1-12 - 1/15

[bkwits]

Starting a new thread. Come on Down.

:seeya:

:seeya:

[wolfi_2]

Don´t know how to quote to the last thread, so the bold is from Hawk

I would think there would be many newscasts that would welcome the mom. I just don't know what the limits are on the 'gag order'. I know it makes me want to gag.

-Well, I think it´s not so good for Eryn, to be too much present on TV, if her little boy is set free for good and it´s not proven that he is innocent without any doubt, where can she live in US? There would be a lot of people who will remember her face, than count one and one together, looking for the school of the boy - and bingo! she maybe had to move very often with her children.

[bkwits]

Don´t know how to quote to the last thread, so the bold is from Hawk

I would think there would be many newscasts that would welcome the mom. I just don't know what the limits are on the 'gag order'. I know it makes me want to gag.

-Well, I think it´s not so good for Eryn, to be too much present on TV, if her little boy is set free for good and it´s not proven that he is innocent without any doubt, where can she live in US? There would be a lot of people who will remember her face, than count one and one together, looking for the school of the boy - and bingo! she maybe had to move very often with her children.


That is a very good point. One that I hadn't thought of. As I understand it, Eryn is not covered by the judge's gag order, but I think counsel has advised her not to speak about the case. IMO

[Hawk]

Don´t know how to quote to the last thread, so the bold is from Hawk

I would think there would be many newscasts that would welcome the mom. I just don't know what the limits are on the 'gag order'. I know it makes me want to gag.

-Well, I think it´s not so good for Eryn, to be too much present on TV, if her little boy is set free for good and it´s not proven that he is innocent without any doubt, where can she live in US? There would be a lot of people who will remember her face, than count one and one together, looking for the school of the boy - and bingo! she maybe had to move very often with her children.

Good results seldom come without compromise. If it helps the boy be treated right the sacrifice of possibly being recognized in the future would be a small price to pay.

Besides, that's what makeovers are for, right?

[wolfi_2]

Hi! :seeya:

I guess the appeal will be tomorrow. 13th right? Who has that link?

Did you think about this one?

http://www.cofad1.state.az.us/casefiles/sa/sa080294.pdf

[wolfi_2]

Good results seldom come without compromise. If it helps the boy be treated right the sacrifice of possibly being recognized in the future would be a small price to pay.

Besides, that's what makeovers are for, right?

from this kind of view, yes!

[Hawk]

WOW! Yes that is it, I didn't see that they Denied Oral Argument before!! :ohmy:

That means it will be squashed. Bank on it! :thumbup:

Sorry to be so ignorant. What does that mean? And what results will there be?

[JD1974]

You know what really bothers me the most about this case? The law says that if the boy is incompetent he cannot be charged, yet if he can be deemed competent within 240 days they can bring the charges. The part that bothers me is this, if he was incompetent when he committed the crime that should be the end of it. Whether he can be deemed competent almost a year later still does not alter the fact that when he actually committed the crime he was not.

This has bothered me from the beginning. It also bothers me when people are found to be incompetent because of a mental illness, they just wait until they are medicated and then charge them. The problem with both of these scenarios is the fact that after time passed these people changed, of course as the little boy gets older he will become competent, but was he when the murder was committed?

This little boy IF guilty will eventually realize the ramifications of what he has done when he is older, but we should not let our govt hold charges over your head until you understand what is going on. The whole point is when the crime was committed YOU DIDN'T!!!

[wolfi_2]

You know what really bothers me the most about this case? The law says that if the boy is incompetent he cannot be charged, yet if he can be deemed competent within 240 days they can bring the charges. The part that bothers me is this, if he was incompetent when he committed the crime that should be the end of it. Whether he can be deemed competent almost a year later still does not alter the fact that when he actually committed the crime he was not.

This has bothered me from the beginning. It also bothers me when people are found to be incompetent because of a mental illness, they just wait until they are medicated and then charge them. The problem with both of these scenarios is the fact that after time passed these people changed, of course as the little boy gets older he will become competent, but was he when the murder was committed?

This little boy IF guilty will eventually realize the ramifications of what he has done when he is older, but we should not let our govt hold charges over your head until you understand what is going on. The whole point is when the crime was committed YOU DIDN'T!!!


this is exact what I think about it, but unfortunately not the law.

[Hawk]

The "incompetent" thing only applies to whether or not the defendant is able to help in his or her own defense and does NOT apply to whether or not the defendant had the competence to commit the crime. In other words, you can, theoretically be competent enough to commit a crime, but then be ruled incompetent to stand trial. One really has nothing to do with the other.

That's why they are saying that if he can be made to be competent in 240 days, then they can try him.

Where this might help the State other cases, may be perhaps someone who was injured in the commission of a crime (or just before trial gets injured or develops a disease perhaps, deeming them unable to help in their defense. However, if their prognosis is that they will recover, then the state can then have 240 to wait for them to get better, become able to participate in their defense and move forward.

If after 240 days the person still is not competent, then chances are they never will be and then the case is dismissed without prejudice.

Does that sound correct to all you legal eagles out there?

I sure ain't no legal eagle but that finally makes sense to my dense brain. I just couldn't understand what it meant.

Thanks!

[JD1974]

The "incompetent" thing only applies to whether or not the defendant is able to help in his or her own defense and does NOT apply to whether or not the defendant had the competence to commit the crime. In other words, you can, theoretically be competent enough to commit a crime, but then be ruled incompetent to stand trial. One really has nothing to do with the other.

That's why they are saying that if he can be made to be competent in 240 days, then they can try him.

Where this might help the State other cases, may be perhaps someone who was injured in the commission of a crime (or just before trial gets injured or develops a disease perhaps, deeming them unable to help in their defense. However, if their prognosis is that they will recover, then the state can then have 240 to wait for them to get better, become able to participate in their defense and move forward.

If after 240 days the person still is not competent, then chances are they never will be and then the case is dismissed without prejudice.

Does that sound correct to all you legal eagles out there?

I am not talking about just being incompetent to stand trial. I am saying like in this case at his age there is no way he can comprehend what he has done. So the pros want to hold a charge over his head until he is an adult. Those are the situations I am speaking of. That is why they want the judge to rule before the competency reports are done, that is why they are stalling. If the judge throws that one out they can refile when he is older.

[JD1974]

Right... and I gotcha and I agree with you....I was just trying to explain the legal difference between compentecy to stand trial and competency to commit the crime. In my opinion, this chid is competent of neither. Nor do I even thing he actually did it period, IMO.

I don't think he did either. It just scares me to think that if you cannot even help your own defense with your trial so you are deemed incompetent, especially mentally, they dope them up and proclaim they are cured and now competent. Something changed between the time of the incompetency ruling and then when they are deemed well enough to go to trial. It bothers me because if said person couldn't even help mount a defense at the time of the murder, how the heck can he be expected to have been competent to know what he had done to begin with?

I am really only using this for kids and mentally ill people. I don't care if this little boy could be competent within 240 days, he wasn't competent period IMO due to his age at the time of the murders..you shouldn't be able to go back in time and charge a little kid as an adult because he grows up and knows what he did when he was 8 years old.

[JD1974]

They can't try people who are legally retarted because they cannot assist. Ever hear a defense attorney say "he has the mind of an 8 yr old"?

:wink:



I know! I said awhile ago. If you are 8 years old it's ok to try you, if you only have the mind of one they let you off. UNREAL

[JD1974]

Just thought I'd repost this, if it's a help.

The Dusky standard used to determine competency is:
Sufficient present ability to consult with ones attorney with a reasonable degree of rational understanding, and a rational as well as factual understanding of the proceedings against him.
(Dusky v. United States, 1960) In my psych and law class the instructor said you pretty much have to be found to have the brain of a grapefruit to be found incompetent. We were talking about children though. However, I would think in this case he could very well be found incompetent to stand trial. The key words in this standard is reasonable and rational.

Dusky was referred to in Brewer's motion for something, can't remember what though.


Yes and that right there is what I am talking about. You have someone with a severe mental disorder, deemed incompetent. Feed them some meds for a year or so and they are cured, then they can be tried. The problem is, that isn't how they were when the crime was committed.

[JD1974]

Here's something else that might be helpful.

Competencies are context specific:
Competency to waive Miranda warnings
Competency to confess
Competency to plead guilty
Competency to waive right to trial by jury
Competency to stand trial
Competency to be sentenced
Competency to be executed

Again, I'm not sure if this applies to juvies. My class only covered adults.

Mine dealt with children but very limited. I think we talked about the effects that certain drugs could have in-utero. I almost feel like digging out my old psych papers and reviewing them LOL

[PensiveOne]

Denied.

When they (appellate courts) refuse to hear oral arguments, it means they don't want to hear it. They don't want anything to do with it.


moo

Hi Dawg, glad you are back! I was looking up the orals denial the other day and found this, so I am not so sure that denying orals for a special action has the same effect as it does with other appeals:


*Will my appeal be heard with oral argument?
The court schedules oral argument only if one of the parties timely requests it, and only if the court agrees that oral argument might be helpful in deciding the case. However, the court generally favors oral argument if there is any doubt about its usefulness. So requests for oral argument are generally granted. An exception to this rule is special actions, in which oral arguments are generally not allowed.

Here is the link:
http://www.cofad1.state.az.us/FAQ/COURTfaq.HTM

[JD1974]

I agree with you. The difference with an adult is that their defense can be not guilty by reason of insanity or guilty but mentally ill. In the boy's situation, he can't really use either as a defense. The only saving grace IF is that he would also have to be found incompetent for sentencing. I'm not sure what the timeline is on that, but I would think it would be the same. Incompetent for sentencing the boy wouldn't have a reasonable understanding of what he did wrong and why he is being sentenced.


I know, I know. This is just me running off because this subject is so important to me. There was a 4 year old who shot his babysitter, are we going to get to the day that prosecutors can wait for 14 years and try a 4 year old as an adult? What about a 2 year old? Where does it end...everytime we hear about this kind of stuff happening they are getting charged younger and younger, as adults no less.

[bkwits]

Brewer offering to pay for CR's therapy out of his own pocket speaks volumes about him also. I'd hire him.

I was impressed by that as well. :smile:

[JD1974]

An Example:

Caution, not for the weak stomach people

Andre Thomas Eats His Remaining Eyeball on Death Row
From the start, Thomas' attorneys had argued that he was mentally incompetent, but he was still sentenced to death. However, with Thomas now making himself blind, it may be harder to uphold the death sentence.

If Thomas is officially labeled as mentally ill, it will add to the efforts to get his death sentence overturned. Groups like Murder Victims Families For Human Rights, and the National Alliance on Mental Illness, have long argued against using the death penalty on the mentally ill. But the state of Texas have executed the likes of Thomas before, despite these groups' efforts.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1376769/andre_thomas_eats_his_remaining_eyeball.html?cat=1 7

I read about him the other day, horrified me. He is a sick sick person. I think some of my problem is that I try to take all of the emotion out of what I read and just read the facts. This is a prime example of what I am talking about.

[wolfi_2]

I know, I know. This is just me running off because this subject is so important to me. There was a 4 year old who shot his babysitter, are we going to get to the day that prosecutors can wait for 14 years and try a 4 year old as an adult? What about a 2 year old? Where does it end...everytime we hear about this kind of stuff happening they are getting charged younger and younger, as adults no less.


just sick! isn´t it, even the idea is sick!

[PensiveOne]

Most Special Actions are denied.

http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/LowerCourtAndAdminAppeals/specialAction.asp
So did they deny the special action or just the orals? Or do we know?

[JD1974]

One other point. Just because someone has a severe mental disorder does not neccesarily mean that they will be found incompetent. It has to be judged by the standard. As I've said before you have to pretty much have the mind of a grapefruit to be found incompetent. That's why there's not that many found incompetent to stand trial. There's more who are using NGBRI. Lot's can file to find incompetency but very very few are actually found incompetent. However, I really believe the boy will be found incompetent and will also be found to not be able to be restored in 240 days. They don't have to wait the actual 240 days to determine that. IIRC, it's determined the first go around.


Point taken. I am talking about the truly mentally ill. I am bi-polar, I know what it is like to have a mental illness that goes untreated. Did I ever hurt anyone, nope. I am tired of that being the catch all for anyone who commits a crime.

[JD1974]

That is why I posted it. Prime example. :wink:


He lost his first eye the same way IIRC I don't think he ate it but he did remove it himself. I just cannot read that again.

[PensiveOne]

Just the oral, so far.
Tomorrow is the court date.
If pros. wanted oral knowing it would be squashed, they are grasping at straws.

How does it normally work with these kind of appeals? Does the appeals court make a decision and hand it down or do the lawyers all show up and present briefs and then the court decides? I am just wondering if it will be decided tomorrow or maybe it will be weeks?

[PensiveOne]

He lost his first eye the same way IIRC I don't think he ate it but he did remove it himself. I just cannot read that again.

That is gross, I can't read it:crying:

[JD1974]

Bi-Polar and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU_JyGBDeIc

are two different things. Totally.


Oh yeah I know. How many times just in the last 2 years have you heard a def atty come out and say their client was bi-polar as an excuse? I think they made the insanity bar so high because every jury who heard how a parent beat their kid to death would think that was insane in itself.

The thing with bi-polar is lack of sleep. That is what does you in, when you are in a manic phase because of whatever triggers it, you don't sleep. I can't count how many times I hallucinated because I hadn't slept in days. I seen people creeping through my house, the one I swear was a crouching Grinch. I have seen things flying through my house. The only thing that kept me sane is because I KNEW what it was, yeah I had a little voice in the back of my head saying well what if you are wrong and it is really happening...weird stuff happens to you when you cannot sleep.

[JD1974]

Bi-Polar and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU_JyGBDeIc

are two different things. Totally.


Oh yeah there is a song that explains me perfectly. NOT that one lol

It is the lyrics that get me..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psP1bKKEtHg

[Hawk]

An Example:

Caution, not for the weak stomach people

Andre Thomas Eats His Remaining Eyeball on Death Row
From the start, Thomas' attorneys had argued that he was mentally incompetent, but he was still sentenced to death. However, with Thomas now making himself blind, it may be harder to uphold the death sentence.

If Thomas is officially labeled as mentally ill, it will add to the efforts to get his death sentence overturned. Groups like Murder Victims Families For Human Rights, and the National Alliance on Mental Illness, have long argued against using the death penalty on the mentally ill. But the state of Texas have executed the likes of Thomas before, despite these groups' efforts.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1376769/andre_thomas_eats_his_remaining_eyeball.html?cat=1 7


Does eating your own eyeball constitute an 'oral argument'?

[JD1974]

Believe me. I understand. I suffer from MDD and PTSD caused for the most part by abuse growing up and depression beginning as a child and was never treated until my 40's. I never killed anyone either. My ex-husband used his depression as an excuse not to work so he wouldn't have to pay child support and collect disability. That makes me angry.


I quit college because my doctor said it was making me worse. I usually tell everyone it was because I married young, but I went after I was married. I would go to classes, walk out to my car, look at my work and have no idea how I had came to those conclusions on my papers. I didn't remember hardly anything of what my professors taught, no idea what I had done that day in class. I completely lost 4 days. Everyone said I was acting normal, I don't remember them. My husband and kids are still alive though and I got help...

It would make me angry if I were you also. I just can't get over the fact that this kid is 8 years old, my daughter is 8, she is just now starting to catch on to the Santa thing, yet when I put NORAD Santa tracker on she freaks because there he is on the computer! One day she wants to be a doctor, an hour later a ballerina. She is a straight A student in accelerated classes and she can't even decide what is appropriate school attire in the winter, she tried to wear a skirt and flip-flops last week...we live in Michigan!

[JD1974]

Does eating your own eyeball constitute an 'oral argument'?

It sure constitutes something!!!!

[Hawk]

Must have been a hard pill to swallow.

[JD1974]

I know what it feels like not having someone to talk to also. Catholic School kids shut up, or clam up.

The JUDGE NEEDS to get this boy some confidential help. NOW!
And a picture of his mother. Lord help me I want to go to AZ and slap Roca!


What is the reason behind the no pictures, no mail? Another thing this little boy doesn't get because he is a CHILD, adult prisoners get their mail, even DR inmates. The guards or whoever can read them, heck they are supposed to anyway and take out any inappropriate letters.

[Hawk]

Guess he'll never 'see the light' now.

[JD1974]

Guess he'll never 'see the light' now.


Oh man LOL It isn't funny but it is

[Hawk]

Isn't this kid Catholic. Is his school a Catholic School? If the school is like your school was, maybe that's why they didn't see any evidence of abuse. And why he's so scared to talk.

He is Catholic but he went to a public school. Maybe he is talking but no one is listening. He needs his mom. But even a paid therapist would be helpful right now.

[JD1974]

Isn't this kid Catholic. Is his school a Catholic School? If the school is like your school was, maybe that's why they didn't see any evidence of abuse. And why he's so scared to talk.


I hope he is doing a lot of talking to his lawyers..wonder if they record his conversations with his lawyers, seems it would be par for the course down there for LE.

[PensiveOne]

Judge deemed him competent to stand trial.

:blink:

Unbelievable.:scared:

[PensiveOne]

Does eating your own eyeball constitute an 'oral argument'?

OMG LMAO:lol:

[Hawk]

What is the reason behind the no pictures, no mail? Another thing this little boy doesn't get because he is a CHILD, adult prisoners get their mail, even DR inmates. The guards or whoever can read them, heck they are supposed to anyway and take out any inappropriate letters.


It says in the handbook that he can receive mail.


http://www.co.apache.az.us/PDFs/Probation/Handbook.pdf

[PensiveOne]

Isn't this kid Catholic. Is his school a Catholic School? If the school is like your school was, maybe that's why they didn't see any evidence of abuse. And why he's so scared to talk.
They beat the crap out of us in Catholic School! How would they know what abuse is? I wonder if they still do the paddle spankings? Our nuns used to hit us across the hand with a yardstick, too! I will tell you they got the whole idea of hell across to me though. I don't know what they are like today:glare:

[Hawk]

This is the school the boy attended.


http://www.sjusd.net/education/school/school.php?sectionid=7

[JD1974]

They beat the crap out of us in Catholic School! How would they know what abuse is? I wonder if they still do the paddle spankings? Our nuns used to hit us across the hand with a yardstick, too! I will tell you they got the whole idea of hell across to me though. I don't know what they are like today:glare:


I went to a regular school and got it twice for falling asleep LOL Once was a ruler, once was water hahaha...

[bkwits]

Believe me. I understand. I suffer from MDD and PTSD caused for the most part by abuse growing up and depression beginning as a child and was never treated until my 40's. I never killed anyone either. My ex-husband used his depression as an excuse not to work so he wouldn't have to pay child support and collect disability. That makes me angry.

Excuse me, what is MDD. I suffer from depression as well, but it is mostly controlled by anti depressent med.

[PensiveOne]

This is the school the boy attended.


http://www.sjusd.net/education/school/school.php?sectionid=7

Awww, I see Ms. Trickey. I'll bet he misses her:sad:

[PensiveOne]

I pulled the habit off a nuns head in 9th grade. :tonguewag:

5 days in-school suspension with Brother Rocco. :cursing:
I'd have rather my throat be sliced.

LOL, I got into trouble for having a messy desk and whacked with the paddle. The nun said I was going to grow up to be a messy housewife. I told her I wasn't going to be a housewife, I was going to be a nurse! Everybody laughed and I got paddled...I am not a nurse:-)

[Hawk]

Awww, I see Ms. Trickey. I'll bet he misses her:sad:

Bet he does, too. Classes are taught in the jailhouse, but this boy seems talkative and probably doesn't have adequate interaction with classmates. He's the only 9 year old in the joint.

But someone put a bleached streak in his hair.

[PensiveOne]

Bet he does, too. Classes are taught in the jailhouse, but this boy seems talkative and probably doesn't have adequate interaction with classmates. He's the only 9 year old in the joint.

I know, it hurts to think about it. I am sure they are trying to be good to him. My X sister-in-law works in Juvie. She seems to love her job and goes out of her way to help the kids. I know she buys stuff for them to play with and use all of the time. Lots of books.

[bkwits]

Must have been a hard pill to swallow.

Hawk, you are so BAAAD :scared:

I'm still laughing about last night when you deflated us proud Mamas. :rolleyes:

[muska]

I pulled the habit off a nuns head in 9th grade. :tonguewag:

5 days in-school suspension with Brother Rocco. :cursing:
I'd have rather my throat be sliced.

Just stopped for a few minutes to catch up on what's going on and saw your story. I went skiing for the first time when I was 14. There were 6 or 7 nuns skiing in their habits on the bunny slope that day. It was a sight to be seen!! I managed to ski right into one because I didn't know how to stop yet! Luckily I was going really slowly since it was a bunny slope!

I'm sure hoping all goes well tomorrow!! Be back later!

[bkwits]

Awww, I see Ms. Trickey. I'll bet he misses her:sad:


Well, he sure met the Mistresses Trickies when he talked to Avila and Neckel.

[Hawk]

Hawk, you are so BAAAD :scared:

I'm still laughing about last night when you deflated us proud Mamas. :rolleyes:

No deflation intended. You ladies are obviously wonderful mothers. God bless you both.
I just try to lighten things up a bit.

[bkwits]

Major Depressive Disorder. Recurrent

Thank you.

[bkwits]

No deflation intended. You ladies are obviously wonderful mothers. God bless you both.
I just try to lighten things up a bit.


Yeah, Dawg and I were feeling very sorry for you. Thank you for the compliment. I am very blessed. :thumbsup:

[PensiveOne]

Well, he sure met the Mistresses Trickies when he talked to Avila and Neckel.

True! They are a pair:mad:

[JD1974]

True! They are a pair:mad:


I have read enough about Avila to make me sick, Neckel, not so much...unless you count her first day!

[suzanne]

They beat the crap out of us in Catholic School! How would they know what abuse is? I wonder if they still do the paddle spankings? Our nuns used to hit us across the hand with a yardstick, too! I will tell you they got the whole idea of hell across to me though. I don't know what they are like today:glare:

I went to a catholic school too some of my years in school.Yes,they do beat the crap out of you in a catholic school.LOL.I got the paddle spankings and hit across the hand with a yard stick too.The head nun took a liking to me or I really would have been beat.LOL.I really wasn't a bad kid.I was hyperactive.Not manic depressive and I just couldn't sit down or be quiet long enough I guess.I would not let some one spank my child like that today.They got the idea of hell across to me too.LOL.

[Hawk]

I have read enough about Avila to make me sick, Neckel, not so much...unless you count her first day!

Ms. Neckel doesn't have the sour history of the jailer Avila. Ms. Neckel seems to be a reasonable, compassionate, and rational person. I wonder how she feels about the interrogation now?

The questions they asked were geared more toward getting an open confession than finding truth.

Questions they should have asked: "When you shot Tim where did the first bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"When you shot your dad the first time where did that bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"Where were you standing when you first shot your dad"?
"Where were you standing when you shot Tim the first time"? etc, etc,

These questions/answers could have confirmed or disputed the physical crime scene evidence that both cops knew about.
But they didn't ask.

[suzanne]

I pulled the habit off a nuns head in 9th grade. :tonguewag:

5 days in-school suspension with Brother Rocco. :cursing:
I'd have rather my throat be sliced.

LOL.that is so funny.All my report cards say suzy's talking to much.LOL.Oh well.suzy is still talking too much.LOL.They will just have to get over it.One time my wacko teacher told me or us if we were talking too much to go out and talk to the flag pole and if he didn't hear us he would scream I can't hear you.Jerk.:rolleyes:

[PensiveOne]

Ms. Neckel doesn't have the sour history of the jailer Avila. Ms. Neckel seems to be a reasonable, compassionate, and rational person. I wonder how she feels about the interrogation now?

The questions they asked were geared more toward getting an open confession than finding truth.

Questions they should have asked: "When you shot Tim where did the first bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"When you shot your dad the first time where did that bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"Where were you standing when you first shot your dad"?
"Where were you standing when you shot Tim the first time"? etc, etc,

These questions/answers could have confirmed or disputed the physical crime scene evidence.
But they didn't ask.

I agree Hawk, they should have asked more pointed questions...but first they should have stopped the interview and read him his rights, then waited for him to get representation. They shouldn't have been able to continue questioning him at all.

[JD1974]

They just threw here in there because she knew the boy, IMO.



I was just being sarcastic. You know how I can tell when my son is lying...he makes up details!! Last night we caught them with water in the bedroom, they were pretending to make food with their kitchen set. Anyway my 2 daughters said he brought the water in, he of course denied it. So I asked him questions like, well what was on tv when the girls brought the water in, he says cartoon network (lol he is smart as heck) So I say what was on cartoon network, he says Scooby Doo, I was like go to your room, no PS2 tomorrow. My husband looked at me and said are you sure he did it, I said yes because when he isn't guilty he says well..... I think.....and then he goes on to tell me what he thinks I want to hear. When he isn't telling me the truth he always has this perfect story LOL at 4!!!

[Hawk]

I agree Hawk, they should have asked more pointed questions...but first they should have stopped the interview and read him his rights, then waited for him to get representation. They shouldn't have been able to continue questioning him at all.


Absolutely!

But they were already in way over their heads. They would have at least had something substantial to go on.

[muska]

Ms. Neckel doesn't have the sour history of the jailer Avila. Ms. Neckel seems to be a reasonable, compassionate, and rational person. I wonder how she feels about the interrogation now?

The questions they asked were geared more toward getting an open confession than finding truth.

Questions they should have asked: "When you shot Tim where did the first bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"When you shot your dad the first time where did that bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"Where were you standing when you first shot your dad"?
"Where were you standing when you shot Tim the first time"? etc, etc,

These questions/answers could have confirmed or disputed the physical crime scene evidence that both cops knew about.
But they didn't ask.

I don't think they wanted to allow him to say too much that would contradict the crime scene. Every time he started to disagee, Avila would cut him off and redirect him to somewhere where she wanted him to be.

[Hawk]

I don't think they wanted to allow him to say too much that would contradict the crime scene. Every time he started to disagee, Avila would cut him off and redirect him to somewhere where she wanted him to be.

There you go!

Had they asked those questions and gotten the wrong answers (even though they didn't know exactly where the shots hit at the time) it may well have confused the facts even more. That would be good for the boy.

[JD1974]

Ms. Neckel doesn't have the sour history of the jailer Avila. Ms. Neckel seems to be a reasonable, compassionate, and rational person. I wonder how she feels about the interrogation now?

The questions they asked were geared more toward getting an open confession than finding truth.

Questions they should have asked: "When you shot Tim where did the first bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"When you shot your dad the first time where did that bullet hit him"? "The second"?
"Where were you standing when you first shot your dad"?
"Where were you standing when you shot Tim the first time"? etc, etc,

These questions/answers could have confirmed or disputed the physical crime scene evidence that both cops knew about.
But they didn't ask.


Of course they didn't, if he said something that didn't match then they wouldn't be the dynamic duo who solved the crime in an hr.

[JD1974]

I agree Hawk, they should have asked more pointed questions...but first they should have stopped the interview and read him his rights, then waited for him to get representation. They shouldn't have been able to continue questioning him at all.


Reading him his rights... I am glad they didn't actually. He most likely wouldn't have understood them anyway, but LE could play CYA and say they read them to him. The thing that really bothers me is he was standing there when family members asked if they could go in with him...they were told no...how could he have a reasonable belief that if HE asked the answer would be different?

[PensiveOne]

I don't think they wanted to allow him to say too much that would contradict the crime scene. Every time he started to disagee, Avila would cut him off and redirect him to somewhere where she wanted him to be.

Oh yeah, I agree...they were leading him down the primrose path.

[JD1974]

I have some questions that I hope someone can answer. I would like to mail him some books..So...


What kind of books does he like?
Can he have coloring books? (that was depressing to write, reminds me even more of his age)
Does he like children's word search, or those eye spy books?
Can he have puzzles or anything like that, flash cards?
We really know nothing about this little boy, as in his likes dislikes etc. I really want to send something he would enjoy rather than something he would only read because that was all he had....

[PensiveOne]

Reading him his rights... I am glad they didn't actually. He most likely wouldn't have understood them anyway, but LE could play CYA and say they read them to him. The thing that really bothers me is he was standing there when family members asked if they could go in with him...they were told no...how could he have a reasonable belief that if HE asked the answer would be different?

Yep, me too. If that had been my grandson I would have told them, either I am in there or you are not talking to him. Period, end of discussion.

[Hawk]

I have some questions that I hope someone can answer. I would like to mail him some books..So...


What kind of books does he like?
Can he have coloring books? (that was depressing to write, reminds me even more of his age)
Does he like children's word search, or those eye spy books?
Can he have puzzles or anything like that, flash cards?
We really know nothing about this little boy, as in his likes dislikes etc. I really want to send something he would enjoy rather than something he would only read because that was all he had....

Maybe you should address those questions to ChildsVoice. I believe she has direct contact with his mom.

[Hawk]

All he has requested in books with lots of pictures. From what I have heard, he is not allowed to have coloring books in his room. I am almost guessing puzzle books would be the same, as they are probably considered a "toy." He hasn't even been convicted of anything, yet this little boy hasn't even been able to have a picture of his mother in his cell!

I do remember Eryn saying that he liked sports. I sent him a few sports related fiction books that my kids love. Matt Christopher writes them and they are awesome for kids his age. If he likes those, I would be happy to send more. Perhaps when he completes them, he can leave them behind for the other children being held there.


Can't have coloring books or a picture of his mom, but he can put bleach in his hair. How does that work?

[JD1974]

All he has requested in books with lots of pictures. From what I have heard, he is not allowed to have coloring books in his room. I am almost guessing puzzle books would be the same, as they are probably considered a "toy." He hasn't even been convicted of anything, yet this little boy hasn't even been able to have a picture of his mother in his cell!

I do remember Eryn saying that he liked sports. I sent him a few sports related fiction books that my kids love. Matt Christopher writes them and they are awesome for kids his age. If he likes those, I would be happy to send more. Perhaps when he completes them, he can leave them behind for the other children being held there.


Thanks, I have no idea about boys that age. I have never had one. Girls, I have plenty of those...lol

[JD1974]

Can't have coloring books or a picture of his mom, but he can put bleach in his hair. How does that work?



Why the heck is an 8 year old around anything like that?

[Hawk]

Why the heck is an 8 year old around anything like that?

He has a blond streak in his hair in this drug infected AZ county detention center what's next? Self-inflicted tattoos and gang allegiance?
When is Judge Roca going to stop this before it's too late?

[Hawk]

Mr. Brewer is outstanding! He should be the one on TV.

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/REQUEST%20FOR%20A%20RULING.pdf

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/MOTION%20TO%20SUPRESS%20ILLEGAL%20WARRANT.pdf

[JD1974]

Mr. Brewer is oustanding!

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/REQUEST%20FOR%20A%20RULING.pdf

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/MOTION%20TO%20SUPRESS%20ILLEGAL%20WARRANT.pdf


When he offered to pay for counseling out of his own pocket, I knew he was fighting for this kid every inch of the way.

ETA I knew before that but that was the icing on the cake!

[Hawk]

He's Hot too. :biggrin:

All the more reason he should be on Greta, Grace, etc,....

[JD1974]

He's Hot too. :biggrin:



LOL is he single?

[Hawk]

Maybe he has an assistant reading our posts then following our lead.

[Hawk]

LOL is he single?

Send him an e-mail.

[JD1974]

Maybe he has an assistant reading our posts then following our lead.


They probably just read all the emails from us lol

[bkwits]

Maybe he has an assistant reading our posts then following our lead.

Hey, could be. We love you Ben.:wub:

[JD1974]

Send him an e-mail.


ROFL I think my husband would have a problem with that....I was asking for a uhm friend...

[JD1974]

Like parking spaces, all the good ones are taken, and the rest are handicap.

:angry:


I knew it! My friend will be so upset now..

[bkwits]

Like parking spaces, all the good ones are taken, and the rest are handicap.

:angry:

:lol: Used to be for me that the available ones were: gay, drunks, or living with their mother at 35 years old.

[Hawk]

They probably just read all the emails from us lol

Yes, someone does. I've received several responses.

The address is ........office@azcrimedog.net

Just Use Mr. Brewer's name before office, or Mr.Wood's. You can also send messages to the Judge, PD, and prosecutors office. The message will be forwarded to who you address it to.

I think they appreciate the input, or at least the interest!

Ain't America GREAT!

[Hawk]

:lol: Used to be for me that the available ones were: gay, drunks, or living with their mother at 35 years old.

So what's wrong with a drunk gay guy living with his mom?

[suzanne]

Yeah, EYE candy.

Do you have a link to his picture?LOL.

[Hawk]

I talk to Ron@azcrimedog.net all the time. That is Wood's. email.

They wouldn't reply if they didn't want to. I wish everyone here would send a word of support and encouragement.

Ask others to do the same.

Strength is in numbers.

[Hawk]

Do you have a link to his picture?LOL.

Do you want one taken in front of the courthouse or in the shower?

[suzanne]

Do you want one taken in front of the courthouse or in the shower?

Just a picture.:thumbup:

[JD1974]

Just a picture.:thumbup:


I was hoping you were voting for shower....

[bkwits]

So what's wrong with a drunk gay guy living with his mom?

Present company excepted, of course. :sneaky:

[Hawk]

Just a picture.:thumbup:

Go here then click Video archives for Jan 6. He's the man in the blue shirt a minute or so into the tape (has a bag on his shoulder).

http://www.kpho.com/news/18422153/detail.html

[Hawk]

Present company excepted, of course. :sneaky:

Thank you. I was getting nervous.

(Just kidding. I'll be married for 40 years next weekend.)

[bkwits]

Thank you. I was getting nervous.

(Just kidding. I'll be married for 40 years next weekend.)


I know. I get it. :wink:

[Hawk]

Do I know Hot or what??? OMG! Can I get that blown up?

Or a shower shot?

:chicken:

Perhaps you should e-mail him about that.

Good Grief!

[suzanne]

Yeah, EYE candy.

Well,He does look real good.Yes,I believe he probably is taken.:sad:

[suzanne]

GSR
They found 10 particles on his pants
24 particles on his shirt.

:rolleyes: Big deal.

If he shot the gun 10 times or how many times they said he did.Would there have been more?

[JD1974]

GSR
They found 10 particles on his pants
24 particles on his shirt.

:rolleyes: Big deal.


After going on a murderous rampage all this kid has is a spot of blood and 34 particles of GSR on his clothing...wth is wrong with this picture...

[JD1974]

did he have a jacket on? if he did then the gsr would have already been on the shirt. I would think it was rather cool at that time. wasn't it? or he may have gotten the gsr from the jacket if he put it on later that evening, night.

and i still wonder about why they would want his underwear?


Oh good point! A jacket he had been shooting with before...

[JD1974]

They have the wrong person.

This kid is paying for being 8 years old and vunerable. I hope he owns that county when this is all said and done.

Oh and a couple shiny nice badges to hang on his wall...

[Hawk]

I don't feel comfortable emailing them. If I come up with any bright ideas, could you pass them along. I know the wheels of justice turn slowly, so right now I'm really concerned with the boy getting some confidential therapy ASAP and before.

Please don't feel uncomfortable. They are just people. If they don't want to reply they won't. Believe me, they need all the input they can get.

[Details]

No GSR on his shoes.

Guess he did this in his bare feet. :rolleyes:Guess they were in a different baggie.

[Hawk]

No GSR on his shoes.

Guess he did this in his bare feet. :rolleyes:

GSR from a .22 rifle is little. When the FBI started their lab work on GSR most gun murders were done with a revolver where one hand is on the trigger and the other hand is supporting the shooting hand. This produces a lot of 'blow-by' from the front and rear of the cylinder. A rifle doesn't expel as much material. A .22 rifle hardly any.

[JD1974]

GSR from a .22 rifle is little. When the FBI started their lab work on GSR most gun murders were done with a revolver where one hand is on the trigger and the other hand is supporting the shooting hand. This produces a lot of 'blow-by' from the front and rear of the cylinder. A rifle doesn't expel as much material. A .22 rifle hardly any.

The problem though comes when you bring it all together. How could he only have a spot of blood on him? Nothing on his shoes?

[Hawk]

The problem though comes when you bring it all together. How could he only have a spot of blood on him? Nothing on his shoes?

The spot of blood came when he stepped over Mr. Romero and his pant leg absorbed material from the first head wound. He brushed against the victims head but didn't step in blood.
Even if he had stepped in blood from Mr. Romans as he exited the house he walked in grass to the neighbors house. The shoes were old and dirty with the rubber soles worn down. Nothing would be found on the shoe soles. To have blood on the shoe tops would require 'wading' through deep blood, or splatter, which doesn't happen with a small bore bullet.

[Hawk]

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

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

Certainly. But Mr. Howard didn't explain the difference between firearms. A 12 gauge shotgun will certainly expel more particles than a .22.

They didn't have probable cause to test the boys hands the day of the murder.

Even if they had collected the boys unwashed clothes a month after the murders the GSR would have still been there.

Besides, that evidence is worthless. A person could look at guns at a Bass Pro Shop counter, or an indoor shooting range, and go home with that much GSR.

[PensiveOne]

Certainly. But Mr. Howard didn't explain the difference between firearms. A 12 gauge shotgun will certainly expel more particles than a .22.

They didn't have probable cause to test the boys hands the day of the murder.

Even if they had collected the boys unwashed clothes a month after the murders the GSR would have still been there.

Besides, that evidence is worthless. A person could look at guns at a Bass Pro Shop counter, or an indoor shooting range, and go home with that much GSR.

Here is a link I posted a while back. He discusses .22 residue...
We have a problem Houston! (maybe)

http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/2cf37586a1b12b748525738e005fafe5?OpenDocument&Click=
What to Do About A Positive GSR Test

1. Get a particle count. Get it during the discovery stage. If the count is 2000+ on the face, hands, and other areas, your client has problems. Is the count 20 or less? An individual can get that by coming in contact with the police or other people.

2. Demand a breakdown of the residue. If all three elements are not included, it may not be GSR. Even if all three are present, if there is a high percentage of iron, it may be brake pad residue and not GSR at all. Also, some .22 rim-fire ammunition does not contain all three (Pb, Sb, and Ba) elements. If the police department claims your client is the shooter because the GSR test contains the three elements, but the ammunition used in the crime does not contain all three, then “Houston, we have a problem!”

3. Demand photos of the GSR. If the particles are not spheroid shaped, this may also be proof that the residue comes from brake linings and thus is not GSR.

4. Question the police. Did police officers take any steps to prevent cross contamination? Did they wash their hands? Did they clean their cars? Did they bag the hands of the suspect by means of a sandwich bag and a rubber band? Police in the United Kingdom have been bagging hands since the 1940s. Few police departments in this country ever bag a suspect’s hands. Police officers should simply slip a clean evidence bag over each of the suspect’s hands and secure it in place with a rubber band or, better yet, a “flex-cuff.” I realize that this is really high tech, but I truly believe the police in this country can handle this level of technology. Some police departments are now saying: “If you don’t bag them, we don’t test them.”

[Crispy]

Wanted to throw this link out there while I was thinking about it

http://www.azhia.com/legal_7.htm

About juveniles and questioning them

[Hawk]

Here is a link I posted a while back. He discusses .22 residue...
We have a problem Houston! (maybe)

http://www.nacdl.org/public.nsf/0/2cf37586a1b12b748525738e005fafe5?OpenDocument&Click=
What to Do About A Positive GSR Test

1. Get a particle count. Get it during the discovery stage. If the count is 2000+ on the face, hands, and other areas, your client has problems. Is the count 20 or less? An individual can get that by coming in contact with the police or other people.

2. Demand a breakdown of the residue. If all three elements are not included, it may not be GSR. Even if all three are present, if there is a high percentage of iron, it may be brake pad residue and not GSR at all. Also, some .22 rim-fire ammunition does not contain all three (Pb, Sb, and Ba) elements. If the police department claims your client is the shooter because the GSR test contains the three elements, but the ammunition used in the crime does not contain all three, then “Houston, we have a problem!”

3. Demand photos of the GSR. If the particles are not spheroid shaped, this may also be proof that the residue comes from brake linings and thus is not GSR.

4. Question the police. Did police officers take any steps to prevent cross contamination? Did they wash their hands? Did they clean their cars? Did they bag the hands of the suspect by means of a sandwich bag and a rubber band? Police in the United Kingdom have been bagging hands since the 1940s. Few police departments in this country ever bag a suspect’s hands. Police officers should simply slip a clean evidence bag over each of the suspect’s hands and secure it in place with a rubber band or, better yet, a “flex-cuff.” I realize that this is really high tech, but I truly believe the police in this country can handle this level of technology. Some police departments are now saying: “If you don’t bag them, we don’t test them.”


This is, and always has been, junk science. I could go hunting, or target shooting, place my gun in the back of my SUV before returning home and the 'residue' in my SUV and on my jacket would be there forever. If I hugged my wife when I got home she'd have GSR on her too. She hugs our daughter, and on and on.

The manufacturer of the ammo found can easily be traced. The powder used in that ammo is also easily found. It ain't rocket science.

[PensiveOne]

This is, and always has been, junk science. I could go hunting, or target shooting, place my gun in the back of my SUV before going home and the 'residue' in my SUV and on my jacket would be there forever.

The manufacturer of the ammo found can easily be traced. The powder used in that ammo is also easily found. It ain't rocket science.

Yeah, he brings that up in the article. It sounds like it is easy to refute. I would think if it was up in hundreds or thousands, that would be questionable.

[PensiveOne]

Mr. Brewer is outstanding! He should be the one on TV.

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/REQUEST%20FOR%20A%20RULING.pdf

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/MOTION%20TO%20SUPRESS%20ILLEGAL%20WARRANT.pdf

I like Ben!!! :thumbup:

[PensiveOne]

The count was what, 36? Long long way from 2000. Sounds like a problem for the pros

They knew there were problems, just like the confession. That is why it was released. They are playing games. They release what they want. I wouldn't be surprised if they have more evidence back. I haven't seen anything about the blood evidence and I didn't see anything about the shoes. Did you?

[Hawk]

I like Ben!!! :thumbup:

Why don't you marry him?

[PensiveOne]

Why don't you marry him?

My husband might object:tonguewag:

[suzanne]

My husband might object:tonguewag:

LOL.No one ever said if he was single or not yet.Is he?

[PensiveOne]

Does anyone know if the boy had a jacket on that afternoon or later on that evening or perhaps on his way to grandma's to spend the night?

I haven't heard anything about a jacket. I think they assumed he was in the house and had taken it off. But they did ask about his backpack, so I dunno.

[Hawk]

My husband might object:tonguewag:

Just kidding.

I like him, too. Seems he's going above and beyond for a court appointed defender.

[PensiveOne]

LOL.No one ever said if he was single or not yet.Is he?

I don't know...someone will have to "investigate"!

[Hawk]

I haven't heard anything about a jacket. I think they assumed he was in the house and had taken it off. But they did ask about his backpack, so I dunno.

Ms. Neckel said they took a shirt. No jacket is mentioned.

[PensiveOne]

Just kidding.

I like him, too. Seems he's going above and beyond for a court appointed defender.

Yes he is. I think he seems like a go getter. Some people are just like that. It wouldn't matter if he was making a lot of money or doing it pro bono.

[suzanne]

I don't know...someone will have to "investigate"!

Investigate :lol:

[JD1974]

But if that were the case, wouldn't there be some trace blood on the bottom? Not seen by the naked eye?

You would think something would of stayed. What about the top of the shoe, didn't he say he nudged his father in the head with his foot...why no blood on the top of his shoe...or is there? I am getting lost in the info now lol

[suzanne]

Yes he is. I think he seems like a go getter. Some people are just like that. It wouldn't matter if he was making a lot of money or doing it pro bono.

He does seem like a good person.

[PensiveOne]

Nothing at all. A blood spot on the paper. You would think if he had blood on his hand there would be more than that found on the paper.

Nobody, that we have heard of, noticed anything unusual that night. I don't think he had enough time to have cleaned himself up. Maybe there wasn't that much blood when he was there, but it sure seems like he would have had some on himself and some on the gun. I still think he would have been really shook up, too. Noticeably.

[Hawk]

You would think something would of stayed. What about the top of the shoe, didn't he say he nudged his father in the head with his foot...why no blood on the top of his shoe...or is there? I am getting lost in the info now lol

He did say that.

[Hawk]

Nobody, that we have heard of, noticed anything unusual that night. I don't think he had enough time to have cleaned himself up. Maybe there wasn't that much blood when he was there, but it sure seems like he would have had some on himself and some on the gun. I still think he would have been really shook up, too. Noticeably.

Don't know about the blood flow from Mr. Romero, but Mr. Romans body seemed to have drained. The blood pool is massive.

[suzanne]

He did say he nudged him with his foot. Like someone said earlier, maybe he was barefoot (which is not likely).I was wondering if there would be blood on his shoe too.

[Hawk]

I was wondering if there would be blood on his shoe too.

If he came directly home from school, as the prosecution alleges, he may well have kicked his shoes off. Don't most kids? And many adults for that matter.
But if he had the presence of mind to put them back on after the murders.........

[PensiveOne]

Don't know about the blood flow from Mr. Romero, but Mr. Romans body seemed to have drained. The blood pool is massive.

Did you see it somewhere? Or read about it? If it was massive how did he get around that?

[PensiveOne]

If he came directly home from school, as the prosecution alleges, he may well have kicked his shoes off. Don't most kids? And many adults for that matter.
But if he had the presence of mind to put them back on after the murders.........

Now that you mention that, I did read somewhere on a blog that they had found blood on one of his socks. Did they mention that they had taken his socks? I didn't think so.

[Hawk]

Did you see it somewhere? Or read about it? If it was massive how did he get around that?

He could have easily walked around it since it was on the driveway.

The photos are on an AZ TV website. I'll try to find it. You can see Mr. Romans body on the ground.

[Hawk]

Now that you mention that, I did read somewhere on a blog that they had found blood on one of his socks. Did they mention that they had taken his socks? I didn't think so.

Mr. Brewer asked Ms. Neckel if she took underwear and socks. She said no.

[Crispy]

Now that you mention that, I did read somewhere on a blog that they had found blood on one of his socks. Did they mention that they had taken his socks? I didn't think so.

I think I remember reading that they didn't take his socks or underwear when they bagged his clothes at grandmas. They only took shirt, pants, shoes. Of course I could be wrong

[PensiveOne]

He could have easily walked around it since it was on the driveway.

The photos are on an AZ TV website. I'll try to find it. You can see Mr. Romans body on the ground.

I saw those, but I didn't see a pool of blood. He was laying next to the door, so that means the boy would have had to step over him to get in. I would have thought that was where the pool of blood would be.

[PensiveOne]

Mr. Brewer asked Ms. Neckel if she took underwear and socks. She said no.
That's what I thought. Like I said it was on another blog, so it was probably just bad info.

[Hawk]

I saw those, but I didn't see a pool of blood. He was laying next to the door, so that means the boy would have had to step over him to get in. I would have thought that was where the pool of blood would be.

He made his last shot while standing inside the doorway.

The blood pool photo is at a different site after the bodies were removed. The blood could have been easily circumvented by the shooter.

[PensiveOne]

I think I remember reading that they didn't take his socks or underwear when they bagged his clothes at grandmas. They only took shirt, pants, shoes. Of course I could be wrong

I think you are right Crispy. I remember thinking that was weird, but that he was probably still wearing them since he wasn't at home that night after the murders. Of course if they were the same socks and underwear they could have taken them when they arrested him.

[Hawk]

I think you are right Crispy. I remember thinking that was weird, but that he was probably still wearing them since he wasn't at home that night after the murders. Of course if they were the same socks and underwear they could have taken them when they arrested him.

Doesn't look like he was wearing socks in the interrogation tape.

[PensiveOne]

Doesn't look like he was wearing socks in the interrogation tape.

Interesting.

[suzanne]

Doesn't look like he was wearing socks in the interrogation tape.

Didn't he look barefoot?

[Hawk]

http://www.kpho.com:80/news/18463506/detail.html

[PensiveOne]

Didn't he look barefoot?

I have not gone back and watched those videos in a long time. It just makes me too angry. I just went and looked at the first 12 minutes which does not show his feet:( Now I am thinking back to the transcripts where Brewer asked if they had stopped the recording at anytime and they said no. But the camera angle is definately different in those first 12 minutes, so either what we have seen has been edited and does not show them moving the camera or they did stop it at some point. Anyway I will go find some more video to watch, I just didn't want to lose my train of thought.

[suzanne]

I have not gone back and watched those videos in a long time. It just makes me too angry. I just went and looked at the first 12 minutes which does not show his feet:( Now I am thinking back to the transcripts where Brewer asked if they had stopped the recording at anytime and they said no. But the camera angle is definately different in those first 12 minutes, so either what we have seen has been edited and does not show them moving the camera or they did stop it at some point. Anyway I will go find some more video to watch, I just didn't want to lose my train of thought.

I don't watch it either because it makes me too angry too.

[JD1974]

If he came directly home from school, as the prosecution alleges, he may well have kicked his shoes off. Don't most kids? And many adults for that matter.
But if he had the presence of mind to put them back on after the murders.........


Remember he isn't most kids...he planned this murder. No reason to take shoes off when he may have had to run in case one of the victims started chasing him? Plus if he was thinking about murder I think the last thing running through his mind was taking his shoes off at the door, he would be nervous to the point of paranoia lying in wait for them to come home.

Something else I thought of, these guys were supposably going to help someone with cabinets? If true, how could the boy have known when they would be home?

[muska]

Remember he isn't most kids...he planned this murder. No reason to take shoes off when he may have had to run in case one of the victims started chasing him? Plus if he was thinking about murder I think the last thing running through his mind was taking his shoes off at the door, he would be nervous to the point of paranoia lying in wait for them to come home.

Something else I thought of, these guys were supposably going to help someone with cabinets? If true, how could the boy have known when they would be home?

I wondered about that too. I thought that the men stopped home unexpectedly. Maybe someone who knew they weren't suppose to be home was there in the house.

[Hawk]

Remember he isn't most kids...he planned this murder. No reason to take shoes off when he may have had to run in case one of the victims started chasing him? Plus if he was thinking about murder I think the last thing running through his mind was taking his shoes off at the door, he would be nervous to the point of paranoia lying in wait for them to come home.

Something else I thought of, these guys were supposably going to help someone with cabinets? If true, how could the boy have known when they would be home?

He knew am approximate time. That's all he needed.

He would have had to have waited for them upstairs, looked out his dad's bedroom window (sliding glass doors) over the patio railing. I don't think he's tall enough to do that from inside the house, since the truck pulled up so close to the house. Or he waited downstairs and ran up the stairs to brace himself when he saw the truck thru the downstairs window.

[muska]

Mr. Brewer is outstanding! He should be the one on TV.

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/REQUEST%20FOR%20A%20RULING.pdf

http://apps.supremecourt.az.gov/docs/Cases/JV2008065/MOTION%20TO%20SUPRESS%20ILLEGAL%20WARRANT.pdf

These are great! If anyone is writing to the media, it might be good to mention that he can't even have a picture of his mother. That might make someone take an interest.

[JD1974]

He knew am approximate time. That's all he needed.

He would have had to have waited for them upstairs, looked out his dad's bedroom window (sliding glass doors) over the patio railing. I don't think he's tall enough to do that from inside the house, since the truck pulled up so close to the house. Or he waited downstairs and ran up the stairs to brace himself when he saw the truck thru the downstairs window.

Not if they stopped in unexpectedly to grab something on the way to help with the cabinets...he would of had no idea. Still I go back to the question of taking his shoes off, if he did then once again that tightens the timeline. If he didn't why isn't there blood on them? I really think he wouldn't want to take his shoes off because he knows he will have to run, either from dad, Tim or to go report it to the neighbors.

[PensiveOne]

Didn't he look barefoot?

Yep, he looks barefoot to me, too. Not barefoot, but sockless. It looks like he has slippers of some kind on.

[muska]

I'm just thinking it may have been cool enough for him to put one on while he still had his clothes on at some point. That might explain where the GSR came from, plus clothes all over the place and they said the clothes he had on were really dirty. That maybe because he had to put dirty clothes on that morning or he did in fact did spend a lot of time outside before the murders. Which means he didn't go straight home like the officers got him to eventually say. It was November 5th. Was it cool that evening-night?

I think it was suppose to have been in the 50s. Seemed funny that he had only a thermal shirt on, but did you hear him coughing on the tape? He sounded awful.....maybe he was outside playing without his jacket!

[muska]

Not if they stopped in unexpectedly to grab something on the way to help with the cabinets...he would of had no idea. Still I go back to the question of taking his shoes off, if he did then once again that tightens the timeline. If he didn't why isn't there blood on them? I really think he wouldn't want to take his shoes off because he knows he will have to run, either from dad, Tim or to go report it to the neighbors.

Whether there's blood on the shoes or not doesn't matter, does it? Everyone agrees he was there at the crime scene.

[PensiveOne]

Remember he isn't most kids...he planned this murder. No reason to take shoes off when he may have had to run in case one of the victims started chasing him? Plus if he was thinking about murder I think the last thing running through his mind was taking his shoes off at the door, he would be nervous to the point of paranoia lying in wait for them to come home.

Something else I thought of, these guys were supposably going to help someone with cabinets? If true, how could the boy have known when they would be home?

Maybe he didn't know, but the step-mom did, because she had talked to VR on the phone while she was at the store and knew he was on his way home.

[Details]

I bet it was from a paper cut.Picking a scab, a scraped knee, any one of a number of things - he is an 8 year old boy.

[JD1974]

Whether there's blood on the shoes or not doesn't matter, does it? Everyone agrees he was there at the crime scene.


It could matter. You would expect blood to be on his shoes because he was in the crime scene, so if there isn't why is that?

[muska]

See, that article notes it also.

The appeals court declined oral arguments on the special action.

If they were to rule in Carlyon's favor, how quickly would the judge have to grant or deny the motion? I'm guessing he'd no longer wait for the competency hearing.

If one charge were dropped, it would almost be like getting away with double jeopordy...Carlyon would get to take him to trial twice for the same crime. I know it's not the same, but.....

[Details]

See, that article notes it also.

The appeals court declined oral arguments on the special action.Seems simple enough to me - they're about to have the whole case dismissed, with prejudice, for a good valid cause - in no way is this child competent for trial (let alone the crime - IMO) - so they want to prevent that by dropping a charge, trying to create a loophole to allow them to retry him yet again later.

It's just so wrong. The worst type of loophole/gaming the system. If he's not competent, he's not competent.

[suzanne]

Yep, he looks barefoot to me, too. Not barefoot, but sockless. It looks like he has slippers of some kind on.

Ok,Where was the interview?The police station?

[bkwits]

I wondered about that too. I thought that the men stopped home unexpectedly. Maybe someone who knew they weren't suppose to be home was there in the house.

IF, the child was the sole shooter, where is it written in stone that it was planned?

[PensiveOne]

Ok,Where was the interview?The police station?

Yes, here is the clip I watched:

http://www.azfamily.com/video/3tvextra-index.html?nvid=305445

[muska]

It could matter. You would expect blood to be on his shoes because he was in the crime scene, so if there isn't why is that?

Don't you think he could have just missed it? I don't know. It seems to me, more likely there would be some blood on his shoes but not necessarily.

[PensiveOne]

Seems simple enough to me - they're about to have the whole case dismissed, with prejudice, for a good valid cause - in no way is this child competent for trial (let alone the crime - IMO) - so they want to prevent that by dropping a charge, trying to create a loophole to allow them to retry him yet again later.

It's just so wrong. The worst type of loophole/gaming the system. If he's not competent, he's not competent.

No argument from me on that! Like I said before it seems like a no-brainer. They could however start a civil commitment after the dismissal, so that is another worry.

[muska]

Seems simple enough to me - they're about to have the whole case dismissed, with prejudice, for a good valid cause - in no way is this child competent for trial (let alone the crime - IMO) - so they want to prevent that by dropping a charge, trying to create a loophole to allow them to retry him yet again later.

It's just so wrong. The worst type of loophole/gaming the system. If he's not competent, he's not competent.

That's the word I was trying to come up with - loophole. That is what it seems like.

[muska]

No argument from me on that! Like I said before it seems like a no-brainer. They could however start a civil commitment after the dismissal, so that is another worry.

Where would he have to go if they did that?

[JD1974]

Don't you think he could have just missed it? I don't know. It seems to me, more likely there would be some blood on his shoes but not necessarily.


I don't know. I haven't heard anything about footprints or shoeprints yet, have you guys?

That actually could be a big question, any footprints found there...

[Details]

It could matter. You would expect blood to be on his shoes because he was in the crime scene, so if there isn't why is that?Blood is not surprising. Nor is a lack of blood. No blood means only that he avoided it coming into the house.

But as the shooter, who has to shoot his dad from both below and above his body on the stairs - for that, I'd find a lack of blood very surprising. Some of the shots may have been close range and caused some spray, on narrow closed stairs, for an 8 year old to clamber over Daddy's prone, bleeding body, to shoot him again from the other side - and not have blood all over the place, and lots of it - that's surprising.

[Perplexed1]

I've been following all you guys most of the day, and you're covering a lot of ground. I'd just like to interject some food for thought. Is it possible the voice that Mrs. Romans heard was a female voice calling Tim in? To shoot him? I listened to the 'confessions' again today, and that little guy was all over the place sith his stories. He's 8 yrs. old! Last night my 8 yr old grand-daughter told me they'd been at the grocery store 4 hours!, and her and 2 sisters were in the car the whole time! I repeated it to the mother and she said, "It was 2 hrs, and you guys were in the store the whole time". The grand-daughter grinned and looked sheepish. she had spun a yarn. That's what 8 yr old kids do. I personally think the little guy came upon the mess.

[Details]

That's the word I was trying to come up with - loophole. That is what it seems like.That's what it is. The intent of the law is that the charges are permanently dismissed if you won't be competent within 240 days. They're trying to keep one of the charges alive.

I wonder if that's why their shrink's evaluation is so very much delayed. Seems very dirty pool. I don't like it from the defense, when it's the defense, and I don't like it from the prosecution either.

[JD1974]

That's what it is. The intent of the law is that the charges are permanently dismissed if you won't be competent within 240 days. They're trying to keep one of the charges alive.

I wonder if that's why their shrink's evaluation is so very much delayed. Seems very dirty pool. I don't like it from the defense, when it's the defense, and I don't like it from the prosecution either.


I am almost positive that is why they are holding back the eval, then trying to make the judge rule on the dismissal before the eval is back.

[Perplexed1]

How could a wife, especially one of just 3 months, clean up such a mess. Sounds pretty cold hearted to me. A woman that could do that, could do almost anything. Is she a marksman? Woman?

[PensiveOne]

Where would he have to go if they did that?

I don't know.
I posted this in the morning before we switched threads:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/arizonastatecases/app1/jv980138.txt

E. Except for juveniles who are ordered to
receive restoration treatment pursuant to  8-
291.03, if at the hearing the court determines
that the juvenile is incompetent to proceed
and that there is not a substantial
probability that the juvenile will regain
competency within two hundred forty days after
the date of the original finding of
incompetency, the court shall dismiss the
charges with prejudice and shall initiate
civil commitment proceedings if appropriate.

[Crispy]

I am almost positive that is why they are holding back the eval, then trying to make the judge rule on the dismissal before the eval is back.


I think that them agreeing not to use the CPS report and the confession plays into this as well.

[muska]

Everyone has read from the ballistics report that they have to send the gun from the Texas crime lab somewhere else for furthur testing to see if it was the gun used in the shootings right?

That IS a Ballistics report.

It didn't match. What else would one take that to mean?

Very, very interesting but not so surprising!!

[Details]

Everyone has read from the ballistics report that they have to send the gun from the Texas crime lab somewhere else for furthur testing to see if it was the gun used in the shootings right?

That IS a Ballistics report.

It didn't match. What else would one take that to mean?Good point!

Further testing being needed means they did not get a match.

Of course, it could mean that they didn't get an exclusion either. Got something in the middle where they can't call it a match, but it's close enough they want a second opinion. It can't be all that close - they seem to like to release information they have that is close - like the GSR - so much trying the case in the media going on here with them - every result, every bit of data that points to the boy, even if it's not really solid (confession and GSR) released out.

But given other tactics - I'd think it's more delay tactics. They seem, IMO, to be just pushing so hard to make this case work - a case that was right wouldn't need this much pushing, would have gunpowder residue results that were high enough to be meaningful, would have blood results that showed something, would have ballistics that were a match.

[Details]

Where you been? I explained all that this morning about the appeal. :tonguewag:
About the shrink. Their shrink has requested to see the defenses report to see how Dr Cady came to that conclusion.


:biggrin:A real conclusion wouldn't require him to be ready to bolster himself against a contrary conclusion - IMO. Put out your findings, and defend them, if they're properly formed, that's all that is needed.

[muska]

How could a wife, especially one of just 3 months, clean up such a mess. Sounds pretty cold hearted to me. A woman that could do that, could do almost anything. Is she a marksman? Woman?

One of the men who was interviewed from TR and VRs workplace said Tiffany had a "little chipmunk." Maybe that gun was hers or she sometimes said it was.

[Crispy]

How could a wife, especially one of just 3 months, clean up such a mess. Sounds pretty cold hearted to me. A woman that could do that, could do almost anything. Is she a marksman? Woman?

I don't think I could do it and welcome to the boards!!!

[Details]

Heh - I'd like to see the shrink who finds a way to say an 8 year old is competent to defend themselves in a double-murder trial - yeah, I want to see someone try to say that with a straight face. An 8 year old isn't competent to drive a car, or choose their own meals - but they can deal with a murder trial? Suuuuure.

He'd probably testify for the prosecution if someone double-dog-dare'd him.

[Perplexed1]

Also, Tiffany went to spend time with the Romero family, and was able to go to parties, etc. She's a different kind of woman and wife than I am.

[Perplexed1]

We hear time and again, that when it's overkill in a murder, it is usually a crime of passion. Like the little guy said, 'why would I shoot tim?'.

[muska]

Any guess about where the judge fits in all this? I saw a couple of interesting comments at the White Mountain Independent site after a recent article about the boy. The poster was speculating that the judge is keeping the boy in near isolation in an effort "to break him" and get him to say what happened. The poster thought the judge had assigned the probation counselor for the same reason - try to get a new permissable confession of some sort. The person commenting thought the boy was innocent but thinks the judge believes otherwise.

What does anyone think? I'd like to think the judge would be fair but I don't know. I think that his assigning a probation counselor was unfair. That counselor is out of the picture now, right?

[Perplexed1]

Any guess about where the judge fits in all this? I saw a couple of interesting comments at the White Mountain Independent site after a recent article about the boy. The poster was speculating that the judge is keeping the boy in near isolation in an effort "to break him" and get him to say what happened. The poster thought the judge had assigned the probation counselor for the same reason - try to get a new permissable confession of some sort. The person commenting thought the boy was innocent but thinks the judge believes otherwise.

What does anyone think? I'd like to think the judge would be fair but I don't know. I think that his assigning a probation counselor was unfair. That counselor is out of the picture now, right?

I read that same article, but I think the judge has been trying to be very fair, and is concerned for the child's welfare.

[GentleBreeze]

I don't know. I haven't heard anything about footprints or shoeprints yet, have you guys?

That actually could be a big question, any footprints found there...

I do know in the motion submitted by the State to obtain physical samples from the boy, it stated "footprints" as one of the things the State wanted.

imoo

[muska]

I read that same article, but I think the judge has been trying to be very fair, and is concerned for the child's welfare.

Why would he assign a probation counselor who could testify against the boy? That seems like a major conflict of interest! Maybe the counselor never actually got together with the boy.

[TaraCrazyHair]

Heh - I'd like to see the shrink who finds a way to say an 8 year old is competent to defend themselves in a double-murder trial - yeah, I want to see someone try to say that with a straight face. An 8 year old isn't competent to drive a car, or choose their own meals - but they can deal with a murder trial? Suuuuure.

He'd probably testify for the prosecution if someone double-dog-dare'd him.

I had to smile at the "double dog dare" but I happen to think your absolutely right!

This is the first I heard ballistics did not match?

Could I have more information?

[ExPI]

I am glad that the GSR test came back so low. There is no way this boy was in that closed in stairway when the shots were fired. Now all the police have to do is find the real shooter who now as a two month head start. It should take Milnick about uh..uh... two hours.

[GentleBreeze]

I am glad that the GSR test came back so low. There is no way this boy was in that closed in stairway when the shots were fired. Now all the police have to do is find the real shooter who now as a two month head start. It should take Milnick about uh..uh... two hours.

I am not so sure that is considered low in a criminal trial. Even some of the experts that have commented, have said that it is a significant amount.

Phil Spector right now is facing a retrial for murder and the GSR was front and center in that case and he had only one or two GSR particles found on him.

imoo

[muska]

Everyone has read from the ballistics report that they have to send the gun from the Texas crime lab somewhere else for furthur testing to see if it was the gun used in the shootings right?

That IS a Ballistics report.

It didn't match. What else would one take that to mean?

I would not have seen and understood this so.....thanks for pointing it out!!!

[Perplexed1]

I am glad that the GSR test came back so low. There is no way this boy was in that closed in stairway when the shots were fired. Now all the police have to do is find the real shooter who now as a two month head start. It should take Milnick about uh..uh... two hours.

Where's Columbo when you need him? He'd definately be dogging Tiffany!

[TaraCrazyHair]

I am not so sure that is considered low in a criminal trial. Even some of the experts that have commented, have said that it is a significant amount.

Phil Spector right now is facing a retrial for murder and the GSR was front and center in that case and he had only one or two GSR particles found on him.

imoo

If the ballistics did not match up, the GSR no matter how low really would not matter would it?

[Details]

I had to smile at the "double dog dare" but I happen to think your absolutely right!

This is the first I heard ballistics did not match?

Could I have more information?All we have is what JusticeDawg posted - that they've sent out for another lab's opinion. No reason to do that if they got a match, presumably.

[Details]

So why use Spector? I don't think 10 shots were fired in that case.Spector's not relevant at all - especially as an adult, who had a significant amount of time to clean up, and showed up at the door apparently having taken a shower or done some other washing up. For that, finding a few particles meant something - and that's on skin, not clothing.

[muska]

I wondered about that.

It would make no sense for blood from November 5 to be on it. Where could that possibly fit into the timeframe? If there's blood on the paper from either man, I'm really going to start thinking 'set-up' and maybe....Tiffany.

[GentleBreeze]

Spector's not relevant at all - especially as an adult, who had a significant amount of time to clean up, and showed up at the door apparently having taken a shower or done some other washing up. For that, finding a few particles meant something - and that's on skin, not clothing.

It was significant enough in his trial. It was very much a part of his case that is why the defense loaded up on firearm experts trying to refute it.

What is the difference? Spector had time to remove some of it but so did this boy have ample time to wash some away and shed many of the GSR particles by touching others and being touched. Much longer than Phil Spector had.

imoo

[Perplexed1]

It would make no sense for blood from November 5 to be on it. Where could that possibly fit into the timeframe? If there's blood on the paper from either man, I'm really going to start thinking 'set-up' and maybe....Tiffany.

And...Bingo!

[Perplexed1]

Too bad they didn't waterboard Tiffany for an hour and a half!

[Crispy]

It was significant enough in his trial. It was very much a part of his case that is why the defense loaded up on firearm experts trying to refute it.

What is the difference? Spector had time to remove some of it but so did this boy have ample time to wash some away and shed many of the GSR particles by touching others and being touched. Much longer than Phil Spector had.

imoo


Phil Spector had 40 minutes, this boy had under 15.

[GentleBreeze]

Here is one video of it.

http://www.kpho.com/video/18420271/index.html

----------Report here:

The report recommended that the ammunition and weapon be submitted for further testing. Diaczuk said that could determine whether the bullets that hit the men came out of the gun taken into evidence.

http://www.kpho.com/news/18414816/detail.html

Thanks. I was under the impression the report actually stated why the firearm was going to have further testing done on it but I see that is only Diaczuk's assumptions.

I think that has already been done along with the trajectory data. In one of the supplemental discovery motions it stated that over 20 pages of diagrams done by DPR had been turned over.

IMO it is being sent to a specialized lab that can retrieve not only fingerprints but also biological evidence that may be on it.

imoo

[muska]

Too bad they didn't waterboard Tiffany for an hour and a half!

They should have at least taken her in, put just a little pressure on.....and they should have done the same with several others as well.

[Details]

It was significant enough in his trial. It was very much a part of his case that is why the defense loaded up on firearm experts trying to refute it.

What is the difference? Spector had time to remove some of it but so did this boy have ample time to wash some away and shed many of the GSR particles by touching others and being touched. Much longer than Phil Spector had.

imooThe particles were on Spector's hands - not clothes - there's no evidence the boy's clothes were washed (quite the contrary). So - it's an entirely different scale - the number of particles you expect after a washing on skin, and the number you expect on cloth that has not been washed. Totally, massively different scales.

And Spector didn't have any reason for it to be there - he hadn't been out shooting and such - and GSR doesn't stay on hands all that long - they get washed and used too much.

The boy - he does go out shooting, any one of those pieces of clothing could have been worn on prior trips - and GSR can stay on cloth much more easily than skin, through the washing process - or the clothes may not have been washed (they appeared dirty).


I'm wearing some dirty jeans right now - I ate some wonderful lettuce wraps that were a bit messy. If you took a reading of the level of sauce on my hands - you'd likely find a scant trace. I washed them. If you looked at my jeans - significant number of particles. It's two different locations, two different situations, two very different meanings to the numbers.

[GentleBreeze]

Phil Spector had 40 minutes, this boy had under 15.

How is that, Crispy? The boy's clothing wasnt even retrieved until the following day.:confused:

imoo

[Details]

Phil Spector had 40 minutes, this boy had under 15.And as that his clothes were dirty - obviously he didn't wash them in that time, nor after.

[Perplexed1]

They should have at least taken her in, put just a little pressure on.....and they should have done the same with several others as well.

It's not always the most obvious one that did a murder. Not that there's anything obvious about a little 8 yr old boy taking down two grown men, in a matter of a few minutes.

[muska]

It seems like Tanya Romans would normally, at some point, have had to pick CRs voice from a voice line-up. That can't be done anymore because she, and the rest of the world, knows his voice from the infamous tape. So how could it ever be shown that she knew his voice? And there's no way to know that TRs statement that CR was calling her was truthful. He could have had any number of reasons to want to get off the phone.

[Details]

For it to have been a close match, wouldn't it have had to come from a blood relative? Like grandpa?This is ballistics, not DNA.

A close match - hard to say what that could be. Maybe where the scrapes match, but the firing pin is a bit off from the samples from the murder scene, etc.

[Crispy]

How is that, Crispy? The boy's clothing wasnt even retrieved until the following day.:confused:

imoo

You said he had ample time to wash some away, I took that to mean his hands.

[GentleBreeze]

The particles were on Spector's hands - not clothes - there's no evidence the boy's clothes were washed (quite the contrary). So - it's an entirely different scale - the number of particles you expect after a washing on skin, and the number you expect on cloth that has not been washed. Totally, massively different scales.

And Spector didn't have any reason for it to be there - he hadn't been out shooting and such - and GSR doesn't stay on hands all that long - they get washed and used too much.

The boy - he does go out shooting, any one of those pieces of clothing could have been worn on prior trips - and GSR can stay on cloth much more easily than skin, through the washing process - or the clothes may not have been washed (they appeared dirty).


I'm wearing some dirty jeans right now - I ate some wonderful lettuce wraps that were a bit messy. If you took a reading of the level of sauce on my hands - you'd likely find a scant trace. I washed them. If you looked at my jeans - significant number of particles. It's two different locations, two different situations, two very different meanings to the numbers.

Sorry, I don't want to be cantankerous but all it tells me that ample time had passed where much of the GSR would have been removed due to the shedding, touching others and being touched and still 3 dozen particles remained even after then.

Do you know of another case where more particles were found on a suspect's clothing than this? I have tried to research other cases but the amounts I found was much less than this. TIA

imoo

[Perplexed1]

It seems like Tanya Romans would normally, at some point, have had to pick CRs voice from a voice line-up. That can't be done anymore because she, and the rest of the world, knows his voice from the infamous tape. So how could it ever be shown that she knew his voice? And there's no way to know that TRs statement that CR was calling her was truthful. He could have had any number of reasons to want to get off the phone.

A woman's voice could sound like a little boy's soprano.

[Details]

Sorry, I don't want to be cantankerous but all it tells me that ample time had passed where much of the GSR would have been removed due to the shedding, touching others and being touched and still 3 dozen particles remained even after then.

Do you know of another case where more particles were found on a suspect's clothing than this? I have tried to research other cases but the amounts I found was much less than this. TIA

imooCan't say I'm any type of expert in GSR - so, nope, I don't know about quantities in other cases. But the experts who do know about it seem to feel that 36 particles is a small number that could have happened any number of ways, and studies posted earlier, IIRC, mentioned clothing that had been through the wash retaining GSR.

[GentleBreeze]

You said he had ample time to wash some away, I took that to mean his hands.

Oh, I am sorry, Crispy. I meant he had much more time for the GSR to shed or be rubbed away by the touching and normal friction of just wearing the clothing.

imoo

[Kara]

Omigosh! I'm gone for less than 24 hours and y'all fill this many pages of posts? Did something interesting happen? Or are we just responding to argumentative posts???

ETA...do I need to read to catch up on info I missed? Or is this just 300+ posts of debate over previously known information?

[GentleBreeze]

The boy's clothes weren't washed. Spectors hands were. Big big difference. Spector washed his hands. iirc, GSR would not still be on hands that have been washed. However, there would still be GSR on clothing even after washing, which these clothes were not. Where is all the blood that should have been found on his clothes?

Why do you think there should be a lot of blood on his clothing? The majority of blood that pooled seeped out after they had been shot imo. Why would he have any blood on his clothing?

It is interesting that in one spot on his jeans blood could be seen with the naked eye. What kind of pattern it is will be very interesting to learn. It could be blood transfer if he rubbed up against one of the victims but it also may be blood spatter if his pants were very close to one of the victims' head when he fired the weapon. Also forensic experts can run tests on clothing to see if blood or other biological is present but cant be seen by the naked eye.

imoo

[Perplexed1]

Or he could have picked some up by the touching and normal friction of hugging people after the tradgedy who may have been the real shooter.

Very interesting.

[Perplexed1]

Omigosh! I'm gone for less than 24 hours and y'all fill this many pages of posts? Did something interesting happen? Or are we just responding to argumentative posts???

We're on a roll!

[Details]

Yeah, If they got home earlier it may have been the girl he proposed to the night before. She may have gotten wind that he was sleeping with the other woman at the bar. What was her name. Or, it could have been her. or/and who is Lisa Bonilla who was a defendent in the lawsuit that Vincent was also a defendent of?An interesting thought - if it was some girlfriend of his calling him inside, he'd naturally say it was someone else - and a woman's voice isn't that dissimilar from a young boy's.

I don't know - so many possibilities - and we don't even know who does and doesn't have alibis, let alone all the players.

[bkwits]

It was significant enough in his trial. It was very much a part of his case that is why the defense loaded up on firearm experts trying to refute it.

What is the difference? Spector had time to remove some of it but so did this boy have ample time to wash some away and shed many of the GSR particles by touching others and being touched. Much longer than Phil Spector had.

imoo

As you say, too much time had elapsed between the shootings and the collection of the clothes to really show any definitive evidence. The clothes could have been contaminated by GSR by others touching him, by the clothes touching contaminate items when taken off for the night. BTW, the boy would not have washed his own clothes and GSR was not found on his skin.

IMO

[muska]

The boy's clothes weren't washed. Spectors hands were. Big big difference. Spector washed his hands. iirc, GSR would not still be on hands that have been washed. However, there would still be GSR on clothing even after washing, which these clothes were not. Where is all the blood that should have been found on his clothes?

Because this defendant was an eight year old boy at the time of the crime, I don't think we can compare much to other defendants.He would not think to do the things an adult might do.

[GentleBreeze]

Can't say I'm any type of expert in GSR - so, nope, I don't know about quantities in other cases. But the experts who do know about it seem to feel that 36 particles is a small number that could have happened any number of ways, and studies posted earlier, IIRC, mentioned clothing that had been through the wash retaining GSR.

I think it depends on the expert commenting. One of the experts that has commented in the media articles said the 3 dozen particles are a significant amount.

imoo

[wolfi_2]

If he washed off the GSR from the clothing, or hand’s, he must be a little genius, I don’t think he had ever thought about GSR.

[GentleBreeze]

As you say, too much time had elapsed between the shootings and the collection of the clothes to really show any definitive evidence. The clothes could have been contaminated by GSR by others touching him, by the clothes touching contaminate items when taken off for the night. BTW, the boy would not have washed his own clothes and GSR was not found on his skin.

IMO

They didn't test for GSR on his skin/hands, so we will never know if it was there or not.

That is where I do admit they dropped the ball. LE shouldnt have assumed that anyone was just an eye witness to the crimes. No one is ruled out when a case is first unfolding so their assumptions were ridiculous imo. They should have tested his hands that very night and then asked questions later.

imoo

[muska]

Not unless he were some sort of child prodigy of some sort.

Some would like us to believe that, but.....he was having trouble with his third grade homework......ut oh, a regular kid!

[Perplexed1]

If he washed off the GSR from the clothing, or hand’s, he must be a little genius, I don’t think he had ever thought about GSR.

Way too much credit being given to an 8 year old.

[Details]

I think it depends on the expert commenting. One of the experts that has commented in the media articles said the 3 dozen particles are a significant amount.

imooIMO, they seem to be saying the same thing in different ways. 3 dozen isn't a small amount - but nor is it all that much - is my interpretation. It's a glass is half empty/glass is half full type of thing, from my perspective.

[GentleBreeze]

If there was blood splatter, then I would be inclined to think there would be more than one spot that could be seen with the naked eye. It doesn't take much to make a spot of blood to be seen with the naked eye. Usually, imo, blood that cannot be seen with the naked eye has been attempted to be clean. Also, with brains splattering, I would think there would be some splatter on the shooter.

Not necessarily. The blood comes out in a fine mist and so does the spinal fluid. It would be hard to see on jeans which may have been dark. The location of the blood found on the jeans will also be telling. If it were higher up than the victims' bodies and it is blood spatter instead of blood transfer then how is the defense going to explain that?

imo

[Details]

Not necessarily. The blood comes out in a fine mist and so does the spinal fluid. It would be hard to see on jeans which may have been dark. The location of the blood found on the jeans will also be telling. If it were higher up than the victims' bodies and it is blood spatter instead of blood transfer then how is the defense going to explain that?

imoIf they have that - they haven't said so. Spatter would be a clear indication the child either was the shooter, or was in the room - no other possible interpretation. But they haven't said they have anything like that. And they've had a fair bit of time to be testing - the mere existience of this or that fluid on the jeans (brain, blood, spinal) shouldn't take all that long. Blood is particularly easy, and would be present when brain or spinal was likely to be present as well. A quick bit of luminol and they can see if there is a smear or spray pattern (a smear fits with finding the bodies and having contact with them, a spray fits with being there when the shots were fired).

So - where's the evidence? Because this prosecution team has NOT been shy about leaking anything that might incriminate the boy.

[GentleBreeze]

If they have that - they haven't said so. Spatter would be a clear indication the child either was the shooter, or was in the room - no other possible interpretation. But they haven't said they have anything like that. And they've had a fair bit of time to be testing - the mere existence of this or that fluid on the jeans (brain, blood, spinal) shouldn't take all that long. Blood is particularly easy, and would be present when brain or spinal was likely to be present as well. A quick bit of luminol and they can see if there is a smear or spray pattern (a smear fits with finding the bodies and having contact with them, a spray fits with being there when the shots were fired).

So - where's the evidence? Because this prosecution team has NOT been shy about leaking anything that might incriminate the boy.

Luminol can destroy evidence. They use a new technique that shows things that were not seen by the naked eye and it does not destroy the evidence.

All we know that supplementals have been turned over. We do not have the full disclosures of what those supplementals contain.

I think they will keep somethings close to their vest. Just because they leak some does not ever mean they leak all.

I do think however if this case is tossed the full evidence will be leaked or released to the media but until then they will go at their own pace.

I noticed in the January 6th hearing the defense is not nearly asking for as much discovery as they have been. IMO, they have already been given most of the results but all of those have not leaked yet.

I think the initial trajectory testing on the weapon has been done but they have sent the weapon out for further lab testing. Perhaps to verify that all 10 shell casings were fired from this weapon or to see if any biological matter is on the barrel of the weapon.

imoo

[suzanne]

If they have that - they haven't said so. Spatter would be a clear indication the child either was the shooter, or was in the room - no other possible interpretation. But they haven't said they have anything like that. And they've had a fair bit of time to be testing - the mere existience of this or that fluid on the jeans (brain, blood, spinal) shouldn't take all that long. Blood is particularly easy, and would be present when brain or spinal was likely to be present as well. A quick bit of luminol and they can see if there is a smear or spray pattern (a smear fits with finding the bodies and having contact with them, a spray fits with being there when the shots were fired).

So - where's the evidence? Because this prosecution team has NOT been shy about leaking anything that might incriminate the boy.
Yes,Where is the evidence?

[GentleBreeze]

gentlebreeze,
are you playing devils advocate or do you really care what happens with the innocent child here?

I don't look at this case any differently than I do the countless other cases I have discussed here for many years. I give my opinion. I dont play games like being a devil's advocate.

I did think the boy that was on trial in MS was innocent and I was glad to see he was acquitted.

However; in this case I don't see an innocent child. If you do, then that is quite fine because you are entitled to believe as you wish on this message board and so am I. Should there be exonerating evidence shown then I will and can change my opinion quickly.

I wish I did see something that points toward his innocence. But my wishes don't make things come true. If I had my wishes Vincent Romero and Tim Romans would be alive today and this boy would be in school getting an education, instead of charged with premeditated double homicide.

imoo

[suzanne]

Luminol can destroy evidence. They use a new technique that shows things that were not seen by the naked eye and it does not destroy the evidence.

All we know that supplementals have been turned over. We do not have the full disclosures of what those supplementals contain.

I think they will keep somethings close to their vest. Just because they leak some does not ever mean they leak all.

I do think however if this case is tossed the full evidence will be leaked or released to the media but until then they will go at their own pace.

I noticed in the January 6th hearing the defense is not nearly asking for as much discovery as they have been. IMO, they have already been given most of the results but all of those have not leaked yet.

I think the initial trajectory testing on the weapon has been done but they have sent the weapon out for further lab testing. Perhaps to verify that all 10 shell casings were fired from this weapon or to see if any biological matter is on the barrel of the weapon.

imoo

None of this evidence will convict him any way.It's not enough.He will be let off because he is not competent to aide in his own defense.

[Details]

Luminol can destroy evidence. They use a new technique that shows things that were not seen by the naked eye and it does not destroy the evidence.

All we know that supplementals have been turned over. We do not have the full disclosures of what those supplementals contain.

I think they will keep somethings close to their vest. Just because they leak some does not ever mean they leak all....I don't know - it doesn't seem to fit that they'd leak the confession, and the GSR - their two weakest bits of info, IMO, two things that the experts can easily say are highly questionable (or, stupid, stupid, STUPID!) - and keep secret the high quality, solid evidence. Doesn't seem to fit any possible motive for leaking evidence, managing the case.

[suzanne]

I don't look at this case any differently than I do the countless other cases I have discussed here for many years. I give my opinion. I dont play games like being a devil's advocate.

I did think the boy that was on trial in MS was innocent and I was glad to see he was acquitted.

However; in this case I don't see an innocent child. If you do, then that is quite fine because you are entitled to believe as you wish on this message board and so am I. Should there be exonerating evidence shown then I will and can change my opinion quickly.

I wish I did see something that points toward his innocence. But my wishes don't make things come true. If I had my wishes Vincent Romero and Tim Romans would be alive today and this boy would be in school getting an education, instead of charged with premeditated double homicide.

imoo

I see this little boy as a victim on all counts.We do not know everything that has gone on.

[suzanne]

I don't know - it doesn't seem to fit that they'd leak the confession, and the GSR - their two weakest bits of info, IMO, two things that the experts can easily say are highly questionable (or, stupid, stupid, STUPID!) - and keep secret the high quality, solid evidence. Doesn't seem to fit any possible motive for leaking evidence, managing the case.

I agree.Most of this so called evidence will be thrown out because of police screw ups.Yes,they were stupid,stupid and stupid.

[muska]

well, then I guess they would need to find someplace that will say they are a match.

And even if it is a match, it won't tell us who the shooter was.

[muska]

I was thinking about the dog....

It's my understanding the dog was in the cage. If I'm wrong PLEASE:punch: me....

I would think with all the gun shots going off...the dog would be barking up a storm...trying to get out of that cage!

Ms. Roman heard "young boy's voice" while on a cell phone but no dog barking in the background?

Did anyone check the cage for blood or even check the dog's fur?

I believe CR said he let the dog out when he came into the house. That's all I remember hearing about the dog.

Does anyone know if Tiffany gave the dog, wallet and snowboard back to the boy?

[Hawk]

I would think she could hear a dog barking better than a little boy's voice, depending on the breed of dog. What breed is the dog?


The dog is a boxer pup named Nellie. The child said he let her out of the cage. Seems she'd be pretty frisky with all that went on. Unless, of course the men were dead when she was released.
She may well have blood on her though.

[Hawk]

yeah, unless Tiffinay bathed Nellie as fast as she cleaned the house.

There may have been bloody paw prints had she gone to Mr. Romans. You can easily trace that at night with a $15 blood trail light that hunters use. I didn't read of any such light being used by the Sheriff's dept when they took photos.

[suzanne]

There may have been bloody paw prints had she gone to Mr. Romans. You can easily trace that at night with a $15 blood trail light that hunters use. I didn't read of any such light being used by the Sheriff's dept when they took photos.

May I please ask where did the police say they found the puppy when they got there?

[ExPI]

The boy fires eight shots in an enclosed area and only gets 36 microscopic particles on him. The officers in their reports are very precise that one bagged the clothes and another bagged the shoes but there is nothing in the report that causes me to thik that hey put the pants and the shirt in separate bags. The shirt could have been cross containated by the pants or vice versa. I really need to be convinced that he could have killed two men with the Chipmunk rifle.
There is very little said about the dog in the reports, maybe the dog was in an outside pen.

[suzanne]

I need to try and sleep now.I always lay there for a long time and can't sleep.So good night.:closedeyes:

[muska]

Even if the dog were in an outside pen, surely anybody could have heard her barking with all the hulla ballu going on. Before and after the police arrived. I don't know many pups that would be so calm with activity going on, friend or foe.

He just said when he came in, he let the dog out....maybe Nellie was barking and that caught his attention. Avila asked him where the dog was when something was happening(I forget exactly what) and he said he wasn't sure if she was still outside or had come back into the house. He was being honest...he didn't know. I think if he was lying, he'd make up more specific answers.

I think the dog was there somewhere; he even mentioned that the dog wasn't hurt.

[ExPI]

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

There was an outside kennel on the far side of the driveway. I knew I saw that somewhere.

[muska]

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

There was an outside kennel on the far side of the driveway. I knew I saw that somewhere.

He said that was for Nellie when he was playing outside.

[muska]

I was thinking about the dog....

It's my understanding the dog was in the cage. If I'm wrong PLEASE:punch: me....

I would think with all the gun shots going off...the dog would be barking up a storm...trying to get out of that cage!

Ms. Roman heard "young boy's voice" while on a cell phone but no dog barking in the background?

Did anyone check the cage for blood or even check the dog's fur?

It sure does seem like the dog would be making lots of noise. Someone will probably say that the boy thought to put the dog away somewhere but there's no way the kid planned and thought of all the things some would like to give him credit for....it's not like we've seen any signs he was a real organized child.

Well, good night!

[wolfi_2]

It sure does seem like the dog would be making lots of noise. Someone will probably say that the boy thought to put the dog away somewhere but there's no way the kid planned and thought of all the things some would like to give him credit for....it's not like we've seen any signs he was a real organized child.

Well, good night!

Dogs know, I don’t know why, but they know when something wrong is going on and yes the dog would make a lot of noise!
My parent’s had a boxer too, and I like to have one also, but my job keep’s me of from a puppy.

[tif]

I hadn't thought about the dog until the rest of you brought it up. If Vincent was being shot while Tim was outside on the phone, wouldn't Tim have heard the dog barking? It's been my experience that the sound of a barking dog will carry through just about anything. Wouldn't Tanya have heard the dog?

Do we know where the dog was when the police arrived?

[ExPI]

The following is a quote from the article article SHOT THROUGH THE HEART - What Gunshot Residue Can and Can't Tell in Forensic Science

"Primer is generally made up of barium nitrate and antimony sulfide; however, most .22 ammunition does not have antimony"

The video report says clothing was tested for "barium, lead and antimony". Lead could have come from many sources, antimony is not present in .22 shells this leaves barium if the GSR came from the boy's .22. I am getting tired and not as sharp as I could be but I feel like this is important.

[wolfi_2]

Her cage was right by the front door. IF she was in it, she was going insane. I don't know how Tanya & Tim could NOT have heard her.

LE Never said.

It would be interesting if any neighbor heard the dog around the time of the shootings.

[wolfi_2]

The guy right next door (back side) got home at 4:45 pm. He said he heard nothing.

It had to be someone the dog knew WELL.


sorry, but never mind , A dog knows when something is wrong, they feel it (I can´t it explain better) ,a dog will surely hear the shooting´s and also both man when they are make some crying noise, I don´t think that both men died without any cry.

But now it´s also for me bedtime, god night !:closedeyes:

[Details]

The following is a quote from the article article SHOT THROUGH THE HEART - What Gunshot Residue Can and Can't Tell in Forensic Science

"Primer is generally made up of barium nitrate and antimony sulfide; however, most .22 ammunition does not have antimony"

The video report says clothing was tested for "barium, lead and antimony". Lead could have come from many sources, antimony is not present in .22 shells this leaves barium if the GSR came from the boy's .22. I am getting tired and not as sharp as I could be but I feel like this is important.This is important for being a correct choice by whoever requested the testing. They should test for all three, even if they only expect to see two if the boy is the shooter - because they should be testing for the exculpatory evidence as well. Testing for only two would probably be irregular, and a huge red flag.

[fairlaw]

You are so right. I'm really glad that you are staying on top of this case.