stopping him from slicing his mother's throat one night with a kitchen knife...or poisoning her...or bashing her skull in with a baseball bat.

If he's guilty ..he needs to stay right where he is. That's what we do to people that plan & carry out multiple murders.

[Crispy]

Who did the girlfriend call after 5? I didn't see that.

Also-who is this Big John character? He's supposed to be a Roman family friend or something like that. He's always running his mouth off. He said somoething to the effect that "well, what difference does it make if the kid is in juvie, gets convicted or not, gets out, whatever, it is a no win situation." I find that comment very odd. It IS a big deal to the kid and his mother!
http://www.kpho.com/index.html

IMO

Big John is also the person who told Romans wife they had to leave for court and that stopped the interview they were doing with her. jmo

[tif]

Okay I don't know how relevant (or accurate) this is but by googling SRP's address in st johns and using that and the address in the transcripts, and plugging those into mapquest it appears that it is a 6 minute drive. VR called Tiffany at 4:27, so they "could" have been home as early as 4:33.

Cool, if we knew where the friend's father was driving from, we could subtract his drive time from the 11.5 minutes. The Romero's address is in the transcripts.

[Caution03]

whats the link to the transcripts involving this case? I would like the liink to tiffany paring like its 1999

where is everyone getting all this information?

[LindaNJ1216]

So help me get this straight:

If the call was made at that time from Tim's cell phone (and that is the cell phone recovered at the scene and hasn't been tampered with) then indeed all of that did happen in that amount of time, take away who the shooter was. Actually, it seems even more improbable that the boy coming home and seeing the car drive away would have to be added into the mix (along with the crying for a short time at the body.)

I am now even more confused than when I started. It really does not seem at probable for that to have taken place.

Does anyone know how long it took the neighbor's father to get home after his son called him?

I have one scenario that might just work and it would take an accomplice:

Tim and Vincent arrive at home PRIOR to the call being made, say around 4:45. Gunman is lying in wait in the home and kills Vincent and when Tim goes in to check what is going on runs toward the house and is shot along the way. The shooter then takes the cell phone and calls the wife to establish an alibi. The boy walks up as they are leaving. The boy then sees the car drive off and then finds the bodies, runs to the neighbors house, etc...

I just don't see enough time to shoot and reload all of those times and then rush over to the neighbor's house-not all covered in blood. I just don't get it.

What do you the rest of you sleuths think?

JMO


The boy would still have to walk over Tim's body to enter the house and put his book bag under the table and discover his dad, stay with the body for a tad then go to the neighbors. While the boys alabi witnesses all lie and deny having seen him wave while on his 10 lap walk.

I have no reason to think the shooter would be covered in blood at all.

[LindaNJ1216]

Yes. And all along they and everyone else has bee focusing on Vincent being the primary victim with Tim being "collateral damage." Perhaps Tim really was the intended victim??? He certainly was shot more than Vincent.
IMO

Then why not simply shoot Tim and leave?

[Justice_Dawg]

I'm sorry, you lost me.......:confused:

You said:
they "could" have been home as early as 4:33.
---
I said: Not if they stopped at the bar!

[bkwits]

By ALL accounts this boy love and was close to his dad. If he could murder him there is nothing stopping him from slicing his mother's throat one night with a kitchen knife...or poisoning her...or bashing her skull in with a baseball bat.

If he's guilty ..he needs to stay right where he is. That's what we do to people that plan & carry out multiple murders.

Oh really? Can you say OJ? Can you say Drew P.?

[bkwits]

Then why not simply shoot Tim and leave?


The shooter was waiting in the house, hoping not to be seen??

Maybe shooter thought Vincent was Tim coming up the stairs (in hardhat, etc.)

[Justice_Dawg]

Then why not simply shoot Tim and leave?

We do not know who was shot first.

The way Vincent was found, shot in the back, he was running from someone. Tim could have been running (wounded) right behind him.

Whoever killed them, wanted them both dead.

The boy had no reason to want TIM DEAD!

[Crispy]

whats the link to the transcripts involving this case? I would like the liink to tiffany paring like its 1999

where is everyone getting all this information?

Court documents

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

The other link is posted on page 3 or 4 by Justice Dawg

[tif]

Shooting and reloading doesn't take but seconds each time. Even giving him a full minute for each shot there is plenty of time to shoot six times. Count off 60 seconds and it is longer than some think.

The friend of the boy's that he went to lived right close by.

The father could have been nearby in town. The town is tiny. It only took LE 2 minutes to get to the scene from their station.

imoo

It is physically possible for that to have happened, but is it likely? The actions of everyone involved would have to have happened with such precision that it makes it improbable. I just wish we knew the time the friend called his father.

Sorry if this sounds "out there", but I wonder if there are any real time satellite images available at the time of the murders.

[bkwits]

The boy would still have to walk over Tim's body to enter the house and put his book bag under the table and discover his dad, stay with the body for a tad then go to the neighbors. While the boys alabi witnesses all lie and deny having seen him wave while on his 10 lap walk.

I have no reason to think the shooter would be covered in blood at all.

I discount most of what the boy said in the "confession tape".

One possiblity is he came in while Tim was in the truck.. The shooter was hiding or had gone out the back door. Boy found dad, called for Tim. Tim got shot.

Where does it say his bookbag was under a chair in the kitchen?

[Kara]

from the transcripts:

BB: Okay. Um, the, other information that you had, was, that there had been a phone call made to, um, apparently to, Tim, by his ex, er by his wife. Is that right?
DN: Either, he called her or she called him, I don’t remember…
BB: Wha, yeah, one way (unk)…
DN: …yeah, but they were on the cell phone, yes.
BB: And, and that infer, information was brought to you by, uhh, the wife.

Like BB says later in that transcript "We are hanging everything on Tanya's credibility":ohmy:
Surely cell phone records will indicate who made the call.

[LindaNJ1216]

The shooter was waiting in the house, hoping not to be seen??

Maybe shooter thought Vincent was Tim coming up the stairs (in hardhat, etc.)

Why enter the house at all, why not hide outside and pick them off and drive away?

[Kara]

I know. It supposedly happened at a bar, IIRC. It still intrigues me that a man would have a bullet hole in the door of his truck and then be shot later. Was someone gunning for him?

I can't remember where I read it, but supposedly it was stray gunfire at a party. I don't know about you, but I don't attend many parties where there is any gunfire, much less stray gunfire. :shrug:

[LindaNJ1216]

I discount most of what the boy said in the "confession tape".

One possiblity is he came in while Tim was in the truck.. The shooter was hiding or had gone out the back door. Boy found dad, called for Tim. Tim got shot.

Where does it say his bookbag was under a chair in the kitchen?

Why would the shooter enter the house?

[bkwits]

Why enter the house at all, why not hide outside and pick them off and drive away?

Great possiblity of being seen. Car being recognized and license noted by neighbors. When VR was shot, apparently no one heard the shots.

[tif]

This is irrelevant, but I'm wondering if anyone else thinks the people involved in this, including the defense attorney, seem to be unusually inarticulate? The transcripts read like something you would get from the Google translator.

[bkwits]

This is irrelevant, but I'm wondering if anyone else thinks the people involved in this, including the defense attorney, seem to be unusually inarticulate? The transcripts read like something you would get from the Google translator.

I think it is their accents and regional manner of speech. IMO

[IAMME]

You said:
they "could" have been home as early as 4:33.
---
I said: Not if they stopped at the bar!


Oh ya, they could have, or they could have gotten home at 4:33, been killed shortly thereafter, which makes the boys story of finding them entirely plausible, basing the fact that I am not sold on the Roman's phone call, not based on someone who IMO had the BEST motive presented so far in this case....


I want everyone to understand that the information I am about to give is not 100%, but by googling ("ray davis" saint johns az) i came up with an address that is .2 mi from the scene, that i believe is 100% correct and according to mapquest it is .8 minutes driving time. I also found a ray davis who is the manager of Blue Hills Environmental Association, which is 1.64 miles from the scene and 4 minutes driving time......You can take that info for what it is worth, but you have to assume there is only one ray davis in st johns, and you also have to assume he is still at the same job, and that he was in the office when his son called him and not out collecting trash or whatever.....

[IAMME]

I can't remember where I read it, but supposedly it was stray gunfire at a party. I don't know about you, but I don't attend many parties where there is any gunfire, much less stray gunfire. :shrug:

Nope, and I thought I ran with a pretty rowdy crowd.:cool:

[tif]

I think it is their accents and regional manner of speech. IMO

Probably, you seem to be a much more charitable person than I.:blushing:

[GentleBreeze]

Gentle,

Why are you so sold so early in the game on who the murderer is? Just because he confessed? It seems like you are very willing and quick to dismiss any notion that someone else may have done this.

The amount of information that has been uncovered in the past few days certainly brings up a LOT of reasonable doubt. Now I know this isn't a courtroom, but expect that you are a reasonable person.

Do you not have an open mind on this?

I am trying to have an open mind (even though I feel the child needs to be protected and not incarcerated no matter what happened) but am finding it more and more difficult to feel that this child could have ever done this, especially alone.

What could possibly change your mind? And if you are wrong, do you feel the least bit guilty of cheering on a prosecution team that has rushed to judgment?

The ONLY evidence that is in right now is the confession and Tanya's statement. That's it! Is that already enough for you to feel it is warranted to keep the kid locked up for who knows how long until all of this is sorted out?

IMO

I don't really have that much of an opinion on what the Court's decisions are concerning this boy whether it be another furlough or if and when he is tried, what punishment he will be given, if any. Whatever the Judge decides to do in this case is fine with me. That is his call to make.

But since I have been hunting and shooting rifles ever since I was around 7 or 8, I just can't blindly say that the boy didn't have enough time to do this when imo he did. I don't even think it took a total of 5 minutes for both murders to be completed.

My rightness or wrongness will not have any outcome concerning this boy or any other case discussed on a message board. People have opinions even though there is a majority it is never 100% where everyone is on the same page. Sometimes people's opinions will be right, sometimes they will be wrong. If my opinion turns out to be wrong then so be it. I certainly have no problem saying I was wrong but this isn't being on the right side of something or wrong side like some contest but just a place to express opinions based on what we may know at any given time. Should there be exonerating evidence revealed I will reverse my opinion of his guilt in a NY minute.

I don't agree that Tanya is the only circumstantial evidence in this case. It is already known that he spoke with his caseworker after he was arrested and was not a coerced comfession and he offered a reason to them why he murdered his father.

imoo

[Justice_Dawg]

Could the Jordan Romero from this document be the same as the one in from the blog that Tiff went to visit to escape the drama?

http://72.3.233.244/pdfs/drugpolicy/redding_savanaaffidavit.pdf

Yeah, that's him and Chris Clark is the guy Tiffany has her arm around.

[Justice_Dawg]

BB: And then the, um, in the searches that were conducted there was never, an unspent round found, right? On the ground?
DN: Right. Right.
BB: And I guess this, this information…
DN: I should, actually, clarify that, in, the locations of the body, there weren’t. There’re rounds all, in that house, upstairs, there, there are, um, there’s just bullets, spilled everywhere.
CC: What size?
DN: Um, the, the ones I saw were larger calibers, that’s one ‘a the things I needed Tiffany to explain ta me. You know, and she says, oh, yeah, Vince was always, these things were, ya know, uh, he had bullets everywhere.

[LindaNJ1216]

The judge also denied the defense attorney's motion to appoint a therapist for the juvenile, expressing concerns over the way the motion was proposed. Defense attorney Benjamin Brewer has argued the boy needs "emotional healing," and requested that the proposed therapy sessions remain confidential and immune from court testimony. Judge Roca ordered the defense to search for an alternate way to get the boy help

http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2008/12/08/20081208stjohns12082008-CR.html

[LindaNJ1216]

This is irrelevant, but I'm wondering if anyone else thinks the people involved in this, including the defense attorney, seem to be unusually inarticulate? The transcripts read like something you would get from the Google translator.

It's scary...I have the Dueling Banjos song from Deliverance going through my head everytime I read it!

[IAMME]

Yeah, that's him and Chris Clark is the guy Tiffany has her arm around.

WHOA!! How do you know that?:scared:

Does anyone know much about police depositions? I have been deposed in a custody case, and my atty had me watch a video on given deposition, which basically said DO NOT give any more information than you have to. I also had to go through a course in nursing school and part of THAT was "the nurse at deposition" and that also said to not give more information than is asked. SO in general is it normal for a police officer to be as "helpful" as the two who were deposed in this case?

[Justice_Dawg]

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Dec08/0,4670,ChildCharged,00.html
If the boy were found to be incompetent and could not be restored to competency within 240 days, prosecutors said the judge would have to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning the charges could not be refiled, and initiate civil commitment proceedings. Prosecutors said a civil commitment is unlikely.

"There is substantial likelihood that in the event the juvenile were found incompetent and not restorable to competency, the juvenile in this case will go completely without treatment to address why he was capable of killing two apparently innocent persons," prosecutors said in court documents. "Further, the victims in this matter would go completely without justice."

Prosecutor Brad Carlyon said Monday that the state is considering filing a special action with the state Court of Appeals to determine whether the judge can stay the proceedings in the case. :ohmy:

"Our position is we should move forward," said Apache County Attorney Criss Candelaria.


Brewer brought up the possibility of future furloughs for the boy before the attorneys and Roca retreated to the judge's chamber to discuss the case. The boy was granted a 48-hour furlough to be with his mother for Thanksgiving.

"Our guy is sitting in the detention center and we don't think that's best for him," Brewer said after the hearing.

Court administrator Betty Smith said the procedures for future furloughs were discussed but none were requested.--------------------

:tonguewag:

YET!

[FurthurBB]

The boy would still have to walk over Tim's body to enter the house and put his book bag under the table and discover his dad, stay with the body for a tad then go to the neighbors. While the boys alabi witnesses all lie and deny having seen him wave while on his 10 lap walk.

I have no reason to think the shooter would be covered in blood at all.

Why? He came home from school before they would have left work. The body would not have even been there when he put his backpack under the table. IMO

[Justice_Dawg]

"Our position is we should move forward," said Apache County Attorney Criss Candelaria.:rolleyes:
---------
With NO DNA Forensics Ballistics. Yeah, OK Hotshot. :w00t:

[bkwits]

Probably, you seem to be a much more charitable person than I.:blushing:


Probably just older. :ohmy:

[Details]

...I don't agree that Tanya is the only circumstantial evidence in this case. It is already known that he spoke with his caseworker after he was arrested and was not a coerced comfession and he offered a reason to them why he murdered his father.

imooLink?


Because I've seen nothing resembling what you say. We've got one little tidbit in a search warrent about an interview with CPS - nothing saying if that happened before the murders, day of the murders, before or after the confession, or a week or more later. Much searching has turned up nothing. The whole thing is a bit in doubt to me, since the tally that supposedly existed was not found.

[FurthurBB]

Link?


Because I've seen nothing resembling what you say. We've got one little tidbit in a search warrent about an interview with CPS - nothing saying if that happened before the murders, day of the murders, before or after the confession, or a week or more later. Much searching has turned up nothing. The whole thing is a bit in doubt to me, since the tally that supposedly existed was not found.

I did read that this was after, I think it was from the transcript. He said without provocation, "Don't you want to know why I did it? Because I reached 1000 spanking that weekend."
It sounds odd to me though, it does not sound like something an 8-year-old would say. IMO

[Details]

BB: And then the, um, in the searches that were conducted there was never, an unspent round found, right? On the ground?
DN: Right. Right.
BB: And I guess this, this information…
DN: I should, actually, clarify that, in, the locations of the body, there weren’t. There’re rounds all, in that house, upstairs, there, there are, um, there’s just bullets, spilled everywhere.
CC: What size?
DN: Um, the, the ones I saw were larger calibers, that’s one ‘a the things I needed Tiffany to explain ta me. You know, and she says, oh, yeah, Vince was always, these things were, ya know, uh, he had bullets everywhere.Not a cautious gun owner. It's not unlikely that the 22 with the shell box beside it was sitting there by the door that morning.

[Details]

I did read that this was after, I think it was from the transcript. He said without provocation, "Don't you want to know why I did it? Because I reached 1000 spanking that weekend."
It sounds odd to me though, it does not sound like something an 8-year-old would say. IMOThat's from the search warrent - but I've seen no transcript with anything more. And in the search warrent, it was that he was tallying spankings, and that a 1000 would be his limit - no threat, no statement of any action to be taken, just that that would be his limit. Maybe he'd run away, maybe he'd go to his mom, maybe he'd go to the police or his teacher, who knows what he'd do - if he even said it. The statement from the search warrent sounds like it's from before the murders, and doesn't sound like he's hit a thousand yet, since he's talking in the future tense, not past nor present.

[bkwits]

I know this is a bit off topic, but it came to mind with so much talk about exactly what the boy said in his interview.

I think this was when I was in college during a Criminal Law class. During a regular ordinary lecture, a man came charging into the room caused a big commotion, yelled some things and then ran out the other door.

After the incident, which turned out to be a set up, the professor asked us all to indicate what we saw and heard. Many from the class misidentified the sex of the person (thought it was a woman) what they were wearing and what they said. Many people even misstated which door the person came in through and which door they left through. It all happened very quickly.

The lesson was meant to illustrate the reliability of eyewitness testimony. I remember how difficult it was to put together what I thought I saw and heard. I can only imagine the reliability of what a child thinks they saw and heard on what must have been the most horrifying night of their lives (even if he did it.)

I ask my 8 year old every night where his backpack is and he never knows. Many times, I find it outside on the lawn! Often times he leaves it at school or on the bus. My son is at home now and I guarantee if I call home right now and ask him where his backpack is, he probably couldnt tell me with 100% accuracy where it is.

The reason I am saying this is because any testimony a child gives must be taken with a grain of salt. In most cases, an 8 year old wouldn't be allowed to testify on the stand. They are too young. How can we expect this child to testify on his own behalf and be held accountable for anything he says.

His mind has got to be so jumbled on the inside right now. I am sure he is having nightmares and relives the event over and over again. Each time he does, I would imagine that the events change from day to day or even moment to moment.

If what they are hinging their case on at this moment is what this 8 year old testified to in that interview and what this woman said about the cell phone call, there is no doubt in my mind that this child should be released immediately until further evidence is brought forth in order to charge him with a crime. Until I see ballistics that actually connect this child with these murders, I feel that his due process has been completely violated and should be released to the custody of his mother immediately.

Shame on this judge for allowing this to continue. It is truly a crime in and of itself.

IMO

What a great post. You've put into words what I have been thinking for some time. :thumbup:

[tif]

I did read that this was after, I think it was from the transcript. He said without provocation, "Don't you want to know why I did it? Because I reached 1000 spanking that weekend."
It sounds odd to me though, it does not sound like something an 8-year-old would say. IMO

Even if the boy's quote is accurate, we don't know if he can distinguish between actually killing his father or feeling responsible because he wished him dead. It doesn't take a sociopath to wish a parent dead from time to time. I think that's pretty normal.

[JD1974]

I don't understand the problem with appointing a therapist for the boy who would not have to testify against him. Aren't there laws about patient client confidentiality, or does that not apply to cases like this. Or is that simply because he is a child.

The judge even says his court is not set up to handle this case. Well duh!!! Anyone can see that!

An 8 year old does not get any of the mumbo jumbo going on around him. It is quite apparent that this child is not competent to stand trial.

And then we have the Roman family's Big John spouting off again about how it is so unfair that too much attention is being paid to the child and his age. The kid is 8 YEARS OLD!!!

If Vincent had survived, I am sure he would be doing everything he could to protect his little boy.

IMO



I have sat through trials, I follow crime a lot and I know a lot about laws due to my own research but I am telling you if I was ever a defendant I would be clueless and scared to death. I am 34 years old, I cannot even imagine a trial at the age of 8. I can't even understand how an 8 year old can assist with his own defense. You notice during a trial the defense makes notes on certain things a witness says...how can an 8 year old even catch some of the things witnesses may say that are untrue? This case just makes me so angry!

[LindaNJ1216]

I did read that this was after, I think it was from the transcript. He said without provocation, "Don't you want to know why I did it? Because I reached 1000 spanking that weekend."
It sounds odd to me though, it does not sound like something an 8-year-old would say. IMO

Because this isn't your everyday normal 8 yr old

[FurthurBB]

Because this isn't your everyday normal 8 yr old

He seems very normal to me. IMO

[LindaNJ1216]

:chicken::chicken:He seems very normal to me. IMO


Now that's scary!

Just how many 8 yr old's do you know go around murdering people?

[steffaroob4]

Because this isn't your everyday normal 8 yr old

I don't know how anyone can say that, the only thing we can be sure of is the fact that we don't have enough evidence at this point to figure out what happened. IMO, the confession is mute at this point, if LE thought someone else did it when they question the boy, why did they want his clothes, why didn't they more carefuly question about who he is close to.

I have read and looked at everything so far, what makes me think twice about all of the info is the repeated things that LE didn't question the boy about. I saw in those tapes several things that gave me pause. He states that his grandfather's prints might be on the weapon, grandpa is at the house when parents aren't home, his description of the car is similar to his grandfather's, his grandfather objects to LE questioning the boy. Why didn't they question the boy further on his grandfather??? Both officers knew the grandfather's objection over the interview, I would think they should have been asking some basic info on grandfather in that interview.

As I look at everything, I see things that can go both ways, I am still sitting on the fence, I am leaning a certain direction, but that may change as more evidence comes in.

[Crispy]

That's from the search warrent - but I've seen no transcript with anything more. And in the search warrent, it was that he was tallying spankings, and that a 1000 would be his limit - no threat, no statement of any action to be taken, just that that would be his limit. Maybe he'd run away, maybe he'd go to his mom, maybe he'd go to the police or his teacher, who knows what he'd do - if he even said it. The statement from the search warrent sounds like it's from before the murders, and doesn't sound like he's hit a thousand yet, since he's talking in the future tense, not past nor present.

It's in the newest transcripts of the interviews with the boys lawyer. He was visiting with CPS, she was told she couldn't ask him about the murders, and he said to her Don't you want to know why I did it and she said Only if you want to tell me and he said Because I hit 1,000 spankings that weekend.

Of course that is all paraphrased, not exact quote from the transcript.

[FurthurBB]

:chicken::chicken:


Now that's scary!

Just how many 8 yr old's do you know go around murdering people?

None, and I do not believe he is any exception. IMO

[GentleBreeze]

None, and I do not believe he is any exception. IMO

There are always exceptions. That is why we have murderers and criminals when most dont murder or become criminals. What one person may not do another will.

There is no fail safe because they are of a certain age.

imo

[PensiveOne]

It's in the newest transcripts of the interviews with the boys lawyer. He was visiting with CPS, she was told she couldn't ask him about the murders, and he said to her Don't you want to know why I did it and she said Only if you want to tell me and he said Because I hit 1,000 spankings that weekend.

Of course that is all paraphrased, not exact quote from the transcript.

Don't you think it was awfully convenient that he offered to tell her, when she was told not to question him about it:glare:

[Justice_Dawg]

Who on here was giving me crap that there was only ONE .22 in that house.

My friends can rat on others if they wish. :thumbup:

[PensiveOne]

Oh really? Can you say OJ? Can you say Drew P.?
Scott Peterson was running around for a long time, too.:smile:

[IAMME]

It's in the newest transcripts of the interviews with the boys lawyer. He was visiting with CPS, she was told she couldn't ask him about the murders, and he said to her Don't you want to know why I did it and she said Only if you want to tell me and he said Because I hit 1,000 spankings that weekend.

Of course that is all paraphrased, not exact quote from the transcript.


We do not know that that is what was said, all we have is whichever officer said that repeating what she had heard....not the CPS workers statement...That wouldnt even be admissible in court, but it is good that it came out in depo, that is what depo is for, basically a BIG ole fishing trip for what the other side knows.

[bkwits]

Who on here was giving me crap that there was only ONE .22 in that house.

My friends can rat on others if they wish. :thumbup:

Who was that? Now let me think.:wink:

[Justice_Dawg]

Who was that? Now let me think.:wink:
This is for Them. :tonguewag:

BB: And that’s their room, right?
DN: Yes.
BB: Okay. Uh, w-why weren’t any of those seized?
DN: Um, actually, all the .22’s were taken, because there was .22, casings, that were found, next to the bodies.
BB: None ‘a the other weapons were taken?

[FurthurBB]

There are always exceptions. That is why we have murderers and criminals when most dont murder or become criminals. What one person may not do another will.

There is no fail safe because they are of a certain age.

imo

It is not because of his age that I do not think he is guilty. It is because of the evidence we have so far. IMO

[Justice_Dawg]

It is not because of his age that I do not think he is guilty. It is because of the evidence we have so far. IMO

What evidence? :confused:

:lol::lol:

[FurthurBB]

What evidence? :confused:

:lol::lol:


Or the lack thereof.

[PensiveOne]

The judge also denied the defense attorney's motion to appoint a therapist for the juvenile, expressing concerns over the way the motion was proposed. Defense attorney Benjamin Brewer has argued the boy needs "emotional healing," and requested that the proposed therapy sessions remain confidential and immune from court testimony. Judge Roca ordered the defense to search for an alternate way to get the boy help

http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2008/12/08/20081208stjohns12082008-CR.html

OMG! That is just wrong. I really feel they need to do something for this boy, whether he did this or not. If they are not equipped to handle it then they need to let him go or put him in a place where he can be helped.:cursing:

[steffaroob4]

This is for Them. :tonguewag:

BB: And that’s their room, right?
DN: Yes.
BB: Okay. Uh, w-why weren’t any of those seized?
DN: Um, actually, all the .22’s were taken, because there was .22, casings, that were found, next to the bodies.
BB: None ‘a the other weapons were taken?

I saw that when I read the transcript, I was under the wrong assumption there was only one .22.
I will never understand why they don't take all guns found at a crime scene, it has never made sense to me.

[Justice_Dawg]

BB: Any, indication that there, from the, you interviewed Candace, right?
DN: Yes.
BB: And, apparently she indicated that there was some problems with, three Mexican Nationals, at some point in the bar with, with Vincent and, and Tim?
DN: Yes.
BB: Um, any idea, who these guys were, di, were they contacted er, er interviewed?
DN: She didn’t know their names and she never saw them again, so I don’t know how we would contact them.
BB: Um, apparently the police department spoke to em, on that night.
DN: Mexican Nationals?
BB: That’s, that’s what, that’s what Candace said, that the police came, because of some kind of altercation, and, I, presumably got their names. I, you know, I have no idea. But I, but I, you haven’t received any repor, report with regard to any kind of incident involving three nationals and these, and Vincent and…

[IAMME]

I wonder how long it took the police to find out about the GF.....If you look at the myspace pages, candace's friend rikki, has a sister who is a dispatcher in st johns.

[GentleBreeze]

It is physically possible for that to have happened, but is it likely? The actions of everyone involved would have to have happened with such precision that it makes it improbable. I just wish we knew the time the friend called his father.

Sorry if this sounds "out there", but I wonder if there are any real time satellite images available at the time of the murders.

Yes, I think it is very likely. Even the boy told the caseworker he did it.

It really didn't take all that much planning imo. He lived there and he knew the habits of each man. I think it will become common knowledge that Tim remained in his truck each day talking on his cell phone and probably smoking a cigarette since no smoking was allowed in the Romero home before he entered the home after work.

Imo, what most likely happened the boy was on the first floor out of sight and the father came in and had a habit of going upstairs to his bedroom to shuck his full construction gear for the day. The father has his back to the shooter. Shooter fires twice, once into his elbow and once into his back then when he falls on the stairs he pumped two final bullets to the head. IMO that would only take about 2.5 minutes tops.

Then he walks to the door. I think the door was closed by Vincent when he walked in that day. It was in the 50s and he wouldn't leave just the metal screen door there that has perforations in it so the cold air could come through imo. Then the boy opens the main entry door up again afterwards and calls out to Tim while he is on the phone with Tanya.

Then within a 2 or 3 minutes he is dead too.

From what I remember the neighbors that gave statements about hearing the gunshots that day said they heard the shots around 5 pm and 911 call was made at 5:06 pm. Their statements are also consistent with the weapon being a single bolt action rifle with them describing them as a pop then a delay in between each time. That is when he is reloading to fire again. The other boy's father was very close by when called by his son imo. It only took LE two minutes to arrive at the scene from their station. The boy probably called his father and it took him a couple of minutes to arrive at the scene and call 911.

I have always thought the tight time line will be one of the most pivotal pieces of circumstantial evidence in this trial, if there is one. Imo, they have him there in such a tight time frame that no one else will be placed there but him and the two deceased victims.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

We do not know that that is what was said, all we have is whichever officer said that repeating what she had heard....not the CPS workers statement...That wouldn't even be admissible in court, but it is good that it came out in depo, that is what depo is for, basically a BIG ole fishing trip for what the other side knows.

They would have to have an official sworn statement by the caseworker or the Judge would not have given them another search warrant to go back and look.

And yes the statement is admissable in court. They are not bound to attorney client priviledge concerning a defendant.

imoo

[Justice_Dawg]

I wonder how long it took the police to find out about the GF.....If you look at the myspace pages, candace's friend rikki, has a sister who is a dispatcher in st johns.

:ohmy:

Mexican Nationals hmmmmm

[IAMME]

They would have to have an official sworn statement by the caseworker or the Judge would not have given them another search warrant to go back and look.

And yes the statement is admissable in court. They are not bound to attorney client priviledge concerning a defendant.

imoo


Sort of like they would have to have a child's legal guardian's permission to interview him?

And no, the officers statement in the transcript is heresy/hearsay (not sure which is the correct spelling here), now the CPS workers direct statement would be allowed in court, however we don't know what that statement is.........

[GentleBreeze]

Sort of like they would have to have a child's legal guardian's permission to interview him?

And no, the officers statement in the transcript is heresy, now the CPS workers direct statement would be allowed in court, however we don't know what that statement is.........

The Judge would not just take the word of the officer stating why he wanted another search warrant. There has to be proven probable cause. So the Judge knows the officer didn't just make this up out of thin air.

The Judge is very well aware of what the caseworker either told him directly or when they signed a sworn statement to what had been told to them by the defendant.

We see police officers all the time testify as to what others have told them and what they have learned during an investigation and from whom. So it must be admissible hearsay.

imoo

[muska]

They would have to have an official sworn statement by the caseworker or the Judge would not have given them another search warrant to go back and look.

And yes the statement is admissable in court. They are not bound to attorney client priviledge concerning a defendant.

imoo

So it's as if the caseworker was working for the police department - gathering info to help their case and then just handing it over. I wonder if she's related to Neckel or Rodriquez. Aren't CPS workers suppose to help the kid?

[IAMME]

I'm sorry I have to take back my previous statement, it appears that the CPS worker's statement actually may NOT be allowed.

This is a pretty informative site:
http://www.childtrauma.org/ctamaterials/Juv_Fam_Ct.asp

[GentleBreeze]

So it's as if the caseworker was working for the police department - gathering info to help their case and then just handing it over. I wonder if she's related to Neckel or Rodriquez. Aren't CPS workers suppose to help the kid?

No, in all cases whether the minor is a defendant or a victim in a criminal case the District Attorney has legal rights to full disclosure of any CPS records. He then turns what has been disclosed to his office, over to the defense attorney.

imoo

[GentleBreeze]

I'm sorry I have to take back my previous statement, it appears that the CPS worker's statement actually may NOT be allowed.

This is a pretty informative site:
http://www.childtrauma.org/ctamaterials/Juv_Fam_Ct.asp

Which section states that? Thanks.

The CPS has withdrawn itself from the case so they are no longer attached to the boy. The child has a GAL and also if out and about is in the custody of the mother.

ETA: This site seems to be talking about when the minor child is a victim not a defendant imo.

imoo

[IAMME]

Which section states that? Thanks.

The CPS has withdrawn itself from the case so they are no longer attached to the boy. The child has a GAL and also if out and about is in the custody of the mother.

ETA: This site seems to be talking about when the minor child is a victim not a defendant imo.

imoo

It says it under hearsay, and I am pretty sure that the hearsay laws would be the same no matter if he was defendant or victim, the hearsay rules wouldn't change....Now I dont profess to know what the hearsay laws ARE in Arizona, but according to the site I linked, it may not be admissable, and it also says that if it is a felony EVEN in juvenile court they have the right to a jury.

[GentleBreeze]

It says it under hearsay, and I am pretty sure that the hearsay laws would be the same no matter if he was defendant or victim, the hearsay rules wouldn't change....Now I don't profess to know what the hearsay laws ARE in Arizona, but according to the site I linked, it may not be admissible, and it also says that if it is a felony EVEN in juvenile court they have the right to a jury.

There are exceptions to the hearsay rule.

I believe the caseworker will be deemed trustworthy and the Judge will allow them to testify.

I have seen it allowed in other cases where the defendant talked outside of the well of the court. Look at how many cases we see where jail house snitches are allowed to testify to what they have been told by a defendant.

imoo

[Justice_Dawg]

There are exceptions to the hearsay rule.

I believe the caseworker will be deemed trustworthy and the Judge will allow them to testify.

I have seen it allowed in other cases where the defendant talked outside of the well of the court. Look at how many cases we see where jail house snitches are allowed to testify to what they have been told by a defendant.

imoo In Arizona?

[muska]

No, in all cases whether the minor is a defendant or a victim in a criminal case the District Attorney has legal rights to full disclosure of any CPS records. He then turns what has been disclosed to his office, over to the defense attorney.

imoo

They took advantage of him. They told the CPS worker she/he could not ask about the case(wink,wink). They knew they could get the kid to talk about whatever they wanted him to talk about, just like the day before. I don't think anyone knows what this kid did or saw....he probably doesn't know anymore himself. I hate that the justice system is providing less justice for this child than it would an adult.

[Justice_Dawg]

Which section states that? Thanks.

The CPS has withdrawn itself from the case so they are no longer attached to the boy. The child has a GAL and also if out and about is in the custody of the mother.

ETA: This site seems to be talking about when the minor child is a victim not a defendant imo.

imoo

Just for you.

http://www.law.arizona.edu/Depts/Clinics/CAC/depadj.html

[bkwits]

They took advantage of him. They told the CPS worker she/he could not ask about the case(wink,wink). They knew they could get the kid to talk about whatever they wanted him to talk about, just like the day before. I don't think anyone knows what this kid did or saw....he probably doesn't know anymore himself. I hate that the justice system is providing less justice for this child than it would an adult.

I agree.

When I was about 5 years old, I was staying with my grandparents. My uncle only about 5 years older than I, was living there as well. My great-grandfather was frail and weak, and came to stay with my grandparents. It wasn't very long until he fell and broke his hip. He went downhill from that and died not long after that.

This happened over fifty years ago, and deep inside I've always blamed myself. A few months ago, I was talking to the uncle about this. I mentioned that it was my fault because I left the ironing board up and Greatgrandpa tripped on it and broke his hip. My uncle said no that he left the ironing board up. So he has been blaming himself all this time.

Think about it. I was 5, I wouldn't have been ironing or prob couldn't even handle the ironing board. The uncle was 10, so I'm sure he wasn't ironing, but we both blamed ourselves all of these years.

[Emyo]

Just for you.

http://www.law.arizona.edu/Depts/Clinics/CAC/depadj.html


Great information. I just didn't know that you all were discussing a dependancy issue. I thought the judge already decided on that and the child was not made a ward of the court. His mom has custody.

moo

[muska]

I don't understand the problem with appointing a therapist for the boy who would not have to testify against him. Aren't there laws about patient client confidentiality, or does that not apply to cases like this. Or is that simply because he is a child.

The judge even says his court is not set up to handle this case. Well duh!!! Anyone can see that!

An 8 year old does not get any of the mumbo jumbo going on around him. It is quite apparent that this child is not competent to stand trial.

And then we have the Roman family's Big John spouting off again about how it is so unfair that too much attention is being paid to the child and his age. The kid is 8 YEARS OLD!!!

If Vincent had survived, I am sure he would be doing everything he could to protect his little boy.

IMO

Mumbo jumbo must be how it sounds to the boy. I had to laugh (just a little) when I read how the judge addressed the boy at the first hearing. "Mr. Romero, You've had the opportunity to discuss with Mr. Brewer the contents of the petition.....You have a number of rights...the right to confront and cross-examine all of the witnesses against you...etc. etc. " He might as well have saved his breath.

[GentleBreeze]

Just for you.

http://www.law.arizona.edu/Depts/Clinics/CAC/depadj.html

Thank you. Wow they do have exceptions to the hearsay rule.

This is interesting too.......

Instead, disclosure in Juvenile Court practice is pretty much a one-way street. CPS routinely discloses all the documents, reports and examinations that it receives. In addition, CPS is required to submit reports to the court which contain significant information. On the other hand, the parties -- especially the parents -- tend to disclose little unless asked.

Since the State has the burden of proof, it will present its evidence first. Even if the CPS's witnesses are friendly to us, our examination of them will be considered cross-examination and leading questions will be allowed. Different Judges handle the order of cross examination differently. Some have the parents' attorney go first and the child's attorney last. Others do the reverse. It is a good idea to find out before the hearing starts.

[Justice_Dawg]

Thank you. Wow they do have exceptions to the hearsay rule.

This is interesting too.......

Instead, disclosure in Juvenile Court practice is pretty much a one-way street. CPS routinely discloses all the documents, reports and examinations that it receives. In addition, CPS is required to submit reports to the court which contain significant information. On the other hand, the parties -- especially the parents -- tend to disclose little unless asked.

Since the State has the burden of proof, it will present its evidence first. Even if the CPS's witnesses are friendly to us, our examination of them will be considered cross-examination and leading questions will be allowed. Different Judges handle the order of cross examination differently. Some have the parents' attorney go first and the child's attorney last. Others do the reverse. It is a good idea to find out before the hearing starts.

As long as the CPS worker is available for Cross exam. All's fair in love and war. :tongueside:

[GentleBreeze]

Great information. I just didn't know that you all were discussing a dependency issue. I thought the judge already decided on that and the child was not made a ward of the court. His mom has custody.

moo

I have read different articles on the dependency issue. One said that the Judge at this time because the boy has been remanded and in the custody of the detention center, that custody is not needed now. He did grant her custody while the boy is out on furlough.

imo

[GentleBreeze]

As long as the CPS worker is available for Cross exam. All's fair in love and war. :tongueside:

Of course, they already know that.:tongue:

imoo

[Justice_Dawg]

Great information. I just didn't know that you all were discussing a dependancy issue. I thought the judge already decided on that and the child was not made a ward of the court. His mom has custody.

moo

This happened with the CPS before the dependency hearing. That's what we were talking about..before the mom got custody.

[IAMME]

Thank you Justice. That clears it up.

[muska]

This happened with the CPS before the dependency hearing. That's what we were talking about..before the mom got custody.

Will the the boy's attorney be able to challenge the admissability of this CPS testimony? Shouldn't they have waited for the mother, the person with custody, to get there? They made sure these interviews took place as fast as they possibly could, wanted to get them done before the parent arrived, before anyone stepped in on the child's behalf.

[Justice_Dawg]

Will the the boy's attorney be able to challenge the admissability of this CPS testimony? Shouldn't they have waited for the mother, the person with custody, to get there? They made sure these interviews took place as fast as they possibly could, wanted to get them done before the parent arrived, before anyone stepped in on the child's behalf.

Officer/Detecive Neckels states many times that she/they got the ok from Tiffany.

Defense attorney Ben Brewer tells Neckels that as soon as Tiffanys husband was dead, she had no right to give any kind of permission for the boy as they are no longer related.
Neckels says she didn't even know about the boys bio mom. Then she states she did. So, she lied.

Eryn had joint custody of the boy. In case of emergency, she should have been contacted ASAP. She wasn't.

Brewer has a lot to challenge in this case.

MOO

[JD1974]

:chicken::chicken:


Now that's scary!

Just how many 8 yr old's do you know go around murdering people?

What's scarier is that you are already calling him a murderer.

[JD1974]

Mumbo jumbo must be how it sounds to the boy. I had to laugh (just a little) when I read how the judge addressed the boy at the first hearing. "Mr. Romero, You've had the opportunity to discuss with Mr. Brewer the contents of the petition.....You have a number of rights...the right to confront and cross-examine all of the witnesses against you...etc. etc. " He might as well have saved his breath.

That would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. I wonder if he even knows that he is Mr Romero, he has probably only heard his fatheror grandfather addressed in that way.

[JD1974]

Officer/Detecive Neckels states many times that she/they got the ok from Tiffany.

Defense attorney Ben Brewer tells Neckels that as soon as Tiffanys husband was dead, she had no right to give any kind of permission for the boy as they are no longer related.
Neckels says she didn't even know about the boys bio mom. Then she states she did. So, she lied.

Eryn had joint custody of the boy. In case of emergency, she should have been contacted ASAP. She wasn't.

Brewer has a lot to challenge in this case.

MOO


Exactly what was stated in a post not too long ago. As soon as a biological parent dies the step parent has no ties to the child whatsoever. I knew I wasn't crazy when I poasted that. Like I said if the bio parent and step parent divorceed would the step parent pay child support NO because they have absolutely no ties other than marriage to the child. Tiffany had no right to give permission for the little boy to be questioned, the thing that bothers me about that also is the grandfather who actually had blood ties to the boy said no yet she overruled him, she had NO RIGHT.

[Justice_Dawg]

What's scarier is that you are already calling him a murderer.

Reminds me of lynching, stoning, buring at the stake, ect. with no trial. Some here have the characteristics to be the ring leaders.

MOO

[GentleBreeze]

Will the the boy's attorney be able to challenge the admissibility of this CPS testimony? Shouldn't they have waited for the mother, the person with custody, to get there? They made sure these interviews took place as fast as they possibly could, wanted to get them done before the parent arrived, before anyone stepped in on the child's behalf.

The Judge is the one that brought CPS into this case. When any case involves minors they are brought into meet with the child. The parent has no right to say their child cant speak with CPS. Just think of how many abusive parents would use that as an excuse for not letting their abused child talk.

I don't believe this conversation with CPS was done right away. It was days after the arrest and his mother was already in St. Johns.

imo

[Justice_Dawg]

the judge is the one that brought cps into this case. When any case involves minors they are brought into meet with the child. The parent has no right to say their child cant speak with cps. Just think of how many abusive parents would use that as an excuse for not letting their abused child talk.

I don't believe this conversation with cps was done right away. It was days after the arrest and his mother was already in st. Johns.

Imo

link??????

[Justice_Dawg]

exactly what was stated in a post not too long ago. As soon as a biological parent dies the step parent has no ties to the child whatsoever. I knew i wasn't crazy when i poasted that. Like i said if the bio parent and step parent divorceed would the step parent pay child support no because they have absolutely no ties other than marriage to the child. Tiffany had no right to give permission for the little boy to be questioned, the thing that bothers me about that also is the grandfather who actually had blood ties to the boy said no yet she overruled him, she had no right.

ita!!!!!!!

[muska]

The Judge is the one that brought CPS into this case. When any case involves minors they are brought into meet with the child. The parent has no right to say their child cant speak with CPS. Just think of how many abusive parents would use that as an excuse for not letting their abused child talk.

I don't believe this conversation with CPS was done right away. It was days after the arrest and his mother was already in St. Johns.

imo

You may be right about the timing; I may have gotten that wrong. Regardless, they took advantage of him. He should not have been allowed to talk about the case, to say anything that might in any way incriminate himself. An adult would have understood the importance of remaining silent until an attorney was there. The same right should have been guaranteed the child. This might not have been legally necessary but it would have been the fair thing to do.

[IAMME]

It reminds me of the old cartoon with the little dog and the people are talking to him and all he hears is "Blah blah blah blah blah Rufus blah blah blah blah TREAT blah blah blah blah...."

This is a joke and not even close to funny!:cursing:

PS-my 8 year old asked me tonight what "unlimited" meant. I am certain he does not know what "petition" "confront" "witnesses" or probably even "opportunity" means. And he's not dumb....he's just 8.

IMO

I cant remember if I already posted this. :blushing:
I found the miranda warning online and read it to my 11 and 7 y/os, then asked them what it meant.

The 7 y/o said "I dunno" the 11 y/o said, "it means they can just keep after you no matter what."

[Crispy]

I read my son the basic Miranda warning. I told him it all at once and he didn't understand, but when I broke it down line by line he understood some of it. Right to remain silent and if you can't afford an attorney one will be appointed to you. Then again, we watch a lot of Cops!!

[Crispy]

Don't know if you have seen this or not. An updated link talking about the judge in the case. He says the system is just not set up for a case like this. They are in uncharted waters

http://www.azfamily.com/news/homepagetopstory/stories/st-johns-local-news-120608-interview-transcripts.394067bb.html

ETA: The state is considering a special action to with the Court of Appeals to determine whether the court can stay the proceedings in the case.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/12/08/20081208stjohnshearing.html

[IAMME]

I read my son the basic Miranda warning. I told him it all at once and he didn't understand, but when I broke it down line by line he understood some of it. Right to remain silent and if you can't afford an attorney one will be appointed to you. Then again, we watch a lot of Cops!!


How old is you son?

Our poor guinea pigs, errrr I mean kids, must think we have gone nuts!!:w00t:

[IAMME]

I just thought of something... I remember reading somewhere that this is the first case of a child this young being charged with murder in 20 years. Does anyone have any information on THAT case? Wouldn't rulings made on that case be able to affect this one?

[Crispy]

How old is you son?

Our poor guinea pigs, errrr I mean kids, must think we have gone nuts!!:w00t:

He is 8. I have an 8 year old step daughter that doesn't understand it though.

I just find it hard to believe that they won't have the evidence until late January, but the prosecutors still want this case to move forward. You would think the stay wouldn't bother them, because you can't start a trial without evidence and without knowing if the boy is competent to even stand trial. I think they are nervous about the competency hearings.

I want to see an interview with Sgt. Rodriguez and the boys attorney. He is the one that Neckel said was handling the Romans family and that aspect of the investigation. jmo

[PensiveOne]

I just thought of something... I remember reading somewhere that this is the first case of a child this young being charged with murder in 20 years. Does anyone have any information on THAT case? Wouldn't rulings made on that case be able to affect this one?

http://tinyurl.com/6yr5wg

This site talks about a few cases. The 1990 case it talks about was where an 8 year old killed his father with a knife while his father was beating his mother. That case was ruled justifiable homicide.

I found this doc, too. Although it talks about youth violence in schools, there is a 6 year old listed...the vast majority are teens.
http://www.learn-usa.com/relevant_to_et/Youth_Violence.pdf

Flint, Michigan February 29, 2000 Male student, 6
Details: Armed with a .32-caliber handgun, allegedly shot and killed 1 student at Buell Elementary School near Flint, Michigan.

more on that story...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2000/03/07/60II/main168970.shtml

The little boy in that case was really messed up. His father was in jail and his family sold crack.

The most shocking piece of the article talks about an 8 year old who killed his brother, was set free because of his age and then at 12 killed again. Maybe there is a lesson in that story:(

[muska]

He is 8. I have an 8 year old step daughter that doesn't understand it though.

I just find it hard to believe that they won't have the evidence until late January, but the prosecutors still want this case to move forward. You would think the stay wouldn't bother them, because you can't start a trial without evidence and without knowing if the boy is competent to even stand trial. I think they are nervous about the competency hearings.

I want to see an interview with Sgt. Rodriguez and the boys attorney. He is the one that Neckel said was handling the Romans family and that aspect of the investigation. jmo

I think the prosecutor is trying to force the defense to take the plea bargain. They want this off public radar asap. They are probably concerned that the evidence will come back in favor of the boy. The boy is too young and probably too traumatized and confused to be any help to the defense.

[LindaNJ1216]

They took advantage of him. They told the CPS worker she/he could not ask about the case(wink,wink). They knew they could get the kid to talk about whatever they wanted him to talk about, just like the day before. I don't think anyone knows what this kid did or saw....he probably doesn't know anymore himself. I hate that the justice system is providing less justice for this child than it would an adult.


IMO So you want him to have all of the rights of an adult, but you don't want him tried as an adult?

I would hope because he's 8, it would be far more important to get to the TRUTH of the matter than defending him if he's guilty.

Where would the boy be if charges were dismissed for some adult like technicality? Would that REALLy be in the boys best interest?

[Martek]

That would be laughable if it wasn't so sad. I wonder if he even knows that he is Mr Romero, he has probably only heard his fatheror grandfather addressed in that way.

I don't get why it would be thought of as laughable or sad - especially considering the forum.

Would not the legal proceedings have to be done in a certain way - and also most likely transcribed and/or recorded - "for the record"?

If so, would that not explain why it is being done in such a "laughable" and "sad" way? IOW, it is being done as prescribed by law, is it not?

:confused:

Martek

[Justice_Dawg]

I think the prosecutor is trying to force the defense to take the plea bargain. They want this off public radar asap. They are probably concerned that the evidence will come back in favor of the boy. The boy is too young and probably too traumatized and confused to be any help to the defense.

Absolutely!!

IMO

[bkwits]

IMO So you want him to have all of the rights of an adult, but you don't want him tried as an adult?

I would hope because he's 8, it would be far more important to get to the TRUTH of the matter than defending him if he's guilty.

Where would the boy be if charges were dismissed for some adult like technicality? Would that REALLy be in the boys best interest?

Do you really think this child should be locked up, in isolation for months while they diddle around with the evidence?

Do you think he should be held in jail (I know, Juvie jail) during Christmas, his birthday, New Years and until maybe some evidence comes back that implicates him?

He's already been in jail for over a month. What if he didn't do it? In that case, a killer (an adult killer, most likely) is out there.

:thumbdown:

[Justice_Dawg]

IMO So you want him to have all of the rights of an adult, but you don't want him tried as an adult?

I would hope because he's 8, it would be far more important to get to the TRUTH of the matter than defending him if he's guilty.

Where would the boy be if charges were dismissed for some adult like technicality? Would that REALLy be in the boys best interest?

I want him to have all of the rights of any other American Citizen.
I would love to get to the TRUTH of the matter, but for some odd reason it will take until the end of January to get anything.

An adult awaiting trial gets a shot at going free on bail . Why can't a child?


IMO

[bkwits]

I think the prosecutor is trying to force the defense to take the plea bargain. They want this off public radar asap. They are probably concerned that the evidence will come back in favor of the boy. The boy is too young and probably too traumatized and confused to be any help to the defense.

If they take the plea bargain, will the case will be dropped? I mean will LE look at the evidence to see if there is a killer (not the child) out there?:confused:

[LindaNJ1216]

Do you really think this child should be locked up, in isolation for months while they diddle around with the evidence?

Do you think he should be held in jail (I know, Juvie jail) during Christmas, his birthday, New Years and until maybe some evidence comes back that implicates him?

He's already been in jail for over a month. What if he didn't do it? In that case, a killer (an adult killer, most likely) is out there.

:thumbdown:

Well I happen to think he did it and I think going home for Thanksgiving and being being treated as if he did nothing wrong, not talking about it and recieving bags of toys is a HUGE mistake.

[LindaNJ1216]

I want him to have all of the rights of any other American Citizen.
I would love to get to the TRUTH of the matter, but for some odd reason it will take until the end of January to get anything.

An adult awaiting trial gets a shot at going free on bail . Why can't a child?


IMO

I think there is usually NO bail for someone that commits two premeditated murders.

That's not the way it works.

You can't have it both ways. Either you want him treated like an adult or you want him treated like a child.

[LindaNJ1216]

If they take the plea bargain, will the case will be dropped? I mean will LE look at the evidence to see if there is a killer (not the child) out there?:confused:


if he takes the plea bargin he did it. Case closed

[Justice_Dawg]

If they take the plea bargain, will the case will be dropped? I mean will LE look at the evidence to see if there is a killer (not the child) out there?:confused:

The plea was part of the Motion to dismiss. All the plea was is "if" the boy did it, the state promised to keep everything in Juvenile court, and the boy would never be tried as an adult. (So out when he is 18 yrs no matter what)

The judge doesn't want to address the motion while a competency issue in the case is still pending; he ordered all proceedings stayed until the evaluations are complete. So there is no deal to take at this point.

The Prosecutors had a fit. They even offered to DISMISS BOTH MURDER CHARGES!

They are scared to death that he will be deemed incompetent to stand trial.