1-29 Hearings

[JusticeDawg©]

Good Morning!

I feel really bad for Tanya and Big John and all of the other grieving family members. Big John probably considered the other theories and dismissed them like we did.

We? You got a mouse in your pocket? :biggrin:

[JusticeDawg©]

Ballistics don't match.

MOO
JMHO
IMO

:w00t:

[rusure?]

Ballistics don't match.

MOO
JMHO
IMO

:w00t:

Do you know something? I'll bet they don't either. They got a report and sent stuff off to somewhere else, didn't they?

[rusure?]

No one here on this board thinks he should be locked away for life and not receive therapy & rehabilitation. I don't have any idea where you got that notion from.

I'll give you 3 guesses and the first 2 don't count.

[GentleBreeze]

What kind of justice. True justice, or vigilante justice? Would you want the truth or would you want whoever was there at the time and innocent? Would you want a 9 yo child who has a chance of rehabilitation to spend the rest of his life in jail or would you want to grant him mercy and grace so he could become a productive citizen in our society, able to contribute to society in positive ways? Would your husband want that? Would it bring him back? I know my husband would want me to show mercy and grace for a 9 yo child. He knows the difference between a child and an adult. He knows I would want him to show mercy and grace to a 9 yo child. I know the difference between a 9 yo child and an adult.

Would we grieve? Absolutely, but being vindictive would not bring them back.

I encourage everyone to discuss this type of issue with your loved ones and determine what they would want and tell them what you would want. We never know when some tragedy such as this will happen to one of us.

We could discuss it till the cows come home with our families and it would never prepare us if it indeed happened to any of us.

Murder is the ultimate act of violence........it is brutal.

Vigilante justice is done unlawfully. I would never become like the killer and use violent means to seek justice.

I would want full accountability, no matter who it happened to be. Why should I want less justice for my husband just because the shooter may have been younger, all the while knowing that they shot my husband repeatedly?

I wouldn't have to grant the killer of my husband, anything.

If he were a juvenile I would want him to pay for his deeds and be incarcerated until the age of 18. I would want him to be given rehabilitation and given extensive mental treatment while he was housed those years. Not so much for him but to better protect society when he is let out to roam among us again.

I do not need to ask my husband what he would want. If anyone, ever harmed me, much less, murdered me, he would want the maximum punishment allowed by law.

imo

[GentleBreeze]

I'll give you 3 guesses and the first 2 don't count.

I cant guess either. I have seen no poster that says they want this boy to be locked away for life. :confused:

imoo

[JusticeDawg©]

Because he didn't want to shoot her.

Myabe he was so angry he just couldn't wait until night?

CR didn't shoot anybody!

IMO
MOO
JMHO!!

:thumbsup:

[rusure?]

If he ended up being tried as an adult, he would spend the rest of his life in prison, or recieve the death penalty. If he was sentenced as a juvenille to be incarcerated until the age of 18, then rest assured, he would not be rehabilitated to the betterment of society. Statistically, a good number of those who are in prison now, were in juvenille detention also. .

By the way, nothing prepares us for any death of a loved one, caused from violence or terminal illness or otherwise. We can never be prepared for it. My sister was told she had 2 years to live with breast cancer. We had 2 years to prepare. When she died, I still was not prepared to loose her. So, nothing really prepares us for a death of a loved one. What we do with that loss is what matters in the end.

[rusure?]

Because he didn't want to shoot her.

Myabe he was so angry he just couldn't wait until night?

Now who's speculating and coming up with wild theories?

[rusure?]

I don't think so. He could not kill two at one time. It would give the other one in the home, who was in close proximity to the first one being shot, time to react. The sounds of the gunshot would be heard inside the home to anyone that was enclosed in that home.

It was much easier to kill one inside the home.

Then kill the other one before they got inside the home.

Both were unaware of what was happening.

imo

However, if the boy could have done it outside so easily as you say, it could be done the same way if they are asleep, especially if the victims sleep as hard as I do. Heck fire, I slept through a tornado going over our house once.

[GentleBreeze]

Ballistics don't match.

MOO
JMHO
IMO

:w00t:

Then if they don't why hasn't Judge Roca dismissed all charges against him?

imoo

[rusure?]

Then if they don't why hasn't Judge Roca dismissed all charges against him?

imoo

Because, the DA has said he would use the coerced confession. The judge cannot dismiss until a motion to dismiss is done. There are legal things that have to be worked out. As you say, they have gsr on the boys clothes (even though it has been discussed here and you refuse to accept the fact that he did not have enough on his clothes to prove anything), and I believe you have commented on the circumstancial evidence against him. There have been a few on this board who are so conviced of his guilt, and gloat over the circumstancial eveidence against this boy. The Judge is not god. He has to follow legal proceedures as you have reminded us before.

[ChildsVOICE]

I was wondering where you went last night. LOL
I got your email and then you were gone. I thought you had a heart attack. OMG Don't do the to me!

LOL I just spit on the library's screen!

No. Not really. But almost!:w00t:

Last night I was trying to reply to a post and it wouldn't let me then kept kicking me off the Internet when I tried a particular neww reports' link. I thought it was just the link then I couldn't log on at all. I had JUST got home from my son's Senior Night at the swim meet. I had to escort him as he was recognized for his last year on the team. I had waited ALL DAY to celebrate with the rest of you...posted on YEAH then poof! Gone! I was like..."Crud! YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME!!!NOOOOTTTT NOWWW!"

Anyway I'm am just tickled pink he gets to be home this week. Let's all pray that he stays safe while being in a town where a lot of people think he did this.

It's just great he's gonna gets lots of hugs and kisses from his mama!:biggrin::smile:

[rusure?]

Because there is no exonerating evidence. All the evidence still points to the boy.

imo

There is some straw grasping going on here. If the bullistics don't point to the boys gun that you were so sure was used, then how can that not be exonerating evidence. How can that mean that all the evidence still point to the boy???

[bkwits]

Maybe he didn't want to shoot Tiffany? He obviosuly didn't blame her, he blamed his dad.


He blamed his dad? What for?

[JusticeDawg©]

Because there is no exonerating evidence. All the evidence still points to the boy.

imo

ok Linda. You know it all. :wink:

[GentleBreeze]

If he ended up being tried as an adult, he would spend the rest of his life in prison, or receive the death penalty. If he was sentenced as a juvenile to be incarcerated until the age of 18, then rest assured, he would not be rehabilitated to the betterment of society. Statistically, a good number of those who are in prison now, were in juvenile detention also. Mercy and grace is something I hope you will one day grasp rather than the hatred I detect in your words.

By the way, nothing prepares us for any death of a loved one, caused from violence or terminal illness or otherwise. We can never be prepared for it. My sister was told she had 2 years to live with breast cancer. We had 2 years to prepare. When she died, I still was not prepared to loose her. So, nothing really prepares us for a death of a loved one. What we do with that loss is what matters in the end.

I believe that was my point. You are the one that said talk it over with family members. IMO that would be pointless.

One day I hope you realize that family members do not have to give mercy and grace to the very ones that have shattered their lives.

There are posters on this very site who have lost loved ones, mostly their own children, by the violent acts of another. They do not coddle or give mercy to the one, who showed no mercy, when they took their loved one's life and they have every right to feel as they do.

I do not agree, even if JR dismisses count one and if he is tried later for the death of his father, he will be sentenced, if convicted, under the juvenile guidelines that were in place when he did the murder. The most that he could get would be around 9 years. Not too shabby for a premeditated first degree homicide, that could have landed him in prison for life or on death row had he been an adult at the time.

imo

[bkwits]

He would have been a witness.

Tim would have been a witness? Wasn't he in the truck when Vince was shot? How could he have been a witness then? He didn't even know CR was home (if he was). If CR is so cunning, why could he not have hidden or ran out the back door?

From all accounts of what LE believes happened, Tim was not a witness.

IMO

[rusure?]

Hatred? Wanting some accountability for brutally murdering two people should in no way be construed as hatred. It's called justice.

No one said a person can ever prepare for the death of a loved one, quite the contrary. You may want to re-read the post you responded to because the poster clearly stated that.


you may want to reread both posts:

from post 585:
"We could discuss it till the cows come home with our families and it would never prepare us if it indeed happened to any of us."

from post 591
"By the way, nothing prepares us for any death of a loved one, caused from violence or terminal illness or otherwise."

I rest my case.

[bkwits]

His spanking, remember? He even went on later to claim it was 1000

The 1000 is hearsay and not allowed as evidence. We don't know that he blamed his dad. He only said his dad told Tiff to spank him. Doesn't seem like a motive to me.

IMO

[bkwits]

He would have been, had he been left alive.

imo

Absolutely not. By all accounts he did not witness the shooting of Vince.

IMO

[GentleBreeze]

Because, the DA has said he would use the coerced confession. The judge cannot dismiss until a motion to dismiss is done. There are legal things that have to be worked out. As you say, they have gsr on the boys clothes (even though it has been discussed here and you refuse to accept the fact that he did not have enough on his clothes to prove anything), and I believe you have commented on the circumstantial evidence against him. There have been a few on this board who are so convinced of his guilt, and gloat over the circumstantial evidence against this boy. The Judge is not god. He has to follow legal procedures as you have reminded us before.

A Judge can dismiss a case at any time. He doesn't have to wait until someone gives him a motion. If there was no evidence against this boy he would do just that and that would be the end of it.

And if there is no evidence then why isn't Wood clamoring to file a motion to dismiss. Even doing it repeatedly like he is known to do on other issues?

imoo

[bkwits]

Because there is no exonerating evidence. All the evidence still points to the boy.

imo


Are you privy to something that we are not? I don't know of any evidence save the shaky statement of Tanya.

IMO

[freddief]

Why were all these people cheering yesterday? If I'm innocent I don't want to be declared incompetent by the defense and prosecutors. I want to fight these charges and fight out who killed my dad!

If I'm found incompetent people think I'm crazy and I did it. Then they may later charge me as an adult.


Which outcome is better?

I'ld rather fight the charges IF I AM INNOCENT.

I think people falsely think he was released yesterday, rather than being on furlough.

[rusure?]

I believe that was my point. You are the one that said talk it over with family members. IMO that would be pointless.

One day I hope you realize that family members do not have to give mercy and grace to the very ones that have shattered their lives.

There are posters on this very site who have lost loved ones, mostly their own children, by the violent acts of another. They do not coddle or give mercy to the one, who showed no mercy, when they took their loved one's life and they have every right to feel as they do.

I do not agree, even if JR dismisses count one and if he is tried later for the death of his father, he will be sentenced, if convicted, under the juvenile guidelines that were in place when he did the murder. The most that he could get would be around 9 years. Not too shabby for a premeditated first degree homicide, that could have landed him in prison for life or on death row had he been an adult at the time.

imo

What I was discussing is also my opinion. I, as you have reminded folks that you, are entitled to my/our opinon. My opinion also is that one motto I try to live by is to show grace and mercy as God has shown me. People are treated as they treat others. Mercy and grace begets mercy and grace, if not in this life then in the next. Why do you think Christ said come to me as a child? Children do not think like adults. Never have never will. Children are our future adults. Treat a child as this boy has and he can only go as far as he is taught.

[GentleBreeze]

Tim would have been a witness? Wasn't he in the truck when Vince was shot? How could he have been a witness then? He didn't even know CR was home (if he was). If CR is so cunning, why could he not have hidden or ran out the back door?

From all accounts of what LE believes happened, Tim was not a witness.

IMO

I think the evidence will show the back door was locked and not accessible to flee out the back.

He couldn't come out that entry door knowing that Tim was sitting there in his truck and would most likely see him run out of the home.

He knew that Tim once off the phone would be coming inside that home and he would see his dead friend in a pool of blood on the stairway.

The boy could not allow that to happen....so Tim became collateral damage, to eliminate any witness that within minutes would see the carnage left in that home.

I even wonder sometimes if the boy thought that Tim had driven off somewhere and when he opened the door back up is when he saw that Tim was sitting right there in the yard and had gone no where.



imoo

[rusure?]

circumstantial evidence is the best kind. IMO

See Scott Peterson

Not really. Look at the folks who have been on death row because of circumstancial evidence and then have been shown innocent because of DNA or other exonerating evidence. Man, I hope you are never tried and convicted for something you didn't do because of circumstancial evidence.

[freddief]

What is shaky about Tanya's statement? It corroborates VR was shot first and the boy asked TR to come help.

[rusure?]

Got a link to the ballistics not matching?

got a link that shows it does????

[FDInLaw]

On the Child's hope and voice myspace page, the Mom posted that the boy is with her but they are not sure what is next. Just because he was released does not mean he is off the hook. IMO we need to wait for more details.

[rusure?]

The 1000 is hearsay and not allowed as evidence. We don't know that he blamed his dad. He only said his dad told Tiff to spank him. Doesn't seem like a motive to me.

IMO

I don't agree with spanking. But, I know there are parents who do. How many parents are dead at the hand of their child because the child is spanked???

[JusticeDawg©]

His spanking, remember? He even went on later to claim it was 1000

Carlyon said he was not aware of that statement.

hmmmmmmmmm

[FDInLaw]

No, buy I do have a boy still charged with two counts of premeditated first degree murder.
That kinda trumps a link.

imoCurrently, but a link would still be appreciated.

[freddief]

one "alleged" innocent bystander with a "alleged" confession thown out because of keystone cops

[rusure?]

A Judge can dismiss a case at any time. He doesn't have to wait until someone gives him a motion. If there was no evidence against this boy he would do just that and that would be the end of it.

And if there is no evidence then why isn't Wood clamoring to file a motion to dismiss. Even doing it repeatedly like he is known to do on other issues?

imoo

Go back and reread my post. The DA has circumstancial evidence. If the bullistics don't match, the judge cannot dismiss based solely on that. The poster also said that ALL the evidence was against the boy. If the bullistics don't match, then no, ALL the evidence does not point to the boy.

And before you reply, look at the fact that I said IF the bullistics don't match (I just seriously don't believe they do).

[rusure?]

I never claimed to know the boys motive. I've stated clearly the motive made sense to the boy.
He's the one that said he was angry at his dad for telling Tiffany to spank him. There must be some truth to that because he was indeed spanked, by Tiffany, at his father's request.

Good grief. The logic in that is nill. If every child in the US who gets mad at a parent, there would be not parents. Being angry at a parent is not a motive.

[ChildsVOICE]

What kind of justice. True justice, or vigilante justice? Would you want the truth or would you want whoever was there at the time and innocent? Would you want a 9 yo child who has a chance of rehibilitation to spend the rest of his life in jail or would you want to grant him mercy and grace so he could become a productive citizen in our society, able to contribute to society in positive ways? Would your husband want that? Would it bring him back? I know my husband would want me to show mercy and grace for a 9 yo child. He knows the difference between a child and an adult. He knows I would want him to show mercy and grace to a 9 yo child. I know the difference between a 9 yo child and an adult.

Would we grieve? Absolutely, but being vindictive would not bring them back.

I encourage everyone to discuss this type of issue with your loved ones and determine what they would want and tell them what you would want. We never know when some tradgedy such as this will happen to one of us.

BRAVO! Thank you!

Most people don't know this...but when I first started investigating this case, I did not have an opinion on the boy's guilt or innocence. I have an Early Childhood Education degree and I have been around VIOLENT children much younger than this little AZ boy. I have seen a 6 year old boy intentionally kick his 8 month pregnant mother in the belly trying to harm the baby then pull an adult sized scissors on me to stab me. I have, personally, been choked to near passing out by a 14 year old teen and more. I KNOW what SOME children are capable of doing.

BUT for THIS child...after learning a lot about this, I believe there is noooo way this kid committed this crime. Everybody wants evidence. I want evidence.

1)The first thing we have is the gunpowder residue test said there is next to nothing on the boy's clothing. IF he had committed this crime by shooting two men 10 times, combined, there would be tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of GPR particles on his clothing. There just wasn't enough found to say he even shot the gun once. There was only enough to say he could have picked it up by transfer or from a previous hunting expedition with a follow up of the clothes being washed or from simply living in a home of avid hunters. There HAD to be a HUGE amount of GPR on his clothes and it just was not there.

2) Downward angle of TR's chest injuries suggesting the shooter MAY have been taller than TR. Only other explanation is TR was hunched over/kneeling, etc.

3) Shell casings at top of stairs. Shell casings at bottom of stairs.
Head shot to front of VR's hard hat when his head is at top of stairs.
Arm shot in through just above elbow out at bicep into clothing near ribs= upward angle indicating shooter was at bottom of stairs (per expert's opinion).
Above and below? In front of and behind?

4) Time line is questionable for one person (adult or child) to have success.

5) Boys statements uncharacteristic for cover up stories of an 8 year old's capacity.

For example: "I was thinking, 'What the heck is going on?'" , "'Who did this? Why would anyone do this?" and "...I checked to see if he (Dad) was a little bit alive..." and He, repeatedly, told the police over and over again about a solid WHITE, SMALL CAR that "looked like Grandpa's car only it didn't have any rims"..."going very fast away from the house" as he had been walking home. He was fixated on this car and told the police he saw someone coming from the car going into the house and then the car speeding down the road as he approached the house where he then found Romans "lying there" and then, calling "Dad! Dad!, ran into the house and found his father "upstairs...with blood all over his face". He told police "and I saw the blood and then I cried for like 30 mins just crying right next to him."..."I ran to a girl's house I know...and I talked to her brother and told him 'My dad is dead and I told him Tim is dead."
AND
"Why would I shoot Tim?!" he, SHOCKINGLY, asked the police interrogators when they suggested he had. When the police SUGGESTED he shot his dad, he responded, "HUH?!" "Shot who?"
AND
When asked how did you know Tim's truck was there? the boy responded "because I could see it through (name)'s trees."
AND
"I was worried the bad guys were going to come back"

6)WHY WOULD THE LITTLE BOY THEN RUN FOR HELP?!

7)If the police are to be believed that his motive was to end the spankings or because he had been spanked then WHY WOULDN'T HE HAVE SHOT THE STEPMOTHER & FATHER NOT FATHER AND TENANT?!

8) What 8 year old would be able to even stand to WAIT with a loaded rifle just waiting for the men to walk through the door?! Do you know of any 8 yr olds who would be able to (with a loaded .22 caliber rifle), just sit there and wait for someone to come home to shoot them?

9) Two gunshots to TR's chest too close together to have come from a single shot weapon, IMO.

10) 10 shots with single shot rifle... EVERYBODY knows this fact is too unusual for belief.

11) boy's profile of a good kid before and after does not fit the crime



These are just things off the top of my head to why I do not believe he committed this crime.

[freddief]

I've never understood why they put cr's name on the Apache County website....is li legally required?

[rusure?]

If there was no evidence the case would be dismissed. Peroid.

The words you and GB have been using, all evidence and no evidence are what the problem is here. If there is even one piece of circumstancial evidence against the boy, the DA would run with it as he has, no doubt about it.

The judge cannot just dismiss a case at will. He has to go by the rules of law as anyone else does.

[GentleBreeze]

Currently, but a link would still be appreciated.

I think it would be much easier and simpler if the original poster who first said that the ballistics don't match, gives a link to that.

They were the ones that said the ballistics don't match so where is a link for that?

imo

[rusure?]

This is not a religious board.

There is not a whole lot of religon in my post. I was stating my opinion. The bulk of my post is actually my philosophy about how to treat others. The post is in regards to the treatment of the boy by others.

Most of the laws of this land is from religon. This is why the boy is being charged with murder. Because of the religous rule of you can't murder people. Our nation has a law, you can't murder people. JMO

[rusure?]

No, buy I do have a boy still charged with two counts of premeditated first degree murder.
That kinda trumps a link.

imo

Not really, the other evidence they have is circumstancial. Got a link that proves his is guilty of 2 counts of premeditated first degree murder??

[rusure?]

In this case?

One dead parent + one innocent bystander= one charged boy

Do you have a link the proves this charged boy did it??? You cannot count this yet until he is proved guilty, not just charged or accused of it.

[freddief]

Religion is wierd...on one hand "an eye for an eye" and then "thou shalt not kill"...so I take all with a grain of salt...

[GentleBreeze]

Good grief. The logic in that is nill. If every child in the US who gets mad at a parent, there would be not parents. Being angry at a parent is not a motive.

Really? Anger is a very big motivator, even if the anger is nonsensical.

We have seen juveniles kill their parents and they were extremely angry at the parent or parents for some silly thing, like they were disciplined or put on restriction or didn't want to do their chores or didn't like the nagging they got from the parent or they didn't get to do something they wanted to do.

All children get angry at their parents at some time or another but not all are capable of murder but that never means that some aren't.

Just like all adults too get angry with other adults but most of them don't go around murdering people, but some do.

imoo

[ChildsVOICE]

Well, it may seem like the majority of us agree on just about everything. However, that is not the case. While most of the posters here do have sympathy for the child, there are various beliefs and interpretations of the evidence. Also, many of us have different issues which are important to us. For instance, my biggest issue is how unfairly the child was treated, and how he was denied any rights. I saw it happen in Chicago with the arrest of 7 and 8 year old little boys in the Ryan Harris murder. LE, here had absolutely no evidence agains the children because the children didn't do it. They obtained false confessions from each one individually. The little boys had no representation (as in this case). The real rapist/murderer was arrested because of DNA. While LE was persecuting the children, he raped a 5 year old.

So, if this child shot the two men or not, he was still denied any rights. If it turns out that he alone did this, I still say LE was not right to trample on his rights. IMO.

Welcome to the discussion.

You and I agree here, Hawk.

I have just changed my mind to the boy's innocence as you are still reserved.

We should volunteer to be on the child's jury! Oh! wait...jury trial DENIED!

[freddief]

all children get angry at their parents...only a few shoot them

[FDInLaw]

BRAVO! Thank you!

Most people don't know this...but when I first started investigating this case, I did not have an opinion on the boy's guilt or innocence. I have an Early Childhood Education degree and I have been around VIOLENT children much younger than this little AZ boy. I have seen a 6 year old boy intentionally kick his 8 month pregnant mother in the belly trying to harm the baby then pull an adult sized scissors on me to stab me. I have, personally, been choked to near passing out by a 14 year old teen and more. I KNOW what SOME children are capable of doing.

BUT for THIS child...after learning a lot about this, I believe there is noooo way this kid committed this crime. Everybody wants evidence. I want evidence.

1)The first thing we have is the gunpowder residue test said there is next to nothing on the boy's clothing. IF he had committed this crime by shooting two men 10 times, combined, there would be tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of GPR particles on his clothing. There just wasn't enough found to say he even shot the gun once. There was only enough to say he could have picked it up by transfer or from a previous hunting expedition with a follow up of the clothes being washed or from simply living in a home of avid hunters. There HAD to be a HUGE amount of GPR on his clothes and it just was not there.

2) Downward angle of TR's chest injuries suggesting the shooter MAY have been taller than TR. Only other explanation is TR was hunched over/kneeling, etc.

3) Shell casings at top of stairs. Shell casings at bottom of stairs.
Head shot to front of VR's hard hat when his head is at top of stairs.
Arm shot in through just above elbow out at bicep into clothing near ribs= upward angle indicating shooter was at bottom of stairs (per expert's opinion).
Above and below? In front of and behind?

4) Time line is questionable for one person (adult or child) to have success.

5) Boys statements uncharacteristic for cover up stories of an 8 year old's capacity.

For example: "I was thinking, 'What the heck is going on?'" , "'Who did this? Why would anyone do this?" and "...I checked to see if he (Dad) was a little bit alive..." and He, repeatedly, told the police over and over again about a solid WHITE, SMALL CAR that "looked like Grandpa's car only it didn't have any rims"..."going very fast away from the house" as he had been walking home. He was fixated on this car and told the police he saw someone coming from the car going into the house and then the car speeding down the road as he approached the house where he then found Romans "lying there" and then, calling "Dad! Dad!, ran into the house and found his father "upstairs...with blood all over his face". He told police "and I saw the blood and then I cried for like 30 mins just crying right next to him."..."I ran to a girl's house I know...and I talked to her brother and told him 'My dad is dead and I told him Tim is dead."
AND
"Why would I shoot Tim?!" he, SHOCKINGLY, asked the police interrogators when they suggested he had. When the police SUGGESTED he shot his dad, he responded, "HUH?!" "Shot who?"
AND
When asked how did you know Tim's truck was there? the boy responded "because I could see it through (name)'s trees."
AND
"I was worried the bad guys were going to come back"

6)WHY WOULD THE LITTLE BOY THEN RUN FOR HELP?!

7)If the police are to be believed that his motive was to end the spankings or because he had been spanked then WHY WOULDN'T HE HAVE SHOT THE STEPMOTHER & FATHER NOT FATHER AND TENANT?!

8) What 8 year old would be able to even stand to WAIT with a loaded rifle just waiting for the men to walk through the door?! Do you know of any 8 yr olds who would be able to (with a loaded .22 caliber rifle), just sit there and wait for someone to come home to shoot them?

9) Two gunshots to TR's chest too close together to have come from a single shot weapon, IMO.

10) 10 shots with single shot rifle... EVERYBODY knows this fact is too unusual for belief.

11) boy's profile of a good kid before and after does not fit the crime



These are just things off the top of my head to why I do not believe he committed this crime.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts here!

[rusure?]

I think it would be much easier and simpler if the original poster who first said that the ballistics don't match, gives a link to that.

They were the ones that said the ballistics don't match so where is a link for that?

imo

If you go back and reread the original poster's post, you will also see they said it was just their opinion. Need a link to that too?

[Cherishlove]

What kind of justice. True justice, or vigilante justice? Would you want the truth or would you want whoever was there at the time and innocent? Would you want a 9 yo child who has a chance of rehibilitation to spend the rest of his life in jail or would you want to grant him mercy and grace so he could become a productive citizen in our society, able to contribute to society in positive ways? Would your husband want that? Would it bring him back? I know my husband would want me to show mercy and grace for a 9 yo child. He knows the difference between a child and an adult. He knows I would want him to show mercy and grace to a 9 yo child. I know the difference between a 9 yo child and an adult.

Would we grieve? Absolutely, but being vindictive would not bring them back.

I encourage everyone to discuss this type of issue with your loved ones and determine what they would want and tell them what you would want. We never know when some tradgedy such as this will happen to one of us.I asked my husband that last night, because he knows this case has really bothered me regarding this little boy, I still believe someone else is behind these murders, but anyway he said No he would not want a little child charged only helped and likewise I told him.

[ChildsVOICE]

Next Hearing Date:

REPORTS SAY BOY HAS BEEN RELEASED/TIME PERIOD UNKNOWN.

Jan 29th Hearing has been postponed until Feb. 5th:

Competency Hearing set for Feb. 6 was rescheduled for Feb. 13.

(Feb. 13th will be the day the Judge will hear the Defense and Prosecutor's experts' opinions on the boy's competency.)

SEE:

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

and

http://www.azfamily.com/video/localnews-index.html?nvid=326550&shu=1

(For a time, yesterday, I had posted the next dates were Feb 5th and Feb. 6th but the competency hearing set for Feb. 6th has been rescheduled for Feb. 13th. Sorry if I confused anyone.)

[GentleBreeze]

There is not a whole lot of religon in my post. I was stating my opinion. The bulk of my post is actually my philosophy about how to treat others. The post is in regards to the treatment of the boy by others.

Most of the laws of this land is from religon. This is why the boy is being charged with murder. Because of the religous rule of you can't murder people. Our nation has a law, you can't murder people. JMO

Rightly or wrongly, in almost 10 years, I have never seen much mercy and grace, given to any defendant that has been discussed on this site.

Society as a whole doest seem to have much sympathy for them either, imo.

imoo

[rusure?]

No one said every, I know I certainly didn't.

Being angry at parents is often the motive when a child kills a parent.

Apparently in this case, anger was the motive. The boy said as much.

Most every other 8 year old on the planet knows killing is wrong and they don't do it. If 8 year olds didn't understand this, then you're right, there wouldn't be any parents.

imo

My goodness. I need start copy/paste "go back and reread".
No you did not say every. I did. Your assumption is that the motive of the boy to kill was because he was angry at his father. I said "if every". Where's the link to children who kill parents often have a motive of being angry at a parent? Also, my point is children do not kill parents when angry over a spanking. Never. They get mad about being spanked, but do not kill their parents over it. The gets over it very soon.

[rusure?]

We have seen juveniles kill their parents and they were extremely angry at the parent or parents for some silly thing, like they were disciplined or put on restriction or didn't want to do their chores or didn't like the nagging they got from the parent or they didn't get to do something they wanted to do.
imoo

Please give me a link to those facts. Are the juvenilles you are referring to under 10?

[rusure?]

No evidence is just cause for any judge to dismiss charges.

No prosecutor is going to even attempt to try a case with only one piece of circumstantial evidence.

As I said the words no and all. As you have said, there is no exonerating evidence to show the boys innocence. You have said all the evidence points to the boy. I'm merely making the point that all the evidence does not point to the boy's guilt, imo. Have you got a link that shows that it does???

[ChildsVOICE]

Why mess with competency when you have exonerating evidence?

You don't.

DA can delay all he wants. They can't change the FACTS.

I'm liking what I'm hearing!:thumbup:

[rusure?]

I asked my husband that last night, because he knows this case has really bothered me regarding this little boy, I still believe someone else is behind these murders, but anyway he said No he would not want a little child charged only helped and likewise I told him.

I'm glad you two discussed it. It's almost like a living will, in a round about way.

[tif]

If the bullistics don't match, the judge cannot dismiss based solely on that.

I'm not sure why the judge couldn't dismiss if the ballistics don't match. If no gun found in the house was the murder weapon, CR would have had to hide the murder weapon. Besides everything else he was supposed to have done in those 11.5 minutes, he would now have to find a foolproof hiding place for the gun? I doubt if even this prosecutor would argue that.

[ChildsVOICE]

The boys life has been changed forever. No way will he be the boy he was before this tragedy. He lost his father and is also accused of the crimes. Of course I wish he could be the boy he was before, but it is going to take lots of therapy to accomplish anything close to what he was.

AND a WHOLE LOT of really really really NICE and HONORABLE police officers to change his perspective. Hope he doesn't get lost any time soon. I don't know he'd want to approach an officer for "help" ???

[rusure?]

Rightly or wrongly, in almost 10 years, I have never seen much mercy and grace, given to any defendant that has been discussed on this site.

Society as a whole doest seem to have much sympathy for them either, imo.

imoo

Surprise!!!! I'm likely to agree with you.

The thing about your comments is a very sad thing to know about human beings. It still doesn't make it right. As my mom always said, 2 wrongs do not make a right.

[GentleBreeze]

Please give me a link to those facts. Are the juveniles you are referring to under 10?

It doesn't matter how old the juvenile was .....they were angry and even an 8 year old gets angry with their parents.

Good grief, even very young children are in fits of rage these days. They scream, bite, kick, punch and beat and choke their siblings and have total meltdowns from rage. All these Nanny shows, show the appalling rage that some of our children possess today.

I always notate my posts with "imo". There are cases where anger was the motivating factor in cases where parents were murdered, I am sure if you google you can find them.

imoo

[rusure?]

Christopher Pittman & Cody Posey comes to mind.

Were they under 10?

[tif]

I doubt it to. There is no reason to believe, at this point, there's anything wrong with any evidence.

imo

Other than the fact that there is no ballistic evidence at this point? If there was, one side or the other would be spouting off about it.

[ChildsVOICE]

My 18 year old son (Major in H.S. Air Force JrROTC; swim team , track team, Relay for Life chairman for two schools, and employed as a lifeguard) was just saying last night that "this poor little guy will never trust another police officer again".

He offered to go to St. Johns, AZ and talk to the little boy!:smile:

I have a great kid! I'd buy his plane ticket!:blush:

(Although, I'd have to go too. I wouldn't trust the authorities down there. I'd probably have to take bail money. We might cross the street in the wrong place or something like that. LOL)

[rusure?]

I'm not sure why the judge couldn't dismiss if the ballistics don't match. If no gun found in the house was the murder weapon, CR would have had to hide the murder weapon. Besides everything else he was supposed to have done in those 11.5 minutes, he would now have to find a foolproof hiding place for the gun? I doubt if even this prosecutor would argue that.

because there is still circumstancial evidence against the boy.

[dgfred]

I don't see how it could have been easier than it was.

He had one unsuspecting man entering his home after work with no clue that impending danger lurked near by.

He had another man outside the home totally unaware what was happening inside the home.

Neither man was armed. Neither man had anytime to grab their weapons.

They were both trapped with only seconds to react before being shot again. They weren't some super human dudes. So they died just like other victims do.

imoo

Neither was really trapped, only surprised. Guns in house and in truck.
'They weren't some super human dudes' , but CR must be to load and shoot a bolt action 22 that many times... watch that clip of the young girl firing one. Something else has to be up in my opinion. If CR did shoot a gun at all, maybe he was being truthful about 'ending suffering',
I just don't know. But I do almost certainly know he wouldn't have been able to plan and execute the entire shooting scene, of course in my opinion though.

[IAMME]

If, in fact, the release was evidence based, and not just a temporary furlough or due to the competency issue there must be someone, somewhere, mighty nervous tonight.


How scary is that?

[ChildsVOICE]

No evidence is just cause for any judge to dismiss charges.

No prosecutor is going to even attempt to try a case with only one piece of circumstantial evidence.

You must not have seen too many court cases then.

[rusure?]

It doesn't matter how old the juvenile was .....they were angry and even an 8 year old gets angry with their parents.

It does matter how old the juvenile was. 8 year olds get angry with their parents, but they deal with it differently than a teenager. They have not developed enough to even concieve of murdering their parents. Even children who are abused by parents don't want to leave them.

Good grief, even very young children are in fits of rage these days. They scream, bite, kick, punch and beat and choke their siblings and have total meltdowns from rage. All these Nanny shows, show the appalling rage that some of our children possess today.

This is nothing new. The phrase "terrible twos" was not coined during this decade. 30 years ago I witnessed countless children throwing fits "temper tantrums" in grocery stores and parents yelling at them and hitting them. That was appalling.

I always notate my posts with "imo". There are cases where anger was the motivating factor in cases where parents were murdered, I am sure if you google you can find them.
imoo

Well, I guess you escaped that one. State an opinion as fact and never have to provide a link to your facts, but you can ask for links for others.

[tif]

because there is still circumstancial evidence against the boy.

I just don't think that circumstantial evidence would trump definitive forensic evidence. I wouldn't put it past the prosecution to go back and tear up the house and yard looking for another weapon, but if they didn't find one, case over.

[dgfred]

Thankfully!!!!

But those few need to be accountable AND rehabilitated, if possible.


You will be hard pressed to find another example of a 8yr old killing (actually hunting) two grown men. That is the hardest thing for me to come to grips with... I don't see the kid being able to plan, load, fire, eject, reload and on and on with all that would have been going on???

[ChildsVOICE]

The motion to dismiss however, IMO, was postphoned because the defense was sandbaged by having all the reports etc. not disclosed until yesterday..How many hundreds of pages was it? close to 500 yesterday? That is not a reasonable amount of time to examine disclosed evidence, imo.

If one was a prosecutor with plenty of EVIDENCE PROVING a perpetrator's guilt...then why wait to last minute to give the defense the reports?

I'm just saying. (sarcasm there)

[rusure?]

If one was a prosecutor with plenty of EVIDENCE PROVING a perpetrator's guilt...then why wait to last minute to give the defense the reports?

I'm just saying. (sarcasm there)

Exactly!!!!

[ChildsVOICE]

Perhaps because there will not be enough evidence to convict without reasonable doubt and therefore there will not need to be a competency hearing.

We also do not know if the closed hearing was to allow him to go home. I personally if it meant he sat there for two more weeks and this was put behind him once and for all...amen.

Also if he is innocent of this and his mother decides to sue the state for everything, everday day he sits there is another million in their pocket. This is what happened in Chicago.

IMHO.

On down the road...

I'll, personally, help the kid fill out his Harvard Law admissions papers!:tonguewag:

[FDInLaw]

You will be hard pressed to find another example of a 8yr old killing (actually hunting) two grown men. That is the hardest thing for me to come to grips with... I don't see the kid being able to plan, load, fire, eject, reload and on and on with all that would have been going on???
I don't get it either. Frustrated beyond words that others were not looked at more closely. Anger is a motive, but it was just one of several with this cast of characters.



MOO

[GentleBreeze]

Neither was really trapped, only surprised. Guns in house and in truck.
'They weren't some super human dudes' , but CR must be to load and shoot a bolt action 22 that many times... watch that clip of the young girl firing one. Something else has to be up in my opinion. If CR did shoot a gun at all, maybe he was being truthful about 'ending suffering',
I just don't know. But I do almost certainly know he wouldn't have been able to plan and execute the entire shooting scene, of course in my opinion though.

Hi dgfed!

I don't have to watch a video. I have loaded, fired, ejected, reloaded and fired again, a weapon just like this one, starting when I was seven years old. It only takes seconds each time to complete. I have also done it repetitively when target shooting. These actions are very simplistic and easily done. Even the boy said the "shooter" may have used his gun because it is easy to use.

Yes, imo they were trapped. There was no time for Vinnie to make it up the stairs into his bedroom and retrieve a weapon from under his bed. None of his shots were at close range. There was distance between him and the shooter and in between the distance and them was a barrel of a very deadly gun. This was no shoot out at the OK corral. This wasn't even a fight. The only one there that day that had a weapon was the shooter.

Tim was also trapped. No matter which way he turned he knew he would be shot whether it was to the chest or to the back of his head or straight into his back, it certainly wouldn't have mattered to the shooter which way the victim was going, There was no time or for him to retrieve his weapon, for if there had been he would have done so.

These men were like sitting ducks on a pond. This came without any warning and they each had only seconds to react before being shot again and again.

imo

[dgfred]

I think the evidence will show the back door was locked and not accessible to flee out the back.

He couldn't come out that entry door knowing that Tim was sitting there in his truck and would most likely see him run out of the home.

He knew that Tim once off the phone would be coming inside that home and he would see his dead friend in a pool of blood on the stairway.

The boy could not allow that to happen....so Tim became collateral damage, to eliminate any witness that within minutes would see the carnage left in that home.

I even wonder sometimes if the boy thought that Tim had driven off somewhere and when he opened the door back up is when he saw that Tim was sitting right there in the yard and had gone no where.



imoo

Lucky he had all the shells in his pocket or hand...

Are you saying you think a 8yr old had planned this out including eliminating witnesses? Really?

[rusure?]

Were they under 10?

I'll answer that for you, I looked it up.

CPittman was 12. C Posey was 14. (BTW, CPosey wasn't just spanked, he was abused unmercifully)

CPittman's offense was caused from a direct result of medication not recomend ed for children.

Doesn't seem to be under the same circumstances as the boy in this case since his motive supposedly was because he got angry at being spanked the night before.

[rusure?]

Lucky he had all the shells in his pocket or hand...

Are you saying you think a 8yr old had planned this out including eliminating witnesses? Really?

There is no way he could have.

[GentleBreeze]

If one was a prosecutor with plenty of EVIDENCE PROVING a perpetrator's guilt...then why wait to last minute to give the defense the reports?

I'm just saying. (sarcasm there)

I thought all parties knew that the most of the evidence would be coming back in at the end of January.

imoo

[dgfred]

Hi dgfed!

I don't have to watch a video. I have loaded, fired, ejected, reloaded and fired again, a weapon just like this one, starting when I was seven years old. It only takes seconds each time to complete. I have also done it repetitively when target shooting. These actions are very simplistic and easily done. Even the boy said the "shooter" may have used his gun because it is easy to use.

Yes, imo they were trapped. There was no time for Vinnie to make it up the stairs into his bedroom and retrieve a weapon from under his bed. None of his shots were at close range. There was distance between him and the shooter and in between the distance and them was a barrel of a very deadly gun. This was no shoot out at the OK corral. This wasn't even a fight. The only one there that day that had a weapon was the shooter.

Tim was also trapped. No matter which way he turned he knew he would be shot whether it was to the chest or to the back of his head or straight into his back, it certainly wouldn't have mattered to the shooter which way the victim was going, There was no time or for him to retrieve his weapon, for if there had been he would have done so.

These men were like sitting ducks on a pond. This came without any warning and they each had only seconds to react before being shot again and again.

imo

Well you know me and you are gonna agree to disagree anyway :wink: .

I just cannot see a 8 yr old pulling off these shots with accuracy and precision, without dropping shells, firing all over the place, killing two grown men, finishing shots to head, etc... I'm sorry!?! I know you will not agree, but in my opinion both sturdy men would have been able to react just a little even after the first shots... if it was a bolt-action rifle
that was used.

[rusure?]

I thought all parties knew that the most of the evidence would be coming back in at the end of January.

imoo

They may have known it, but, they weren't privy to what it was until it was disclosed.

[rusure?]

Hi dgfed!

I don't have to watch a video. I have loaded, fired, ejected, reloaded and fired again, a weapon just like this one, starting when I was seven years old. It only takes seconds each time to complete. I have also done it repetitively when target shooting. These actions are very simplistic and easily done. Even the boy said the "shooter" may have used his gun because it is easy to use.

imo

Under what circumstances were you shooting at 7 yo? Were you angry at your father. Was your target moving? Did you shoot 10 shots consecutively? Did you have adrenilen running at the excitement? Did you fear getting caught? What exactly were the circustances of your shooting experience?

[dgfred]

Because he didn't want to shoot her.

Myabe he was so angry he just couldn't wait until night?

He sure hid it well until about 5pm. Little dude is quite the actor.

[rusure?]

I don't believe it took much skill at all, just a murderous, cold heart intent on killing.

Pulling the trigger 10 times took ZERO skill but the most depraved of hearts.

How many 8 yo's do you know of that have a murderous, cold heart with an intent on killing or a depraved heart who has no history of any problems at school, or out in public or by others he is with?

[GentleBreeze]

Lucky he had all the shells in his pocket or hand...

Are you saying you think a 8yr old had planned this out including eliminating witnesses? Really?


I am not saying he did great in depth planning in the death of Tim, although premeditation can be made within seconds. The state is saying he planned it.

I think when he saw him he knew he couldn't get out of the home unseen by Tim and he knew that Tim very shortly would be coming inside the home. Maybe wondering why VR wasn't back yet. I do think they both had planned to leave to help a friend build a chest and had just stopped by for a few minutes.

.22 bullets are very small bullets. Since the report stated his fingerprints were on the box of bullets, he had access to the box of bullets found on the side table. I would think he would take as many as he thought he needed. He even had one to spare and left it in the rifle unspent

imo

[dgfred]

I agree with you. Eight year old killers are pretty rare add to that the premeditation and two grown men....it's frightening.

I don't believe it took much skill at all, just a murderous, cold heart intent on killing. Once the men were taken by surprise & incapacitated, which IMO happened quickly...the skill required was minimal.

Loading and ejecting and aiming was the easy part.

Pulling the trigger 10 times took ZERO skill but the most depraved of hearts.

8yr olds doing that is unknown to everyone.

Try loading, shooting, re-loading and shooting again while moving around a house with the extra shells in your hand or pocket.

'depraved of hearts' WOW..... just WOW !

[rusure?]

Heck I knew that...and I'm not even a party!

Heck, everybody knew it. Did you know what was in the reports before they were disclosed? Gee, no body else did. Are you psychic?

[rusure?]

I do think they both had planned to leave to help a friend build a chest and had just stopped by for a few minutes.

imo

Do you know off hand who the friend was? I'm wondering if anyone questioned him? I wonder if the friend wondered why they didn't show up?

[rusure?]

Just this one and I don't claim to "know" him.

Nope, sorry, try again, this one doesn't count. It has not been proven that he has murderous, cold, depraved heart. It has not been proved he did it.

You still haven't named any children below the age of 10 who have been proven to committed murder yet. So far you came up with two names, but, they weren't even 10 anymore.

[GentleBreeze]

Under what circumstances were you shooting at 7 yo? Were you angry at your father. Was your target moving? Did you shoot 10 shots consecutively? Did you have adrenaline running at the excitement? Did you fear getting caught? What exactly were the circumstances of your shooting experience?

I have been very angry with my father and with good reason but I have never had murderous thoughts about murdering/harming him or anyone else for that matter.

Yes, I shot at many moving targets at that age and much smaller targets that were all shot from yards away. Much smaller targets than a human being is or when the shots were done within feet of them not at least 25 yards away. That doesn't even take any skill to hit a large target close up.

I didn't have an adrenaline rush. We ate what we killed and that was the purpose of shooting the wild game. But if I had, it would have given me a boost of power/energy and most likely would have even sped up my quickness when firing. Only when the adrenaline rush had subsided after it was over would it leave me shaky imo.

imoo

[dgfred]

Do you know off hand who the friend was? I'm wondering if anyone questioned him? I wonder if the friend wondered why they didn't show up?

Well if they were just stopping in, wonder how CR knew this and planned accordingly??? Did they always stop at home after work? Just dad usually? Very curious to me the timing and the way this all happened.

[GentleBreeze]

Let me rephrase my question. When you were 7yo, did you shoot at moving targets while angry at your father and moving yourself while shooting 4 consecutive shoots, and then realizing you were seen run and shoot another target that is moving, still angry at your father, and shoot that target 6 consecutive times?

Your post makes no sense imo.

I have never been accused of murdering anyone. My father died of natural causes.

I don't remember if I was angry at my father at times when I went shooting. I sure may have been. Of course I moved around........small game are very quick and do not standstill. They are much quicker than a human being.

:confused::confused:

[rusure?]

Your post makes no sense imo.

I have never been accused of murdering anyone. My father died of natural causes.

I don't remember if I was angry at my father at times when I went shooting. I sure may have been. Of course I moved around........small game are very quick and do not standstill. They are much quicker than a human being.

:confused::confused:

I'm sorry my question make no sense to you. The point I'm trying to make is that you said the supposed gun used in the killings was very easy to shoot for the accused boy, that it would not be any great feat for him to have done it. You know this because you shot a gun like his when you were 7. I'm just trying to find out if the circumstances of your shooting experience were the same circumstances of this accuses boy of 8. If they are not simular, (which you have shown in your reply posts) then your comparison is not relative to the evidence of this case.

[rusure?]

Well if they were just stopping in, wonder how CR knew this and planned accordingly??? Did they always stop at home after work? Just dad usually? Very curious to me the timing and the way this all happened.

Me too. Very odd. Unless the boy was psychic.

[bkwits]

I never claimed he did.


The boy was trapped in the house that surely Tim would have entered soon.


I don't think he was "trapped" in the house. He lived there. He could have easily hidden and reappeared later or left through the back door. Now someone else may have been trapped there, but not CR.

[shelby77]

Just wanted to post this in case nobody caught it yet, but he's only out for a week :(
Sorry if it's already been posted, but I'm at work, so I can't catch all up lol...see you guys tonight....

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

[Cherishlove]

Just stopping by to say thank you to those who sent me messages about the news. I see the same old same old here longing to skin an 8 year old boy alive before he is even given a trial. What else is new.

For those of us who are secure enough not to take pleasure in the agony that this child has been through, a huge thanks for keeping me up to date on this travesty.


My continued prayers to the boy and to his attorneys to keep up the good fight. :rose:It is hard to understand why someone would spend there days on this post, trying to hang this little child, isn't it and with no real proof, just makes me realize more and more in life how really cold hearted people can be. My prayers are also with this little child.

[bkwits]

I doubt it to. There is no reason to believe, at this point, there's anything wrong with any evidence.

imo

WHAT???? Even the pros. has agreed not to use the "confession" as evidence, which was the sole justification for they arresting CR. CR had miniscule amount of GSR on his clothes (and there are problems with the collection of those clothes). Some shell casings don't match the other shell casings. Tanya's statements are inconsistent. The fingerprint on the .17 cal. ammo box means nothing since CR could have touched it at any time.

That is only the evidence that we know about.

IMO

[rusure?]

It is hard to understand why someone would spend there days on this post, trying to hang this little child, isn't it and with no real proof, just makes me realize more and more in life how really cold hearted people can be. My prayers are also with this little child.

ITA. My prayers are with this child, his mom, the victims loved ones and friends, the attorneys, and the judge.

[rusure?]

WHAT???? Even the pros. has agreed not to use the "confession" as evidence, which was the sole justification for they arresting CR. CR had miniscule amount of GSR on his clothes (and there are problems with the collection of those clothes). Some shell casings don't match the other shell casings. Tanya's statements are inconsistent. The fingerprint on the .17 cal. ammo box means nothing since CR could have touched it at any time.

That is only the evidence that we know about.

IMO

Ditto on all counts, bkwits.:thumbsup:

[GentleBreeze]

Yes, it is truly amazing that people take so much pleasure in the agony of others. So much hate in their hearts, one has to wonder why? Vilifying a little 8 year old kid day after day after day for months on end. It's quite sad, really.

Are we now back to attacking posters who post here? I thought we were to discuss the case and not the posters?

I thought that is against TOS!

imo

[dgfred]

So........... you are no longer disputing the gun is easy to use, even for a 8 year old to hunt small game & target shoot....it only becomes impossible to use when used to shoot people?


No we have only been saying that the loading, shooting, ejecting, reloading with spare shells in the hand or pocket over and over would be very difficult for a 8yr old under at least a little bit of stress. Much
more stress in shooting your own dad with head shots I would guess.

*I have almost the exact kind of 22 Rifle (bolt action) I am an experienced shooter and it IS difficult to continuous fire while moving, keeping extras in pocket or hand, and reloading... you have to place each cartridge into firing position. I really wish you could give it a try with ANY single shot bolt-action rifle, not just a 22.

[Details]

Why were all these people cheering yesterday? If I'm innocent I don't want to be declared incompetent by the defense and prosecutors. I want to fight these charges and fight out who killed my dad!

If I'm found incompetent people think I'm crazy and I did it. Then they may later charge me as an adult.


Which outcome is better?

I'ld rather fight the charges IF I AM INNOCENT.

I think people falsely think he was released yesterday, rather than being on furlough.We're cheering because an 8 year old child, rather than being locked in solitary, growing ever more likely to take severe mental damage from this unnatural isolation, is now with his mother. He should never have been in juvie, they knew it wasn't a good place for him - that's why he was in solitary - but that's not right, not for an 8 year old child. He needs someone there when he wakes up from a nightmare to cuddle him down, he needs to be able to have contact with people (his visits with his mother - she couldn't even touch him!). He's 8, and if any one of us locked our 8 year old in some closet, letting them out only for school, we'd be in HUGE trouble with CPS.

This is just a start - but he's finally not in solitary - that's worth cheering about.

Outside of that - it's also a good indication the judge doesn't think anymore that he should remain in juvie - so it's a hint, maybe. Innocence would be good, and I hope and expect they will be able to prove it - maybe already have - if the ballistics reports have come back. IMO, the autopsy already did prove it - kid just isn't tall enough. But they cannot change the laws, and the laws say they have to go through the competence hearing. Hopefully even after he's found incompetent (since both experts agree, I doubt the judge will disagree), the police will use the forensics results to finish the investigation, look at the other suspects.

He should be exonerated, I too expect to see that, especially since I'd expect that any gag orders would die when this case dies, right? Then the defense would be free to discuss little things like ballistics results, and whatever other reports the prosecution hasn't been talking about.

[IAMME]

I don't think he was "trapped" in the house. He lived there. He could have easily hidden and reappeared later or left through the back door. Now someone else may have been trapped there, but not CR.

The longer I think about this the more i think he very well may have been trapped in that house, Avila's first instinct was that he was a witness.....gut reactions are rarely wrong IMO.

An interesting link on instinct accuracy:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070108121659.htm

So couldnt the shooter have had a gun on him sent him to call Tim inside and threatened to kill him too if he told? Chilling. But possible.

All of that is just speculation of course but that is definately the direction I am leaning in today. It would explain why Tim said that somethign was wrong, if it occurred this way I am sure that the boy would have been visibly upset, to the point that you would KNOW looking at him that somethign was terribly wrong.IMO.

[bkwits]

No we have only been saying that the loading, shooting, ejecting, reloading with spare shells in the hand or pocket over and over would be very difficult for a 8yr old under at least a little bit of stress. Much
more stress in shooting your own dad with head shots I would guess.

*I have almost the exact kind of 22 Rifle (bolt action) I am an experienced shooter and it IS difficult to continuous fire while moving, keeping extras in pocket or hand, and reloading... you have to place each cartridge into firing position. I really wish you could give it a try with ANY single shot bolt-action rifle, not just a 22.

Don't forget that he didn't drop any unspent shells.

[bkwits]

The longer I think about this the more i think he very well may have been trapped in that house, Avila's first instinct was that he was a witness.....gut reactions are rarely wrong IMO.

So couldnt the shooter have had a gun on him sent him to call Tim inside and threatened to kill him too if he told? Chilling. But possible.

All of that is just speculation of course but that is definately the direction I am leaning in today. It would explain why Tim said that somethign was wrong, if it occurred this way I am sure that the boy would have been visibly upset, to the point that you would KNOW looking at him that somethign was terribly wrong.IMO.


I've thought of that too. However, I don't believe Tanya heard and recognized his voice thru the phone. I tend to think that he found them.

IMO

[IAMME]

I've thought of that too. However, I don't believe Tanya heard and recognized his voice thru the phone. I tend to think that he found them.

IMO

I completely understand, I go back and forth on if that phone call even happening, and phone records would only prove that a phone call happened, I am still not sure if they would show if the call went to voicemail or not.... it is just so convenient when you think of Tanya as a suspect.

But like I said I am starting to lean more and more towards him being a witness, and being threatened...

I really wish they would release some more evidence for us to argue.... We really need the phone records and of course the rest of the ballistics sure would be nice too.......sigh....

[Details]

I wonder if it is really just for a week...

In a week, there's the competency hearing, right? Sounds like everyone knows that the two experts agree, the kid is not competent (no shock there) - so that would make the outcome of the hearing pretty near a foregone conclusion. So - give him this week, since they know they won't be keeping him, in a week, he'll be ruled not competent, and fully released.

Hopefully following that, we can get some nice information out, to establish who really did it.


Oh, and for the radio host - yep, you can put this kid in the school with my daughter anytime. Because there's nothing saying he did it - no ballistics, no nothing. And because I do believe Eryn will not be leaving guns all around the house that no child should have unrestricted access to. I wouldn't trust any child under 18 with a gun, unsupervised!

[rusure?]

Disgusted by local talk radio here. KTAR...specifically Darrel ANKARLO a local talk radio personality. This was his tag line into the next topic this morning...
"9 year old WHACKS two men...would you want this kid going to school with your kid"
KTAR is one of two local media outlets that is allowed to be actually in the court!
I think he might have had some callers or been corrected because he corrected himself and said "allegedly" after a few minutes.
Anyway, found out the furlough was only for a week...not sure how I fell about that. How hard it must be to tell him "okay you have to go back now" I don't know which is more difficult. They are really messing with this kids head!!!!

Surely the evidence would have been looked at more closely and then the boy can be exhonerated by then.

[shelby77]

I wonder if it is really just for a week...

In a week, there's the competency hearing, right? Sounds like everyone knows that the two experts agree, the kid is not competent (no shock there) - so that would make the outcome of the hearing pretty near a foregone conclusion. So - give him this week, since they know they won't be keeping him, in a week, he'll be ruled not competent, and fully released.

Hopefully following that, we can get some nice information out, to establish who really did it.


Oh, and for the radio host - yep, you can put this kid in the school with my daughter anytime. Because there's nothing saying he did it - no ballistics, no nothing. And because I do believe Eryn will not be leaving guns all around the house that no child should have unrestricted access to. I wouldn't trust any child under 18 with a gun, unsupervised!


I posted a link to an article at the bottom of the previous page that discussed the fulough only lasting a week, and Tanya's reaction to that...someone from juvie called to let her know, I'm thinking that is how we found out..........

[Details]

I posted a link to an article at the bottom of the previous page that discussed the fulough only lasting a week, and Tanya's reaction to that...someone from juvie called to let her know, I'm thinking that is how we found out..........Could well be. I'm glad they let the victims families know - they should always know - suspect or not, no matter how much we think the kid is innocent, they should always have the right to know what is going on.

Even if this case is really nothing like the tragedies that spawned those laws - the cases where the suspect is let out, and goes after his victims again. Really no way an 8 year old could do that. But for this bit, I think sticking to the principle works out.

[emdragon]

I agree with you. Eight year old killers are pretty rare add to that the premeditation and two grown men....it's frightening.

I don't believe it took much skill at all, just a murderous, cold heart intent on killing. Once the men were taken by surprise & incapacitated, which IMO happened quickly...the skill required was minimal.

Loading and ejecting and aiming was the easy part.

Pulling the trigger 10 times took ZERO skill but the most depraved of hearts.

So if these men had died by stabbing and the boy was still the only one there but had no blood on him and after police intervention confessed to doing it would you still find it the least bit plausable that the boy was really the killer?

[GentleBreeze]

So if these men had died by stabbing and the boy was still the only one there but had no blood on him and after police intervention confessed to doing it would you still find it the least bit plausible that the boy was really the killer?


I am not Linda but I do not think he would have been a match for either of them, in hand to hand combat, but that is not what happened in the case here.

They had no weapon and no one would even bring a knife to fight someone who had a gun in their hands.

imoo

[rusure?]

I am not Linda but I do not think he would have been a match for either of them, in hand to hand combat, but that is not what happened in the case here.

They had no weapon and no one would even bring a knife to fight someone who had a gun in their hands.

imoo

But no one knew if these men would have a gun in their hands.

[rusure?]

Could well be. I'm glad they let the victims families know - they should always know - suspect or not, no matter how much we think the kid is innocent, they should always have the right to know what is going on.

Even if this case is really nothing like the tragedies that spawned those laws - the cases where the suspect is let out, and goes after his victims again. Really no way an 8 year old could do that. But for this bit, I think sticking to the principle works out.

I believe that's why it's a law, IMO.

[Details]

I believe that's why it's a law, IMO.Yeah, I know. The way I see it, it doesn't entirely apply here - the boy can't drive over there, won't have access to a gun, so there's no reason to fear for their safety - in this case.

But at the same time, telling them won't significantly impact his safety (there's of course always a risk when you tell a victim's family - any victim's family, of vigilante justice - but not enough of a risk to outweigh their right to know), so there's no reason to make an exception here.


It's just always an interesting and delicate balancing act - the rights of the accused (who may well be innocent - but most often is not) versus the rights of the victims.

[Jacobtk]

One day I hope you realize that family members do not have to give mercy and grace to the very ones that have shattered their lives.

I hope you realize that works both ways and if the boy is innocent neither he or his mother have to give mercy and grace to the very ones (the police, the DA, the Romans) who have shattered their lives.

[dgfred]

But no one knew if these men would have a gun in their hands.

CR probably planned for just such a situation...?

OK, so is it right that the boy did the shooting, picked up any dropped shells, got rid of them and the right gun, and went over to the neighbors to say he just 'found' them dead? Is that what some think?

In the interrogation tape does the boy say after he saw the white car (with no rims) he walked up on Tim first and he was shot? Then went into the house to find his dad?

[Details]

And apparently he somehow made sure there were just enough shells for the job - they didn't find any 22 shells - nothing. How does that happen? There just happened to be 11 22 shells sitting somewhere (apparently not in a 22 shell box - no listing of one of those found)?


Or ... hmm - in some one of the many suspects houses, there may be a few boxes of 22 shells waiting to be found...

Seriously - where did the boy get the shells? Apparently it was the one form of ammunition they didn't have laying all over the place.

[rusure?]

Yeah, I know. The way I see it, it doesn't entirely apply here - the boy can't drive over there, won't have access to a gun, so there's no reason to fear for their safety - in this case.

But at the same time, telling them won't significantly impact his safety (there's of course always a risk when you tell a victim's family - any victim's family, of vigilante justice - but not enough of a risk to outweigh their right to know), so there's no reason to make an exception here.


It's just always an interesting and delicate balancing act - the rights of the accused (who may well be innocent - but most often is not) versus the rights of the victims.

I agree. Stuck between a rock and a hard place.

[rusure?]

CR probably planned for just such a situation...?

OK, so is it right that the boy did the shooting, picked up any dropped shells, got rid of them and the right gun, and went over to the neighbors to say he just 'found' them dead? Is that what some think?

In the interrogation tape does the boy say after he saw the white car (with no rims) he walked up on Tim first and he was shot? Then went into the house to find his dad?

I don't think so. I'll go back and reread it if you want me to. My memory is not what it used to be.

[dgfred]

What is the mentioned trouble they had at work?

Does anyone think the money might have been for a drug deal gone bad, and the suspect(s) didn't have time to grab the money?

Just a few phone records, a ballistic report, or a couple of other pieces of info and believe we might be able to figure this out on our own!!! What do y'all think?

[rusure?]

And apparently he somehow made sure there were just enough shells for the job - they didn't find any 22 shells - nothing. How does that happen? There just happened to be 11 22 shells sitting somewhere (apparently not in a 22 shell box - no listing of one of those found)?


Or ... hmm - in some one of the many suspects houses, there may be a few boxes of 22 shells waiting to be found...

Seriously - where did the boy get the shells? Apparently it was the one form of ammunition they didn't have laying all over the place.

I think they said the 22's were in the .17 box. But Rodriguez didn't open the box, but marked on the evidence sheet box of 22's.

[dgfred]

I don't think so. I'll go back and reread it if you want me to. My memory is not what it used to be.

So he found his dad first then??? What memory? I forgot what I asked? :biggrin:

[rusure?]

What is the mentioned trouble they had at work?

Does anyone think the money might have been for a drug deal gone bad, and the suspect(s) didn't have time to grab the money?

Just a few phone records, a ballistic report, or a couple of other pieces of info and believe we might be able to figure this out on our own!!! What do y'all think?

You know where we could lay hands on that?

[Details]

I think they said the 22's were in the .17 box. But Rodriguez didn't open the box, but marked on the evidence sheet box of 22's.Nope - we've discussed that box a few times, and as I recall, that .17 box was quite simply not catalogued - there's nothing saying what it was. It was taken - but that's no surprise since .17 ammunition can be used in a .22 (as I recall). However, the men were not shot with .17 shells.

[rusure?]

So he found his dad first then??? What memory? I forgot what I asked? :biggrin:

I don't rightly remember. I'll have to go back and reread it. It was like sixty some odd pages. Too much stress has an effect on ones memory. Hey, maybe Tanya didn't remember correctly the voice she heard or that Tim said it was the boy? She was under a great deal of stress.

[rusure?]

Nope - we've discussed that box a few times, and as I recall, that .17 box was quite simply not catalogued - there's nothing saying what it was. It was taken - but that's no surprise since .17 ammunition can be used in a .22 (as I recall). However, the men were not shot with .17 shells.

Oh. That's right. On the evidence box it did say .17 box of 22's, just says box of .22's. Sorry, I forgot.

[Jacobtk]

If there was no evidence against this boy he would do just that and that would be the end of it. And if there is no evidence then why isn't Wood clamoring to file a motion to dismiss. Even doing it repeatedly like he is known to do on other issues?

As I explained before, questions about the evidence are a matter for the jury/bench trial judge to decide. This is basic law. The judge would not dismiss the case unless there was literally no evidence at all. At this point, the state has casings, a suspected murder weapon, gunpowder residue, a fingerprint on a box of bullets and incriminating statements the state absolutely plans to use despite the claim that they will not. While that is a highly circumstantial case, the judge would not dismiss it. Again, this is basic law.

He couldn't come out that entry door knowing that Tim was sitting there in his truck and would most likely see him run out of the home. He knew that Tim once off the phone would be coming inside that home and he would see his dead friend in a pool of blood on the stairway.

In order for the boy to get outside he would have to walk past where Tim was. There is no way that Tim could not have seen the boy coming out of the house and certainly not have heard the shots with just a screen blocking the sound. Likewise, it makes no sense for Tim to run towards the house, particularly if he had just gotten out of his truck. The scene implies that Tim was already out of the truck and was likely shot while trying to run for cover. He was not trapped by any means. This would explain Vincent heading upstairs, presumably to his room for his gun. It seems unlikely that he would not try to talk his son out of shooting him.

[dgfred]

Since Day 1 has there been anymore mentioned of the 'missing' rifle?

[Jacobtk]

Since Day 1 has there been anymore mentioned of the 'missing' rifle?

No. There has been no mention of the Mossberg or Tiffany's rifle, both of which use .22 caliber rounds.

[dgfred]

Dang, gag orders ought to be outlawed for freaks like us!

[rusure?]

Pardon me if you guys have already discussed this.
Do we know size bullet was shot into Tim's truck by his cousin (if it was his cousin)? Does this person have access to Tim's mother's car which resembles the car seen by the boy. How tall was this person since it not likely a 4 foot tall boy could have shot Tim in the chest in a downward trajectory twice so close together?

[Jacobtk]

Dang, gag orders ought to be outlawed for freaks like us!

One would think they would be mentioned in the police reports, but they are not mentioned there either. I think that shows that not much of any actual investigation went on. The police proposed the notion that the boy was the shooter and simply looked for ways to bolster their case, including forcing a confession out of him.

That is, of course, typical police procedure, including convincing the victim's family that they have the right suspect. The concern is less that they have the right person and more that they have a person. I highly doubt that they actually looked at any other suspects, unless there are reports they did not release to the public.

[Jacobtk]

Do we know size bullet was shot into Tim's truck by his cousin (if it was his cousin)? Does this person have access to Tim's mother's car which resembles the car seen by the boy. How tall was this person since it not likely a 4 foot tall boy could have shot Tim in the chest in a downward trajectory twice so close together?

I do not recall off hand the exact size, but it was not made by a .22 bullet.

I think the trajectory is one of the issues the state might have with its report. Vincent could plausibly have been shot by the boy because he was shot going up the stairs. The state would need to explain why the boy would climb over his father to shoot in him the shoulder, but that is a separate issue. It is not plausible that the boy shot Tim give the way the man was shot. The boy would have had to stand on something to be able to achieve the angle of those shots. If Tim knelt down, that would be evident on his knees and in the environment around him from him turning to fall on his chest in the doorway.

I think the greater issue for the state may be contamination of the evidence due to the way it was handled. I honestly cannot understand why the state would not release its findings or its competency results unless they were not entirely in their favor. The defense, of course, is restricted by the gag order, so they cannot release anything that is not first filed to the court.

[freddief]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts here!

These 11 arguments can be argued the opposite way as well...
Why doesnt the boy's profile fit the crime? What 8 year old profiles do we have about a boy killing his dad? The police hadnt done 1/10th of their interviews when this was released. Even if he was a "good boy". Many good kids do terrible things.
Why can't 10 shots be made from a rifle, especially from a boy who has hunting experience. TR was on the phone in his truck concentrating oh his phone call with his wife. So EVERYBODY doesnt know because I believe a boy can fire 10 shots. Why can't two shots be close to each other? He had almost 2 hours to prepare, why couldn't he be waiting and ambush his dad. He didnt have to ambush 2 people at the same time. After all one was dead inside, 1 outside. If his stepmother was there he could have shot all three. How do we know that VR wasnt his only target and in the moment he decide to kill the other. Why not run from help, to try to put the blame on someone else? You're right the boy's story was uncharacteristic and so he finally admitted to doing it. Time line was perfect for the boy he had almost 2 hours to wait for his dad and prepare. After all he knew when his dad gets home. Shell casings could be anywhere if a victim is running or the shooter is being chased. Of couse ther could be a downward angle on some of the shots as tr was laying on the ground in front of the house. 2nd or 3rd shots could be shot down at the victim on the ground. 22 shells dont make much powder or the boy could have changed. So all these arguments to me are not good arguments. You could argue anything. Aliens could have done it, but not likely. None of your points convince me.


Arguments you propose:

1)The first thing we have is the gunpowder residue test said there is next to nothing on the boy's clothing. IF he had committed this crime by shooting two men 10 times, combined, there would be tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of GPR particles on his clothing. There just wasn't enough found to say he even shot the gun once. There was only enough to say he could have picked it up by transfer or from a previous hunting expedition with a follow up of the clothes being washed or from simply living in a home of avid hunters. There HAD to be a HUGE amount of GPR on his clothes and it just was not there.

2) Downward angle of TR's chest injuries suggesting the shooter MAY have been taller than TR. Only other explanation is TR was hunched over/kneeling, etc.

3) Shell casings at top of stairs. Shell casings at bottom of stairs.
Head shot to front of VR's hard hat when his head is at top of stairs.
Arm shot in through just above elbow out at bicep into clothing near ribs= upward angle indicating shooter was at bottom of stairs (per expert's opinion).
Above and below? In front of and behind?

4) Time line is questionable for one person (adult or child) to have success.

5) Boys statements uncharacteristic for cover up stories of an 8 year old's capacity.

For example: "I was thinking, 'What the heck is going on?'" , "'Who did this? Why would anyone do this?" and "...I checked to see if he (Dad) was a little bit alive..." and He, repeatedly, told the police over and over again about a solid WHITE, SMALL CAR that "looked like Grandpa's car only it didn't have any rims"..."going very fast away from the house" as he had been walking home. He was fixated on this car and told the police he saw someone coming from the car going into the house and then the car speeding down the road as he approached the house where he then found Romans "lying there" and then, calling "Dad! Dad!, ran into the house and found his father "upstairs...with blood all over his face". He told police "and I saw the blood and then I cried for like 30 mins just crying right next to him."..."I ran to a girl's house I know...and I talked to her brother and told him 'My dad is dead and I told him Tim is dead."
AND
"Why would I shoot Tim?!" he, SHOCKINGLY, asked the police interrogators when they suggested he had. When the police SUGGESTED he shot his dad, he responded, "HUH?!" "Shot who?"
AND
When asked how did you know Tim's truck was there? the boy responded "because I could see it through (name)'s trees."
AND
"I was worried the bad guys were going to come back"

6)WHY WOULD THE LITTLE BOY THEN RUN FOR HELP?!

7)If the police are to be believed that his motive was to end the spankings or because he had been spanked then WHY WOULDN'T HE HAVE SHOT THE STEPMOTHER & FATHER NOT FATHER AND TENANT?!

8) What 8 year old would be able to even stand to WAIT with a loaded rifle just waiting for the men to walk through the door?! Do you know of any 8 yr olds who would be able to (with a loaded .22 caliber rifle), just sit there and wait for someone to come home to shoot them?

9) Two gunshots to TR's chest too close together to have come from a single shot weapon, IMO.

10) 10 shots with single shot rifle... EVERYBODY knows this fact is too unusual for belief.

11) boy's profile of a good kid before and after does not fit the crime

[dgfred]

The boy said when he got home he saw the car speeding away and when he got to the house he saw Tim lying on the porch, went into the house (accidentally hitting his head on the way in) went upstairs and found his dad.

Didn't he mention seeing someone going in (or was it out?) the house?

I wish we knew about the locked or unlocked back door and the trailer in back.

[GentleBreeze]

quoted from 2 of your posts:


Post 299: “Being wrong isn't as big a deal to me as it sure seems to be for others on message board.”

Post 309: “Me either. I sure didn't see any personal apologies given to Mark or Archie Lunsford. Sure didn't see any given to Steve Greone or Dan Horowitz or Jennifer Wilbanks fiancé, when they were all accused of being murderers by the majority of posters here, when they weren't.”

Is this the same as what your just posted? Maybe its not against TOS. That seems like what you are speaking about. Can you explain the difference for me. I want to make sure I understand TOS correctly.
Thanks.

Those were in response to two posts.

1. Originally Posted by IAMME
"Thank God!! I cant wait til the evidence is released and we get to witness some crow-eating.....Wonder if any arrests will be made today......."

2, Originally Posted by IAMME

"linda and gentlebreeze-

Both of you have said that you will admit if you are wrong.....Will you both give an apology? Not to other posters on this board, but to the boy and his mother......Just wondering......When the evidence is released of course...."

imo

[Hawk]

Well if they were just stopping in, wonder how CR knew this and planned accordingly??? Did they always stop at home after work? Just dad usually? Very curious to me the timing and the way this all happened.

How could anyone else?

[Hawk]

No we have only been saying that the loading, shooting, ejecting, reloading with spare shells in the hand or pocket over and over would be very difficult for a 8yr old under at least a little bit of stress. Much
more stress in shooting your own dad with head shots I would guess.

*I have almost the exact kind of 22 Rifle (bolt action) I am an experienced shooter and it IS difficult to continuous fire while moving, keeping extras in pocket or hand, and reloading... you have to place each cartridge into firing position. I really wish you could give it a try with ANY single shot bolt-action rifle, not just a 22.

Reloading a bolt action single shot rifle is easier with small hands. Little fingers handle the ammunition better. And faster.

[IAMME]

How could anyone else?


Both widows talked to their husbands....And VRs FIL...and whoever's house they were going to would also know.

[dgfred]

How could anyone else?

Co-workers would know, probably significant others too.
I was just noting that I didn't think CR would have planned this anyway. Someone else would have been prepared for many scenarios probably, especially if it was drug related or lady related.

[Hawk]

Both widows talked to their husbands....And VRs FIL...and whoever's house they were going to would also know.

No one knew exactly where anyone else would be that day.

[dgfred]

Reloading a bolt action single shot rifle is easier with small hands. Little fingers handle the ammunition better. And faster.

Maybe, but not 10+ times in a row with high stress levels... plus holding the other shells in a pocket or hand adds more difficulty. Just walking while doing it makes even harder.

[rusure?]

Arguments you propose:

1)The first thing we have is the gunpowder residue test said there is next to nothing on the boy's clothing. IF he had committed this crime by shooting two men 10 times, combined, there would be tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands of GPR particles on his clothing. There just wasn't enough found to say he even shot the gun once. There was only enough to say he could have picked it up by transfer or from a previous hunting expedition with a follow up of the clothes being washed or from simply living in a home of avid hunters. There HAD to be a HUGE amount of GPR on his clothes and it just was not there.

2) Downward angle of TR's chest injuries suggesting the shooter MAY have been taller than TR. Only other explanation is TR was hunched over/kneeling, etc.

3) Shell casings at top of stairs. Shell casings at bottom of stairs.
Head shot to front of VR's hard hat when his head is at top of stairs.
Arm shot in through just above elbow out at bicep into clothing near ribs= upward angle indicating shooter was at bottom of stairs (per expert's opinion).
Above and below? In front of and behind?

4) Time line is questionable for one person (adult or child) to have success.

5) Boys statements uncharacteristic for cover up stories of an 8 year old's capacity.

For example: "I was thinking, 'What the heck is going on?'" , "'Who did this? Why would anyone do this?" and "...I checked to see if he (Dad) was a little bit alive..." and He, repeatedly, told the police over and over again about a solid WHITE, SMALL CAR that "looked like Grandpa's car only it didn't have any rims"..."going very fast away from the house" as he had been walking home. He was fixated on this car and told the police he saw someone coming from the car going into the house and then the car speeding down the road as he approached the house where he then found Romans "lying there" and then, calling "Dad! Dad!, ran into the house and found his father "upstairs...with blood all over his face". He told police "and I saw the blood and then I cried for like 30 mins just crying right next to him."..."I ran to a girl's house I know...and I talked to her brother and told him 'My dad is dead and I told him Tim is dead."
AND
"Why would I shoot Tim?!" he, SHOCKINGLY, asked the police interrogators when they suggested he had. When the police SUGGESTED he shot his dad, he responded, "HUH?!" "Shot who?"
AND
When asked how did you know Tim's truck was there? the boy responded "because I could see it through (name)'s trees."
AND
"I was worried the bad guys were going to come back"

6)WHY WOULD THE LITTLE BOY THEN RUN FOR HELP?!

7)If the police are to be believed that his motive was to end the spankings or because he had been spanked then WHY WOULDN'T HE HAVE SHOT THE STEPMOTHER & FATHER NOT FATHER AND TENANT?!

8) What 8 year old would be able to even stand to WAIT with a loaded rifle just waiting for the men to walk through the door?! Do you know of any 8 yr olds who would be able to (with a loaded .22 caliber rifle), just sit there and wait for someone to come home to shoot them?

9) Two gunshots to TR's chest too close together to have come from a single shot weapon, IMO.

10) 10 shots with single shot rifle... EVERYBODY knows this fact is too unusual for belief.

11) boy's profile of a good kid before and after does not fit the crime

These are valid arguments.

I had another theory. 3 shooters. Vincent goes in house while one person is upstairs looking for something. Another is downstairs looking for something in a room next to the stairs. Vincent does not see either. Person downstairs shoots, on the third stair, Vincent in the arm.
Vincent turns to see who shot him and the shooter is on the 4th stair and shoots Vincent in the left side of the head. Vincent falls on the landing and yells out very loud. Tim hears him and tells wife something is wrong, I gotta go. The person upstairs shoots Vincent in the top of his head and in the shoulder which causes the downward trajectory.

Tim hears Vincent. Tells wife something is going on, I gotta go.
Tim is already in the driveway and someone in the white car stops and shoots Tim in the arm. Person downstairs comes out and shoots Tim twice in the chest. Person from car who shot Tim in the arm runs into house to tell person upstairs they had to get outa there. Any of the 3 or two of them shot Tim once in head and one shoots aiming at his head but just grazes his head and makes the hole in the security door. The boy just arrives at home as the car is driving away really fast.

IMO

[Hawk]

Co-workers would know, probably significant others too.
I was just noting that I didn't think CR would have planned this anyway. Someone else would have been prepared for many scenarios probably, especially if it was drug related or lady related.

This argument has been done over and over.
If ANYONE, other than the accused, or a random thief, wanted these men dead they would have been killed along the road, at the bar, at the gas station, sniped from the roadway corner, bomb thrown through the door, etc.. The killer would have used a weapon with quicker finality than a .22.
The residence would be the last choice for murder.

Small bore 'Hit-Man' type weapons are used in close proximity (18" or less) to the victim and in populated areas (restrooms in public places, parks after dark, etc.).
This case lacks evidence of that occurring.

[dgfred]

This argument has been done over and over.
If ANYONE, other than the accused, or a random thief, wanted these men dead they would have been killed along the road, at the bar, at the gas station, sniped from the roadway corner, bomb thrown through the door, etc.. The killer would have used a weapon with quicker finality than a .22.
The residence would be the last choice for murder.

Small bore 'Hit-Man' type weapons are used in close proximity (18" or less) to the victim and in populated areas (restrooms in public places, parks after dark, etc.).
This case lacks evidence of that occurring.

So you are saying this is definately either the boy or a random burgler that did this??? Interesting.

In my opinion, multiple shooters with auto 22s could handle the situation quite adequatly in the home,
and did.

[rusure?]

So you are saying this is definately either the boy or a random burgler that did this??? Interesting.

In my opinion, multiple shooters with auto 22s could handle the situation quite adequatly in the home,
and did.

I agree. See my post above.

[bkwits]

This argument has been done over and over.
If ANYONE, other than the accused, or a random thief, wanted these men dead they would have been killed along the road, at the bar, at the gas station, sniped from the roadway corner, bomb thrown through the door, etc.. The killer would have used a weapon with quicker finality than a .22.
The residence would be the last choice for murder.

Small bore 'Hit-Man' type weapons are used in close proximity (18" or less) to the victim and in populated areas (restrooms in public places, parks after dark, etc.).
This case lacks evidence of that occurring.

Aren't people often killed in their homes by others who know them but don't live there. It happens all of the time.

How does one kill someone "along the road" in a small town without drawing attention? Do they shoot from their own car? Do they force them off the road, and then shoot them? I really don't hear of that very often.

IMO

[Hawk]

So you are saying this is definately either the boy or a random burgler that did this??? Interesting.

In my opinion, multiple shooters with auto 22s could handle the situation quite adequatly in the home.

For someone to plan to implicate the boy by sneaking into the house unnoticed, using the Chipmunk to murder these two men, then slinking into the daylight and disappearing, they would have to be the luckiest killer(s) of all time.
It doesn't fit!

[Details]

This argument has been done over and over.
If ANYONE, other than the accused, or a random thief, wanted these men dead they would have been killed along the road, at the bar, at the gas station, sniped from the roadway corner, bomb thrown through the door, etc.. The killer would have used a weapon with quicker finality than a .22.
The residence would be the last choice for murder.

Small bore 'Hit-Man' type weapons are used in close proximity (18" or less) to the victim and in populated areas (restrooms in public places, parks after dark, etc.).
This case lacks evidence of that occurring.Along the road - difficult - the two men would have a 2 ton weapon in their hands, not to mention the guns Tim was known to have in the car. Bad spot for anyone to try to kill them. At the bar - worse - public, with a bunch of other people around, coming, going, very uncontrolled scene. Bombs - not so easy as fiction would have it to make, a rare method for anyone to use to kill someone else. If you think that's so easy - why are so very few killed with bombs? Sniped - hard to hide out, and this is not such a large place. Nor is it as easy as it is made out to hit two people in a car - lots of metal protecting most angles, the fact that the car moves very fast makes it near impossible.

And people have posted - a 22 is in fact a common weapon used to kill someone because of how a smaller bullet can actually cause more widely spread damage, IIRC it was one of your own links talking about how being shot by one of those was like 3 gunshots all at once.

[Cherishlove]

I wonder if it is really just for a week...

In a week, there's the competency hearing, right? Sounds like everyone knows that the two experts agree, the kid is not competent (no shock there) - so that would make the outcome of the hearing pretty near a foregone conclusion. So - give him this week, since they know they won't be keeping him, in a week, he'll be ruled not competent, and fully released.

Hopefully following that, we can get some nice information out, to establish who really did it.


Oh, and for the radio host - yep, you can put this kid in the school with my daughter anytime. Because there's nothing saying he did it - no ballistics, no nothing. And because I do believe Eryn will not be leaving guns all around the house that no child should have unrestricted access to. I wouldn't trust any child under 18 with a gun, unsupervised!
Me too he's a little boy - I wish my son and I could help him right now, that Host has a serious problem, it's too bad that people on the radio/media act like that? He's probably some young inmature guy that should be fired for saying such a horrible thing on the radio.

[Hawk]

Aren't people often killed in their homes by others who know them but don't live there. It happens all of the time.

How does one kill someone "along the road" in a small town without drawing attention? Do they shoot from their own car? Do they force them off the road, and then shoot them? I really don't hear of that very often.

IMO

How did two young men get murdered and no one noticed?

This is an isolated area. Shooting at the bar or on the road would be easy.
There's only two roads leading out of town.

[Hawk]

Along the road - difficult - the two men would have a 2 ton weapon in their hands, not to mention the guns Tim was known to have in the car. Bad spot for anyone to try to kill them. At the bar - worse - public, with a bunch of other people around, coming, going, very uncontrolled scene. Bombs - not so easy as fiction would have it to make, a rare method for anyone to use to kill someone else. If you think that's so easy - why are so very few killed with bombs? Sniped - hard to hide out, and this is not such a large place. Nor is it as easy as it is made out to hit two people in a car - lots of metal protecting most angles, the fact that the car moves very fast makes it near impossible.

And people have posted - a 22 is in fact a common weapon used to kill someone because of how a smaller bullet can actually cause more widely spread damage, IIRC it was one of your own links talking about how being shot by one of those was like 3 gunshots all at once.

Late night in the middle of nowhere is the perfect place to do away with someone who has been drinking.

Speak from life experiences sometime rather than website viewings. It might do you good.

[Details]

For someone to plan to implicate the boy by sneaking into the house unnoticed, using the Chipmunk to murder these two men, then slinking into the daylight and disappearing, they would have to be the luckiest killer(s) of all time.
It doesn't fit!Who says this was all that planned? And by the way - the "luckiest killer of all time" bit is used in a bunch of cases - it was used in the Stephanie Crowe case, about how improbable it would be that this mentally handicapped homeless guy would be able to sneak into a stranger's house, silently kill a little girl, and leave without leaving any evidence of his presence or entry. Guess what - he did. No planning, just a bit of luck, that has to happen to someone!

I doubt the killer(s) planned anything about implicating anyone else. I also doubt they used the Chipmunk. But if they did - it was just a convenient weapon, and a way not to get their weapons on the police grid (use your own weapon, and then you've got trouble, if it's ever tested, it'll match back to the murder. Dispose of it, might be found, keep it, you might be searched - there is no good answer for you). But no special planning is needed.

They know when Tim gets off, so they've got an idea of when he gets home. From outside or inside, the two men are ambushed, killed. Pretty simple. Drive off, all done. No special luck required. No thought of framing the boy needed. The happenstance that the wife mentions the boy - there are several possible reasons for that. An 8 year old confessing - no shock there - I'd bet 90% would also confess. A 22 being used when the boy's gun is a 22 - not really all that odd, it's a common size.

And all kinds of crimes happen in daylight. No reason to expect this one to be noticed any more than all the others are.

[Hawk]

Who says this was all that planned? And by the way - the "luckiest killer of all time" bit is used in a bunch of cases - it was used in the Stephanie Crowe case, about how improbable it would be that this mentally handicapped homeless guy would be able to sneak into a stranger's house, silently kill a little girl, and leave without leaving any evidence of his presence or entry. Guess what - he did. No planning, just a bit of luck, that has to happen to someone!

I doubt the killer(s) planned anything about implicating anyone else. I also doubt they used the Chipmunk. But if they did - it was just a convenient weapon, and a way not to get their weapons on the police grid (use your own weapon, and then you've got trouble, if it's ever tested, it'll match back to the murder. Dispose of it, might be found, keep it, you might be searched - there is no good answer for you). But no special planning is needed.

They know when Tim gets off, so they've got an idea of when he gets home. From outside or inside, the two men are ambushed, killed. Pretty simple. Drive off, all done. No special luck required. No thought of framing the boy needed. The happenstance that the wife mentions the boy - there are several possible reasons for that. An 8 year old confessing - no shock there - I'd bet 90% would also confess. A 22 being used when the boy's gun is a 22 - not really all that odd, it's a common size.

And all kinds of crimes happen in daylight. No reason to expect this one to be noticed any more than all the others are.

If it wasn't planned the killer was certainly prepared!

[Details]

Late night in the middle of nowhere is the perfect place to do away with someone who has been drinking.

Speak from life experiences sometime rather than website viewings. It might do you good.Getting personal, IMO, is always an indication of a weak argument. Oh, and unless we've wandered someplace very dark, neither you nor I nor anyone else here likely has any experience with murdering people.

Someone drinking in a bar - an easy target - but again, uncontrolled environments. People come and go from the bar - you get ready to kill them, but then someone else walks out, drives up, etc. Too easy to be seen. And you don't know when they'll come out. Which makes it hard to have much of an alibi when you need to sit outside a bar all night, waiting, maybe being noticed.

And what's this "middle of nowhere" stuff? It's a small town, there is no "middle of nowhere" - there's the bar, normal roads to and from.


Not that I think there was much thought - just that they knew when they got home, and that'd be an easy time. Guns in the house, guns in the truck - inbetween the two is a good time to get them.

[Details]

If it wasn't planned the killer was certainly prepared!How? This really doesn't take that much.

Grab the gun, come up when they get home, shoot one, shoot the other, check the house, finish them off, go to your car, drive away. All done. The rest is just what happened randomly. Had it happened when the boy happened to be home, he'd be dead. Had it happened that Tim was sick that day, we'd be talking as if that was a part of the plan.

There's really no preparation needed. Most anyone around the two men could tell you what time they got home each day. That's all that the killler(s) needed.


Might be they prepared even less - go, break into the house - maybe you have a key - pick up this handy little mossburg, load it up, wait for them to get home.

[bkwits]

How did two young men get murdered and no one noticed?

This is an isolated area. Shooting at the bar or on the road would be easy.
There's only two roads leading out of town.

I may be dense, but I don't quite understand your argument. Who do you mean by two men getting murdered and no one noticed?

If the shooter or shooters were after both men, they would prob have to do it when coming home from work.

At the bar? Wouldn't someone have noticed something? If it was from arguments at the bar, doing it there would definitely point to the shooter from there.

The small town is my point. Their work is minutes from their home. Where is there a good opportunity to ambush and kill them. Please tell me. I am curious.

[Hawk]

Getting personal, IMO, is always an indication of a weak argument.

Someone drinking in a bar - an easy target - but again, uncontrolled environments. People come and go from the bar - you get ready to kill them, but then someone else walks out, drives up, etc. Too easy to be seen. And you don't know when they'll come out. Which makes it hard to have much of an alibi when you need to sit outside a bar all night, waiting, maybe being noticed.

And what's this "middle of nowhere" stuff? It's a small town, there is no "middle of nowhere" - there's the bar, normal roads to and from.


Not that I think there was much thought - just that they knew when they got home, and that'd be an easy time. Guns in the house, guns in the truck - inbetween the two is a good time to get them.

I apologize. I did not mean a personal reference. Guess I was relying on my own.
When you envision Apache county AZ. please look at how remote it is. It isn't a metropolitan area.

[rusure?]

Getting personal, IMO, is always an indication of a weak argument.

Someone drinking in a bar - an easy target - but again, uncontrolled environments. People come and go from the bar - you get ready to kill them, but then someone else walks out, drives up, etc. Too easy to be seen. And you don't know when they'll come out. Which makes it hard to have much of an alibi when you need to sit outside a bar all night, waiting, maybe being noticed.

And what's this "middle of nowhere" stuff? It's a small town, there is no "middle of nowhere" - there's the bar, normal roads to and from.


Not that I think there was much thought - just that they knew when they got home, and that'd be an easy time. Guns in the house, guns in the truck - inbetween the two is a good time to get them.

I would think it was safer for the shooters to do it where they did. People weren't home from work yet, iirc. In fact they may have not expected the men to come home when they did. The front door apparently was left unlocked often. They may have been looking for something in the house and were surprised themselves when the guys came home early unexpectedly.

[bkwits]

How? This really doesn't take that much.

Grab the gun, come up when they get home, shoot one, shoot the other, check the house, finish them off, go to your car, drive away. All done. The rest is just what happened randomly. Had it happened when the boy happened to be home, he'd be dead. Had it happened that Tim was sick that day, we'd be talking as if that was a part of the plan.

There's really no preparation needed. Most anyone around the two men could tell you what time they got home each day. That's all that the killler(s) needed.


Might be they prepared even less - go, break into the house - maybe you have a key - pick up this handy little mossburg, load it up, wait for them to get home.

I don't think the front door was locked during the day. IMO

[mrrogers]

Maybe, but not 10+ times in a row with high stress levels... plus holding the other shells in a pocket or hand adds more difficulty. Just walking while doing it makes even harder.

if hed shot a gun his clothes would have had thousands of gsr particles
not just 36-60 that they found whoever alnalyzed it called it insitgnificant

[rusure?]

I thought the competency hearing was rescheduled until the 13th of February?

You are correct. Hopefully they won't need it. The boy will be shown innocent.

[Details]

I apologize. I did not mean a personal reference. Guess I was relying on my own.
When you envision Apache county AZ. please look at how remote it is. It isn't a metropolitan area.Thanks.

But I do have experience in large and quite small towns (my grandparents live in a very small one - we drive to another town for groceries!), and I've been to many others, including some of those in Arizona). This one isn't that small. I know what much of Arizona is like - but the smaller the town, the closer together everything is - as is exemplified by how close they were to work, how close the boy's father who called 911 was to home, etc. There's no reason to think this is long desolate remote roads. It's a small town.

And I'm still not seeing how a desolate road helps a prospective murderer any. They don't get seen - maybe - if it's a road to some oddly isolated bar, then you can expect, just like the bar parking lot, cars driving to and from it. Too hard to hit the cars as they drive, and your 'victim' is sitting in a 2 ton weapon that has two guns in it, protected by a bunch of metal, with a cell phone! Talk about the worst place possible! Tim ducks, and he's nearly invulnerable, pulls out his own gun, and shoots back. Really not the place.

[mrrogers]

No one said every, I know I certainly didn't.

Being angry at parents is often the motive when a child kills a parent.

Apparently in this case, anger was the motive. The boy said as much.

Most every other 8 year old on the planet knows killing is wrong and they don't do it. If 8 year olds didn't understand this, then you're right, there wouldn't be any parents.

imo

your using conclusions from acooerced confession. its a moot point
besides that,both the state and the defenses phsychologists say hes incompentent to stand trial
this interrogation is null void and illegal also :smile:

[bkwits]

In all honesty, would you want him going to school with your children? I sure wouldn't


With all due respect Linda, would you give this question a rest. You must have asked it 20 times. It has no bearing on this child's case. IMO

[Details]

With all due respect Linda, would you give this question a rest. You must have asked it 20 times. It has no bearing on this child's case. IMOAnd it's been answered by many.

[Cherishlove]

In all honesty, would you want him going to school with your children? I sure wouldn'tYes I would want him to go to school with my children but it's people like you that judge so quick and would probably tell your child something bad about him and then they would be mean to him.

[Hawk]

I would think it was safer for the shooters to do it where they did. People weren't home from work yet, iirc. In fact they may have not expected the men to come home when they did. The front door apparently was left unlocked often. They may have been looking for something in the house and were surprised themselves when the guys came home early unexpectedly.

They came home everyday at that time. If there was a question about time of arrival all a potential thief, murderer, or drug addict would have to do is call the plant.

[rusure?]

Seriously? Now you have THREE men and not a single one left any evidence behind, not only that...they used the boys gun....and went out of their way to frame a boy?

3 men is more plausable than a solo 8 yr old little boy.

For the record, IMO, the boy wasn't framed by anyone but LE. And before you jump all over that last statement, LE framed the boy by jumping to conclusions before even getting any bullistics reports back or before an autopsy, or questioning anyone else as thoroughly as they did the boy or any police reports were filed and coercing the guy into confessing.

[Hawk]

I totally agree.

Thank you!
I was under the impression that common sense was part of the discussion.

[bkwits]

I totally agree.

Do you agree with Hawk that someone other than the family or a burglar would have killed Vince and Tim on the road or at the bar, not at their house?

How would he or she do this without being noticed?

[rusure?]

They came home everyday at that time. If there was a question about time of arrival all a potential thief, murderer, or drug addict would have to do is call the plant.

There were not any adults home in the neighborhood at the time of the murders, except, iirc a couple that did not hear anything.

[rusure?]

I think everyone would like it if the boy was proven innocent and exonerated of all charges.

But, I'm not holding my breath.

I know you aren't holding your breath. That's no secret. It would be nice if you could hold your breath. He'll be exonerated of all charges, IMO.

[IAMME]

No one knew exactly where anyone else would be that day.


Tiffany knew that VR was on his way home.....She talked to him on the phone.....other than that we have NO way of knowing who knew what about whose whereabouts.....But we do know that both men spoke with their wives, and that VR spoke with his FIL, and I think it is likely that the ppl they were going to help also had some idea of where they would be that day....not to mention anyone from work they told or if TR told the "side-dish" ect ect ect. I think that during the course of any telephone convo they had that afternoon it is very likely that they said something to the effect of we just left work and we are gonna stop by the house and get _____ b4 we go to _____'s house to fix that cabinet.... I know most ppl start phone convos with some version of what are you doing? and most ppl give an answer similar to what I jsut described......IMO

[Hawk]

There were not any adults home in the neighborhood at the time of the murders, except, iirc a couple that did not hear anything.

And the killer knew that! What did he judge by, cars in the driveway?

[bkwits]

Thank you!
I was under the impression that common sense was part of the discussion.


Please explain what you mean by "common sense" per this discussion. Thank you.

[rusure?]

Do you agree with Hawk that someone other than the family or a burglar would have killed Vince and Tim on the road or at the bar, not at their house?

How would he or she do this without being noticed?

That looks like common sense to me. Now if they lived in a large city like NY or LA or Phenix...

[GentleBreeze]

And the killer knew that! What did he judge by, cars in the driveway?

Would the killer notice that if they walked around the block several times?

imo

[rusure?]

I would prefer my child to steer clear of alleged murderers. But that's just me.

That's a shame, and good that it's just you.

[Hawk]

Would the killer notice that if they walked around the block several times?

imo

Would he care?

[Details]

They came home everyday at that time. If there was a question about time of arrival all a potential thief, murderer, or drug addict would have to do is call the plant.A potential thief or drug addict might well not know who the house belonged to, nor where the men worked.

A murderer would know, and would want to be there when they got home, and calling the plant would indeed work.

[GentleBreeze]

Would he care?

Dunno, just wondered if someone walked the neighborhood would they see most weren't home?

imo

[wolfi_2]

In all honesty, would you want him going to school with your children? I sure wouldn't

why not ? what did a school have to do with it?

[rusure?]

And the killer knew that! What did he judge by, cars in the driveway?

Common sense for one. Or by doing drive bys for a few days. Doesn't really take a rocket scientist to find out.

[rusure?]

Yes, absolutely and have said so for a long time. If another adult family member wanted either man dead it would not have occurred at that time or that place nor would the boy's gun been used.

I suggested the crack-head scenario be worked a bit. I may have bought into that if...someone could make it fit better.

We do not know for a fact that the boy's gun is the murder weapon.
.22's are not that rare a weapon.

[rusure?]

A potential thief or drug addict might well not know who the house belonged to, nor where the men worked.

A murderer would know, and would want to be there when they got home, and calling the plant would indeed work.

A potential thief or drug addict wouldn't care who the house belonged to. IMO

[rusure?]

There's a neighbor ear witness to shots fired and that witness's statement is consistent with the boys gun being the murder weapon.

that has not been proven as fact.

[Details]

And the killer knew that! What did he judge by, cars in the driveway?Who says the killer knew that? They might have - these days, with so many dual worker families, homes are indeed often empty during the day. However, there's no reason they needed to know that. So long as no one is outside, no eyewitnesses.

All kinds of crimes happen during the day. Pretty darn good odds of not being seen even if people are home - we're on the computer, watching TV, watching kids play in the back yard, etc. For many of us, especially with money tight, the blinds or drapes are drawn, both for privacy of our own, and to keep the energy bills down.

[rusure?]

wow. just wow.

hey, you said "just me" I didn't say it.

[FurthurBB]

In all honesty, would you want him going to school with your children? I sure wouldn't

Yes, in all honesty I would have no problem with this boy in the same school with any of my children. IMO

[muska]

Aren't people often killed in their homes by others who know them but don't live there. It happens all of the time.

How does one kill someone "along the road" in a small town without drawing attention? Do they shoot from their own car? Do they force them off the road, and then shoot them? I really don't hear of that very often.

IMO

People are killed in their homes by strangers on a very regular basis. Eight year old boys, on the other hand, have NEVER been shown to commit double homicides.
And unless new evidence came out today, we still don't know for sure that the chipmunk was even used.

[rusure?]

You think the neighbor is part of this huge conspiracy to frame the boy? You think he called 911 as a prank? Ya lost me.

The man who called 911 wasn't home yet. It was teenager who said he heard 3 pops. That doesn't prove a thing. No adults heard a thing. The adults were not home. I could be watching TV and think I heard 3 pops. Would that mean I heard gun shots. No. It is not a fact the person actually heard gun shots.

For the record I never said there was a conspiracy to frame the boy. Stop putting words in my mouth that are not there.

[Crispy]

There's a neighbor ear witness to shots fired and that witness's statement is consistent with the boys gun being the murder weapon.

Can you explain this please? How is the neighbor hearing shots consistent with the boys gun being the murder weapon?

[bkwits]

Yes, absolutely and have said so for a long time. If another adult family member wanted either man dead it would not have occurred at that time or that place nor would the boy's gun been used.

I suggested the crack-head scenario be worked a bit. I may have bought into that if...someone could make it fit better.

How do you know the boy's gun was used? Did I miss something? That fact, if proven, would definitely impact on my thinking.

IMO

[Details]

People are killed in their homes by strangers on a very regular basis. Eight year old boys, on the other hand, have NEVER been shown to commit double homicides.
And unless new evidence came out today, we still don't know for sure that the chipmunk was even used.We've got nothing to say the Chipmunk was used. We've got Tim's autopsy to say it sure doesn't look like any Chipmunk was used. A mossburg, anything autoloading, used by a killer who was almost certainly taller than Tim - but not a single-shot, not to do two shots to the chest.

[rusure?]

Yes, in all honesty I would have no problem with this boy in the same school with any of my children. IMO

Yes, he is accused with circumstancial evidence, he is not convicted. No problem with him. The problem, IMO, is in the minds of others (in general, not necessarily anyone on this board) who believe accussed = guilty.

[Cherishlove]

One thing I always wondered in the back of my mind, if the boy knew his dad was not coming right home from work because they had work to do elseshere how could he plan this murder, it was just a fluck they stopped by to get something. His Step Mom must of told him and maybe that is why she called to check up on him just prior to the murders. So if he knew they were not suppose to come right home after work then how would he plan this murder?

[rusure?]

People are killed in their homes by strangers on a very regular basis. Eight year old boys, on the other hand, have NEVER been shown to commit double homicides.
And unless new evidence came out today, we still don't know for sure that the chipmunk was even used.

Absolutely! ITA Muska.

[FurthurBB]

Even if, for the sake of argument, he's guilty? or are basing your decision on your belief he's innocent?

Either way. I do not believe he has some sort of behavioral problem. If he is guilty, there would have to be an extreme reason that none of us know about. IMO

[rusure?]

How do you know the boy's gun was used? Did I miss something? That fact, if proven, would definitely impact on my thinking.

IMO

Well, that fact, if proven would not be enough. Anyone could have used the boy's gun. Apparently it is a very easy weapon to use and not so complicated.

[FurthurBB]

One thing I always wondered in the back of my mind, if the boy knew his dad was not coming right home from work because they had work to do elseshere how could he plan this murder, it was just a fluck they stopped by to get something. His Step Mom must of told him and maybe that is why she called to check up on him just prior to the murders. So if he knew they were not suppose to come right home after work then how would he plan this murder?


Yeah, it doesn't make any sense to me. IMO

[bkwits]

Pop.....pause....pop....pause......pop


I heard the same sequence when a man shot his estranged wife with a handgun in his car down the street from my house.

Seven times.

[rusure?]

One thing I always wondered in the back of my mind, if the boy knew his dad was not coming right home from work because they had work to do elseshere how could he plan this murder, it was just a fluck they stopped by to get something. His Step Mom must of told him and maybe that is why she called to check up on him just prior to the murders. So if he knew they were not suppose to come right home after work then how would he plan this murder?

Did the boy's step mom call to check on him? I missed that. I know she called VR.

[rusure?]

Pop.....pause....pop....pause......pop

how does that prove it was the boys gun???

[mrrogers]

Pop.....pause....pop....pause......pop

he said it sounded like a paint balll gun no proof it was c s gun:w00t:

[Details]

As a great many cases have shown, people remain charged, heck, people remain in jail - worst still, people remain on death row, even after the evidence has been found to prove them innocent.

Even when the system is working right, this happens, because it takes time for the wheels to turn. And when the system is working wrong, when a prosecutor is able to delay turning over evidence and the like, it can take even longer.

[bkwits]

I am basing it on the fact the boy remains charged.

I would think if the boys gun isn't the murder weapon he's innocent. Determining if his gun is the murder weapon wouldn't have taken until the end on January.

all IMO

Well we are not privy to that information. So it is just opinion on your part and nothing more.

[Cherishlove]

Did the boy's step mom call to check on him? I missed that. I know she called VR.I'm not sure if she did or not I thought maybe she did but maybe she didn't I don't know I thought I heard that somewhere but could very well be wrong but what I'm wondering is wouldn't she or he have told the boy your dad will be late getting home, and I will be there as soon as I can after work seems like the boy would know his dad wasn't coming right home after work.

[bkwits]

Just curious, would you extend alleged child molesting teachers the same benefit of the doubt?


Please stop this and get back to the case that we have. :mad:

[rusure?]

So the teenager heard the pops. If the teen heard three pops that sounded like gunshots and at least THREE SHOTS were fired into a dead man near by...chances are..HE HEARD THE SHOTS!

The dead man outside nearby, was shot 6 times.

[GentleBreeze]

So the teenager heard the pops. If the teen heard three pops that sounded like gunshots and at least THREE SHOTS were fired into a dead man near by...chances are..HE HEARD THE SHOTS!

I didn't know that the neighbors who heard the shots were teenagers.

I thought it was an adult couple that were across the street and one of them called 911 to report hearing the shots?

imo

[Crispy]

Pop.....pause....pop....pause......pop


Oh OK I wasn't getting it. Thanks

[rusure?]

Just curious, would you extend alleged child molesting teachers the same benefit of the doubt?

That has nothing to do with the case in discussion. O/T
An adult child molester is an adult. Big difference. But possibly.

[rusure?]

I am basing it on the fact the boy remains charged.

I would think if the boys gun isn't the murder weapon he's innocent. Determining if his gun is the murder weapon wouldn't have taken until the end on January.

all IMO

Sure it would if they sent it out for more test (which iirc they did) and the report is not disclosed until the 27th of January.

[rusure?]

I'm not sure if she did or not I thought maybe she did but maybe she didn't I don't know I thought I heard that somewhere but could very well be wrong but what I'm wondering is wouldn't she or he have told the boy your dad will be late getting home, and I will be there as soon as I can after work seems like the boy would know his dad wasn't coming right home after work.

IMO most parents would. But most parents wouldn't leave guns out where children can get ahold of them and shoot somebody. IMO.

I do know that she talked to VR though. We just don't know about what.

[rusure?]

I didn't know that the neighbors who heard the shots were teenagers.

I thought it was an adult couple that were across the street and one of them called 911 to report hearing the shots?

imo

I've read it both ways iirc. But have also read that the couple was the only ear witnesses, (still 6 shots, not just 3), and also read that the boy across the street heard it and no one else did, (still 6 shots, not just 3).

[rusure?]

That's what I thought too, but I saw no point in arguing. I don't care if it was a teen. It doesn't change the fact that an ear witness heard 3 shots and there was a pause in between consistent with it being the kids gun.

the victim had a total of 6 shots in him. not just 3.

[rusure?]

It's not off topic .........see post 858

It is O/T so please stop this.

[IAMME]

I've read it both ways iirc. But have also read that the couple was the only ear witnesses, (still 6 shots, not just 3), and also read that the boy across the street heard it and no one else did, (still 6 shots, not just 3).

Doesnt it say in one of the officers reports that when interviewing someone that they had shot the "little pea shooter" in the backyard of the home??? I cant recall exactly what was said and dont have the time at the moment to look it up.... Is there anyway to find out if the neighbors called the police on that occasion also?

[JusticeDawg©]

he said it sounded like a paint balll gun no proof it was c s gun:w00t:

he sure did say paintball gun. :biggrin:

[wolfi_2]

just curios
on the court calendar, the competency hearing is at 6th February, 13th February nothing….

[rusure?]

Doesnt it say in one of the officers reports that when interviewing someone that they had shot the "little pea shooter" in the backyard of the home??? I cant recall exactly what was said and dont have the time at the moment to look it up.... Is there anyway to find out if the neighbors called the police on that occasion also?

I think it was one of their co-workers that said that.

[JusticeDawg©]

Yeah, but Tim wasn't killed with a paintball gun was he?:rolleyes:

This is a good time to use common sense and logic;)

Yes he was, by someone other than CR. :smile:

[PensiveOne]

A new article on wmicentral. The hearings next week are @ 3:00 & 4:00. Kinda late...

http://www.wmicentral.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=20252056&BRD=2264&PAG=461&dept_id=505965&rfi=6

[GentleBreeze]

I've read it both ways iirc. But have also read that the couple was the only ear witnesses, (still 6 shots, not just 3), and also read that the boy across the street heard it and no one else did, (still 6 shots, not just 3).

It doesn't matter how many they thought they heard. It is in Rodriquez' report that they heard several shots.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know these were shots being fired across the street, where two men lost their lives due to gunfire and one of them laying on the patio porch, when police arrived in approximately 2 minutes after the 911 call came in at 5:03.

It is common for witnesses to not get the exact amount of the shots correct that were actually fired. Some can say they heard none, some can say they heard 2 or three and some can say they heard more. And they don't have to be on point. The autopsy report tells the story of how many times they were actually shot.

But what they did tell LE is............. there was a pop............then a delay............then a pop .........and then a delay..........and a pop and then a delay, which is very consistent with a single shot bolt action rifle, rather than an automatic or semi automatic that would be fired rapidly in succession.

imoo



Where does it say only the boy across the street heard it and no one else did?

[Jacobtk]

IMo the boy would know they were unarmed

How? If he came home after school and sat concealed in somewhere until both men came home, there is no way he could know whether they had any weapons with them. That sounds more like adult planning than the thinking of a child.

I agree, the only logical explanation is the boy did it.

Actually, it is the most illogical because the boy had no reason to kill either men. Being angry over a spanking is normal for a child, but it is not normal for a child to go from anger over five swats to murder. The easiest explanation is that the boy did it because that solves the case without any effort. The boy reported the crime, ergo he committed the crime. It is also the laziest, most inane and utterly reprehensible explanation because if it wrong, this boy's life has been permanently damaged.

There's a neighbor ear witness to shots fired and that witness's statement is consistent with the boys gun being the murder weapon.

On what basis? Unless the neighbors were gun experts, they could not tell what type of gun was used. They could only report the number of shots they heard. If the shooter used a semi-automatic weapon, the neighbors could not tell the difference between it and a single-shot rifle.

I am basing it on the fact the boy remains charged.

I would think if the boys gun isn't the murder weapon he's innocent. Determining if his gun is the murder weapon wouldn't have taken until the end on January.

I state this again: even if the murder weapon is not the boy's gun the charges would not be dropped. There is enough very weak circumstantial evidence to maintain the charges against the boy. In the Scott Peterson case there was nothing physically linking him to the murder of his wife, yet he remained charged. Do not assume that just because the police arrest someone or the DA charges someone that the person is unquestionably guilty. The Innocence Project has helped hundreds of innocent people who were arrested, charged and convicted of crimes they did not commit.

[GentleBreeze]

Yeah, but Tim wasn't killed with a paint ball gun was he?:rolleyes:

This is a good time to use common sense and logic;)

Nope but I am sure if Vinnie and Tim could have had a choice they would take being shot with a paint ball.

The shooter just happened to use a weapon that was just a popper and not a boomer.

imo

[PensiveOne]

Did you read the comment? From what I'm hearing that's pretty much the consensus there

Yeah, I read the comment. I don't pay any attention to those. The last thing that needs to happen to this boy, is him staying in that county. IMO.

[wolfi_2]

Did you read the comment? From what I'm hearing that's pretty much the consensus there

first rehabilitate him than charge him as adult ? I don’t think that there would be any consensus!

[Jacobtk]

It doesn't matter how many they thought they heard. It is in Rodriquez' report that they heard several shots.

Actually, it does. This is the key problem with witness testimony. People can and often do get the facts wrong. Stating that it does not matter if witnesses have the facts right, only that they know something leads to innocent people going to prison and guilty people walking. It is sloppy thinking and extremely dangerous.

But what they did tell LE is............. there was a pop............then a delay............then a pop .........and then a delay..........and a pop and then a delay, which is very consistent with a single shot bolt action rifle, rather than an automatic or semi automatic that would be fired rapidly in succession.

Until the person states exactly what he or she heard, i.e. the person literally voices out the delays, we have no way of knowing what the timing was. Guessing with this sort of thing is always unwise. Likewise, a person can fire a semi-automatic weapon one shot at a time, so it is illogical to rule the weapon out as a possibility, particularly when the one weapon Romero owned that coincidentally held exactly ten rounds is missing and none of the officers have bothered to find out what happened to it.

[GentleBreeze]

Actually, it does. This is the key problem with witness testimony. People can and often do get the facts wrong. Stating that it does not matter if witnesses have the facts right, only that they know something leads to innocent people going to prison and guilty people walking. It is sloppy thinking and extremely dangerous.



Until the person states exactly what he or she heard, i.e. the person literally voices out the delays, we have no way of knowing what the timing was. Guessing with this sort of thing is always unwise. Likewise, a person can fire a semi-automatic weapon one shot at a time, so it is illogical to rule the weapon out as a possibility, particularly when the one weapon Romero owned that coincidentally held exactly ten rounds is missing and none of the officers have bothered to find out what happened to it.

I don't agree and it has nothing with putting people in prison. Witnesses testify to what they thought they heard........such as the amount of gunshots. They do not have to be correct.........they aren't perfect and the main evidence will show how many shots were actually fired.

Unless you are trying to imply the autopsy report was falsified.


imoo

[Jacobtk]

Did you read the comment? From what I'm hearing that's pretty much the consensus there

To be honest, I would never release the boy back to Tiffany, a woman who at this point has never once visited or spoke to the boy since his arrest. The woman is suspect, just as much as the police and prosecutor involved in this case. It is best for the boy to remain with his mother and out of jail.

[bkwits]

Yeah, but Tim wasn't killed with a paintball gun was he?:rolleyes:

This is a good time to use common sense and logic;)


When do we start?

[Jacobtk]

I dont agree.

Your agreement is not necessary. I am simply telling you what the logical, objective method of looking at this case should be. Whether you intend to be objective or not is irrelevant. You simply cannot know the pacing of spots based on a written report anymore than you could accurately recite, with all the correct inflections, a George Carlin bit from a written transcript.

As per the witness testimony, I will say that I hope you are never on a jury if you are actually willing to accept testimony from a person whose statements contradicts as true and infallible. That is part of the reason why innocent people get convicted.

[Crispy]

Did you read the comment? From what I'm hearing that's pretty much the consensus there


Usually the comments on wmi are a bit harsher than the other sites. jmo

[PensiveOne]

first rehabilitate him than charge him as adult ? I don’t think that there would be any consensus!

Sad the way some people think isn't it?

[rusure?]

Actually, it does. This is the key problem with witness testimony. People can and often do get the facts wrong. Stating that it does not matter if witnesses have the facts right, only that they know something leads to innocent people going to prison and guilty people walking. It is sloppy thinking and extremely dangerous.



Until the person states exactly what he or she heard, i.e. the person literally voices out the delays, we have no way of knowing what the timing was. Guessing with this sort of thing is always unwise. Likewise, a person can fire a semi-automatic weapon one shot at a time, so it is illogical to rule the weapon out as a possibility, particularly when the one weapon Romero owned that coincidentally held exactly ten rounds is missing and none of the officers have bothered to find out what happened to it.

You are 100% correct. :thumbsup::thumbsup:

[wolfi_2]

Sad the way some people think isn't it?

-frightening

[rusure?]

I don't agree and it has nothing with putting people in prison. Witnesses testify to what they thought they heard........such as the amount of gunshots. They do not have to be correct.........they aren't perfect and the main evidence will show how many shots were actually fired.

Unless you are trying to imply the autopsy report was falsified.


imoo

It matters very much what witnesses testify. People on a jury don't forget what they hear from and eye witnesses or ear witnesses. It's a fact, even if a judge tells them to disregard something. They remember false information. I believe I addressed this earlier concerning eye witnesses and memory. The neighbors could have said to the officer they hear pop pause pop pause pop pause, but they can easily forget exactly how long the pauses were. Seconds in time matter a great deal.

[Hawk]

A potential thief or drug addict might well not know who the house belonged to, nor where the men worked.

A murderer would know, and would want to be there when they got home, and calling the plant would indeed work.

And use an in-house pea-shooter.
5:00 o'clock in the afternoon wouldn't be a good indicator that working people might be coming home?

[rusure?]

The men were coming home from work just as they do every other day and using logic and common sense I deduced they would not be armed and ready when they got there.

The motive need not be logical to anyone other than the boy. Motives for murder never make sense to me. The boy said he was angry at his dad for making Tiffany spank him. That wasn't a lie. It happened and the anger he felt as a result is known only to him.

I never said he was guilty because he reported the crime. I've given my reasons many times.

The neighbor reported hearing shots...with a DELAY between them. That is consistent with the boys gun being the murder weapon.

I don't presume anyone guilty simply because they are charged. After considering everything we do know ( which isn't all that much), I like many others have come to the conclusion that the boy is guilty.

There was a ton of circumstantial evidence against Scott Peterson and that case was in no way a weak one. Regardless of what Jamie Floyd may have said;)

You have to base things on fact. Not circumstantial evidence. What did I say earlier about people being on death row based on circumstantial evidence and later being found innocent because of DNA evidence. I want to know what facts you are basing your assumptions on.

[GentleBreeze]

Your agreement is not necessary. I am simply telling you what the logical, objective method of looking at this case should be. Whether you intend to be objective or not is irrelevant. You simply cannot know the pacing of spots based on a written report anymore than you could accurately recite, with all the correct inflections, a George Carlin bit from a written transcript.

As per the witness testimony, I will say that I hope you are never on a jury if you are actually willing to accept testimony from a person whose statements contradicts as true and infallible. That is part of the reason why innocent people get convicted.

Yeah, I notice how you are always telling this or that.

The neighbors hearing the gunfire doesn't need objective thinking imo. It is what it is and is supported with shots fired into the two dead victims across the street from the neighbors. Very few ear witnesses can remember exactly how many gunshots they heard go off. They aren't sitting there beforehand thinking "now let me see, I need to be very astute because gunshots can erupt at any time and I must count everyone of them":rolleyes:

But maybe you can tell me :rolleyes: how it would send someone to prison just by the neighbors remembering only three or four shots. I believe the autopsy report would reveal how many times these men were actually shot.

To me it isn't even about how many shots they think they heard but when they heard them that will be of much more importance.

imoo

[Jacobtk]

The men were coming home from work just as they do every other day and using logic and common sense I deduced they would not be armed and ready when they got there.

Technically, Tim was armed. He had two weapons (which I believe were loaded) in his truck. However, what you would think, as an adult, is immaterial. It is what an 8-year-old would think that matters.

The motive need not be logical to anyone other than the boy. Motives for murder never make sense to me. The boy said he was angry at his dad for making Tiffany spank him. That wasn't a lie. It happened and the anger he felt as a result is known only to him.


Logic plays a huge role in motive because it helps the state explain their case. If the motive makes no logical sense, it more likely than not is not the motive. Being angry over a spanking is not in and of itself a motive. It is normal for a child to be angry when struck by others, particularly when the child cannot fight back. So the state needs something more to explain the boy's behavior, otherwise it will across as it does now: as if they pulled the theory out of thin air.

I don't presume anyone guilty simply because they are charged.

You implied before that if the boy was innocent he would not still be charged. That means that you consider guilty in part because he is still charged.

There was a ton of circumstantial evidence against Scott Peterson and that case was in no way a weak one.

That is your opinion. The fact is that the state had nothing to physically link Peterson to the act. What they did have was very convincing, particularly his behavior. In this case, what the state has is a coerced confession (literally every expert, police officer, judge, DA and child psychiatrist has stated such), the boy's gun, some casings, a few particles of gunpowder residue, a fingerprint on a box of bullets and an unverified claim that Tanya Romans heard the boy call her husband. That is a fairly weak case.

It is also worth noting that since both the competency report and the ballistics report came back, the state has not released any information about them. We know from one report last night that the state's expert came to the same finding as the defense's and apparently considers the boy incompetent and unrestorable due to his age. What remains are the unreleased results of the evidence analysis, which at this point seems rather odd. If the state had anything substantive, it would have leaked to someone now. In my opinion, the absence of any mention of the evidence suggests, coupled with the boy's release, that the evidence either does not point to him or it is inconclusive.

[Hawk]

You have to base things on fact. Not circumstantial evidence. What did I say earlier about people being on death row based on circumstantial evidence and later being found innocent because of DNA evidence. I want to know what facts you are basing your assumptions on.

Groping in the darkness.

[wolfi_2]

Yeah, but Tim wasn't killed with a paintball gun was he?:rolleyes:

This is a good time to use common sense and logic;)


common sense and logic in this case would be to go alongside with the most countries of the world. Because the most country's know, that a 8 or 9 and even a 10 or 11 year old kid isn't fit to stand trial! for that knowledge you haven't to be an expert! and in this case, the whole competency test and the whole charge was a waste of tax money and time!

[rusure?]

Reasonable people use logic and common sense everyday to connect the dots and convict criminals. Far more often than not they get it right.

Defense attorneys that try to explain away piece, after piece, after piece, of circumstantial evidence using far fetched theories like Mexican INTERnationals, drug gangs, hit men, Satanists driving vans, 3 killers, drug related etc.... look desperate and pathetic IMO and ultimately ends in conviction.

Sure a reasonable explanation for one or two ....but far fetched tales time and time and time again ...doesn't fly.

Tell that to an innocent person sitting on death row because folks went on circumstancial evidence. Tell that to one of your loved ones if heaven forbid they find themselves on death row due to circumstancial evidence.

[Hawk]

common sense and logic in this case would be to go alongside with the most countries of the world. Because the most country's know, that a 8 or 9 and not even a 10 or 11 year old kid isn't fit to stand trial! for that knowledge you haven't to be an expert! and in this case, the whole competency test and the whole charge was a waste of tax money and time!

You're right. But that position takes away from us debating who killed these guys.
I agree that he should not have been charged. But if he did the deeds let's know the truth.
And I don't care what the 'other countries of the world would do' or care, what they think.
You excepted, of course.