2/1-

[rusure?]

How did he know that Tiffany would not be home? If she was at the stores, she could well have been home already. Is that why he did not want to go home because she might be there? What days did he KNOW
she was going to be home late and he could walk around or do whatever and not get into trouble?

Tiffany (and some other women problems) are really firing off red flags for me... :unsure:

Was it Mondays and Wednesdays or Wednesdays and Fridays? I do know that Wednesdays was one of the days that he could walk freely about the neighborhood.

[IAMME]

I don't put much into that. Many parents urge their children to not talk about the family affairs.

Tiffany may have thought she need to monitor his conversation with the mother. She said in her statement that Vinnie worried that Eryn would try to kidnap his child.

Or she may have simply been in the area when the calls came in. I see no reason she would have to excuse herself simply because the kid was talking to his mom. I sure never did. I went about what I was doing before the call came in.

imoo

Only people who have somethign to hide dont want their children talking about them IMO A step parent has absolutely NO right to be interferring with ANY aspect of a childs relationship with their natural parents.NONE. EVER.

[rusure?]

That's okay sweety, I don't need to. :laugh:

I know what I'm talk about.

Simply cracking a book doesn't make you educated on the subject;)

imo

It does help, especially when the DSM-IV-TR is the standard for dx'ing someone. What is the source of your knowledge?

[dgfred]

I don't put much into that. Many parents urge their children to not talk about the family affairs.

Tiffany may have thought she need to monitor his conversation with the mother. She said in her statement that Vinnie worried that Eryn would try to kidnap his child.

Or she may have simply been in the area when the calls came in. I see no reason she would have to excuse herself simply because the kid was talking to his mom. I sure never did. I went about what I was doing before the call came in.

imoo

Oh come on GB :scared: , you don't really believe that is what was meant by that statement. Most family matters can be spoken about...
certain others can not- Which was it?
She was worried Eryn would kidnap him??? I hadn't heard that.
Wonder why she left the child to get interrogated alone, seems she threw him to the dogs.

[rusure?]

Only people who have somethign to hide dont want their children talking about them IMO A step parent has absolutely NO right to be interferring with ANY aspect of a childs relationship with their natural parents.NONE. EVER.

It's against the law. At least here it is.

[dgfred]

Only people who have somethign to hide dont want their children talking about them IMO A step parent has absolutely NO right to be interferring with ANY aspect of a childs relationship with their natural parents.NONE. EVER.

Excellent post ME! Right on the mark.

[IAMME]

They sure can tell one minute from 30 minutes, that is for sure imo.

imoo

Are you serious? Have you ever taken a car trip with children? Are we there yet? are we THERE yet? are we there YET? How much longer? 30 minutes.....one minute later......are we there yet?

[GentleBreeze]

We don't know that about he timeline....we have not seen the cell phone records....and DN has been wrong before, and even admitted that she was unsure if 4:52 was the correct time, and since the men were seen @ 4:39 a couple minutes from the home, I am fairly certain that she WAS in fact wrong about that time.

Why would she be wrong about the 4:52 time?

And yes, we haven't seen them ourselves but I think all of these various cell phone times will add up to a very very tight time line.

And if it does, then there is no way in hades this boy could have been casually walking up the block and then see the men dead and do all he said he did and leaving enough time for all the other activities that occurred after then so that 911 could be summoned by 5:03 imo.

imoo

[Aradia5]

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

IMO the step-mom is key here. . . too many questions remain.

Alot of you are pointing at step-mom. That will make me think.

[rusure?]

Why would she be wrong about the 4:52 time?

And yes, we haven't seen them ourselves but I think all of these various cell phone times will add up to a very very tight time line.

And if it does, then there is no way in hades this boy could have been casually walking up the block and then see the men dead and do all he said he did and leaving enough time for all the other activities that occurred after then so that 911 could be summoned by 5:03 imo.

imoo

IMO, we will see the cell phone records when the defense presents their case. The cell phone records or not on the disclosure statements which disclose what the pros could potientially use in presenting their case. Hence, the cell phone records are a detriment to the pros case, but could be a benefit for the defense of the boy's case.

[dgfred]

I think the opposite. In a small town everyone is in everyone's business. You don't want a boy telling everybody about your personal life, finances. I'm sure Vinnie didn't want any private family matters to get to Eryn in case she wanted to go to court to get her boy back. I feel the same way about my house. I don't want my daughter telling everyone my business. To me that proves nothing. In his filing for custody I didn't notice VR requesting child support. So I guess he loved the boy to fight for him. JMO

There is a easy remedy for that- don't discuss finances and such in front of the 8 yr old.

I thought Eryn was living somewhere in a trailer with no electricity (or water?), don't think she would have been trying to get the boy too hard. You also wouldn't want your kid talking about beatings or worse
things... so we will not really know.

[Aradia5]

She has an alibi, unlike the boy who walked aimlessly for two hours around the block, a boy that confessed, that knew details of the crime. IMO

I didn't think it was a real confession.

[dgfred]

She has an alibi, unlike the boy who walked aimlessly for two hours around the block, a boy that confessed, that knew details of the crime. IMO


The alibi stinks the more we find out about it.

We are not really sure what exactly the boy did and at what time, except going to the neighbors. He confessed, but he sure was led.
What details? Same could be said if he just walked up on the scene.

[rusure?]

Give me a few minutes. I'll be happy to find you some research data.:biggrin:

Go right ahead. I love research. Read quite a bit of it and have done quite a bit of research as well. It won't refute the standard for dxing for IED in the DSM-IV-TR, unless it is unreliable research.

[FDInLaw]

Only people who have somethign to hide dont want their children talking about them IMO A step parent has absolutely NO right to be interferring with ANY aspect of a childs relationship with their natural parents.NONE. EVER.Excellent post. . . ITA! What jumps out at me is the short period that they were married. You can feel sorry for a step-parent after years of custody issues, but this chick was fairly new to the scene. I don't get it, she was in the mix too much. It's not a step-parent's place to jump in and demand control and authority over a child's natural parent. She overstepped her bounds, one has to ask why???

[GentleBreeze]

Are you serious? Have you ever taken a car trip with children? Are we there yet? are we THERE yet? are we there YET? How much longer? 30 minutes.....one minute later......are we there yet?

Since I have five children, I most certainly have.

They know if they are at a place in a short few minute. If it is that quick they never whined "are we there yet?" but if it took 30 minutes or more to get there then they may ask "are we there yet"

And children do track time. Most kids if they are latch key kids knows how long they have before the parent is to be home.

They certainly don't think one minute is 30 minutes imo.

But that is irrelevant anyway. The actual time line will show imo that he couldn't have done one thing he said he did, no matter how long he said he did it for. Imo the time line leaves no time for anything but maybe putting the gun on the cage and leaving the home in route to the neighbors after the victims were no longer shaking or quivering.



imoo

[dgfred]

The difference is between 'real' and 'false'.

[Aradia5]

If you said you did it, then what is a real confession? IMO

A real confession would have been I shot my dad 4 times and I shot Tim 6 times. Then a reason why.

[FDInLaw]

First things first: Without access to the information that police have at this time, the public should withhold judgment about the veracity of the 8-year-old boy’s confession. False confessions are common enough in traumatized, eager-to-comply adults, let alone kids. Three other children between the ages of 7 and 8 have confessed to murder since 1958; none of them committed the killings.

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

[FDInLaw]

A real confession would have been I shot my dad 4 times and I shot Tim 6 times. Then a reason why.Yep, and not a tale about ending their suffering with two shots each.

[Aradia5]

IMO the difference is "unaccompanied by a parent" making it inadmissable... JMO

The difference is it didn't match what actually happened.

[Aradia5]

in your opinion?

Autopsy's opinion.
They were not shot twice each, um no they were shot a total of 10 times. That to me is a false confession.

[FDInLaw]

in your opinion?

The boy made contradicting statements. . . no matter how you piece it together, it doesn't all fit. LE, in their brilliance, picked out what they wanted to believe as fact. . . but maybe the boy wasn't lying in the beginning?!! Sometimes kids make up stories when the truth is not received.

MOO

[Hawk]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

[FDInLaw]

Autopsy's opinion.
They were not shot twice each, um no they were shot a total of 10 times. That to me is a false confession.

Excellent point. You would think the boy would remember loading his chipmunk over and over again. . .

[Aradia5]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

He isn't upset? I didn't know that.

[tif]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

Why would you expect an eight year old who just found his father and their friend shot to death to think logically? I think the fact that he did run out of the house shows that he was upset. It's not unusual for an adult to run to a neighbor during an emergency instead of calling 911 themselves. A child isn't going to be thinking clearly in that situation.

[FDInLaw]

He isn't upset? I didn't know that.And we don't Know it since it's based on opinion.

It's easy to list circumstantial evidence to pin the boy. . . but it's the physical evidence that we have not heard that can and just might change everything. MOO

[tif]

Don't forget that he would have had to have placed his book bag under the kitchen table somewhere in the middle of all of that!

In the transcript of his interrogation, CR said that after he found Tim he searched all over the first floor for his dad before he went upstairs. I don't see how tossing his book bag as he went into the kitchen would be suspicious.

[Aradia5]

And we don't Know it since it's based on opinion.

It's easy to list circumstantial evidence to pin the boy. . . but it's the physical evidence that we have not heard that can and just might change everything. MOO

Oh No Wait! I just read that the kid couldn't even talk when he called step-mom the friends dad had to talk for him.
I;d think he was upset.

[Hawk]

Why would you expect an eight year old who just found his father and their friend shot to death to think logically? I think the fact that he did run out of the house shows that he was upset. It's not unusual for an adult to run to a neighbor during an emergency instead of calling 911 themselves. A child isn't going to be thinking clearly in that situation.

He had the presence of mind to let the dog out.

[Hawk]

Oh No Wait! I just read that the kid couldn't even talk when he called step-mom the friends dad had to talk for him.
I;d think he was upset.

Or he was making up his story in his mind and couldn't explain what he wanted to say.

[Aradia5]

I thought the Knox case was Bizzare. This case has it beat by a mile. A calculating 8yr old kid. :rolleyes:

[FDInLaw]

And I thought the Knox case was Bizzare. This case has it beat by a mile. A calculating 8yr old kid. :rolleyes:

Right out of the Twilight Zone. I just don't buy that this kid is pure evil and his environment had nothing to do with it. Quite frankly, I doubt he even committed these crimes. Where is the physical evidence?

[Aradia5]

Right out of the Twilight Zone. I just don't buy that this kid is pure evil and his environment had nothing to do with it. Quite frankly, I doubt he even committed these crimes. Where is the physical evidence?

I didn't see anything posted. Is there any physical evidence?

[dgfred]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

I believe his first instinct would have been to run for help. I once sliced my hand because I was beating the window so hard (I thought my sister was not letting me in... she wasn't home) instead of calling 911 I stuck my hand under the faucet outside, the pain and panic hit me with the water, and I ran to my neighbors to get help. I was 11.

***sidenote: I rode to the emergency room with my neighbor IN A HEARSE! He owned a funeral home... was a creepy ride.

[Hawk]

Right out of the Twilight Zone. I just don't buy that this kid is pure evil and his environment had nothing to do with it. Quite frankly, I doubt he even committed these crimes. Where is the physical evidence?

Where was he for an hour and a half? The Twilight Zone?

[dgfred]

He had the presence of mind to let the dog out.


Let the dog out, that wasn't even a wise thing to do. How does that show presence of mind? What if the dog runs over and starts licking the victims or something?

[IAMME]

Why would you expect an eight year old who just found his father and their friend shot to death to think logically? I think the fact that he did run out of the house shows that he was upset. It's not unusual for an adult to run to a neighbor during an emergency instead of calling 911 themselves. A child isn't going to be thinking clearly in that situation.

My friend had a fire in her floor furnace the other day, she says the flames were waist high her son says they were to the ceiling, she attempted to put them out with a blanket and her SOCKED FEET, then she finally after several minutes woke her 13 yo son he ran and got the fire extingusher, they exhausted that, she finally woke her other 11 yo son, and ordered both boys out of the house, this is in her est. 15 minutes after she woke to find the fire, she told her 13 yo son to call the fire dept. while she continued to try and fight it HERSELF! He replied with but i dont know the number!!!! Do you know what her reply was???? HUH? can you guess??????



She tossed him phone book and told him to look it up!!!!! these are not simple ppl, both mother and son are extremely intelligent.....People dont always act rationally in an emergency even going as far as to "not know the number" to the fire dept. And this is an adult and a 13 year old,and an 11 yo and you expect that a 8 year old is more capable dealing in a much much more traumatic experience???

[dgfred]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

What if YOU do not consider the confession!

So we have a boy that sees a white car speeding away, then walks up and finds his dad and friend shot.

What even makes him a suspect? Fooling around after school?

[Hawk]

I believe his first instinct would have been to run for help. I once sliced my hand because I was beating the window so hard (I thought my sister was not letting me in... she wasn't home) instead of calling 911 I stuck my hand under the faucet outside, the pain and panic hit me with the water, and I ran to my neighbors to get help. I was 11.

***sidenote: I rode to the emergency room with my neighbor IN A HEARSE! He owned a funeral home... was a creepy ride.

Did you pause to throw your backpack under a table and let your dog out of her cage?

[Hawk]

Let the dog out, that wasn't even a wise thing to do. How does that show presence of mind? What if the dog runs over and starts licking the victims or something?

It means he was distracted from the tragedy and issue at hand. Not likely.

[rusure?]

Linda, regarding your post #927:

I find it interesting that you left out pertinent information regarding you saying the boy could have early onset of IED.

Here are some pertinent information links and quotes for you (two of the links and quotes following are from the very things you cited but left out the information I was referring to. How convienent).

As I have so many times before, you have to take everything in context, that also includes research.



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16754840
“Mean age at onset was 14 years”
the boy is nowhere near 14.

http://books.google.com/books?id=8ZCoiE7JjD0C&pg=PA59&lpg=PA59&dq=intermittent+explosive+disorder,+age+of+onset&source=web&ots=fmmjquhykx&sig=BzIju6ujVDL91EgMgx7uC8_cOPM&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1924721
“Mean age of onset (AOO) of first anger attack is in early adolescence”
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/intermittent-explosive-disorder/DS00730

“Intermittent explosive disorder occurs most often in young men and may affect as many as one in 14 U.S. adults”

“Explosive eruptions, usually lasting 10 to 20 minutes, often result in injuries and the deliberate destruction of property. These episodes may occur in clusters or be separated by weeks or months of nonaggression"

“Most people with this disorder grew up in families where explosive behavior and verbal and physical abuse were common. Being exposed to this type of violence at an early age makes it more likely for these children to exhibit these same traits as they mature. “
“There may also be a genetic component, causing the disorder to be passed down from parents to children.“
“As children, they may have exhibited severe temper tantrums and other behavioral problems, such as stealing and fire setting.”

[dgfred]

It means he was distracted from the tragedy and issue at hand. Not likely.

Distracted, but well able to quick load a 22 bolt action and kill two grown men... come on now Hawk.

If I had a backpack on when I cut my hand, who knows where I would have thrown it. I was in a panic, no one else home... the backpack deal means almost nothing.

[IAMME]

Did you pause to throw your backpack under a table and let your dog out of her cage?

He wouldnt have to pause to throw down his backpack, i wish i could post video of my kids as they come through thte door this afternoon....the back packs are the first things to go....usually wherever they happen to throw them down, until i get on to them.

And he was afraid the bad ppl were gonna come back, prb let the dog out for her and his protection.....I had someone breaking in my house once, my first reaction was to get my gun, my second was to get my dog, I then called police....

[dgfred]

What if YOU do not consider the confession!

So we have a boy that sees a white car speeding away, then walks up and finds his dad and friend shot.

What even makes him a suspect? Fooling around after school?

This is what I really want an answer to:

Throw out the confession. What makes him the killer in your mind?
Surely not just the timeframe.

[rusure?]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

How do you know he isn't upset by what he's seen.
Read up on dissociation as well.

[Hawk]

What if YOU do not consider the confession!

So we have a boy that sees a white car speeding away, then walks up and finds his dad and friend shot.

What even makes him a suspect? Fooling around after school?


If the confession is considered then one must pick and choose what one wants to believe.
In that case, the boy shot both these men at least twice. He didn't sound intimidated. He sounded like he wanted to relieve a great burden. He repeated what he had told someone the night before, either grandma or grandpa.
That's why grandpa refused the request to question him again the next morning.
Grandpa was right.

[FDInLaw]

Where was he for an hour and a half? The Twilight Zone?

You are right, he must have done it based on this, I mean what else would an unsupervised eight year old do??? :rolleyes:

Seriously, there needs to be more than circumstantial evidence folks! WAKE UP!!!

[rusure?]

Where was he for an hour and a half? The Twilight Zone?

Children are often in their own twilight zone when playing outside.

[Hawk]

How do you know he isn't upset by what he's seen.
Read up on dissociation as well.

The kids I've known would be screaming!
That doesn't mean that other kids wouldn't. But the folks here with 'vast knowledge' use studies that depend on, and quote, statistical averages. They seldom site, or single out, abnormal children. We all know they exist. And they are dangerous.

[dgfred]

If the confession is considered then one must pick and choose what one wants to believe.
In that case, the boy shot both these men at least twice. He didn't sound intimidated. He sounded like he wanted to relieve a great burden. He repeated what he had told someone the night before, either grandma or grandpa.
That's why grandpa refused the request to question him again the next morning.
Grandpa was right.


I said DON'T consider the confession at all.

Now tell us your reasoning that he is the killer. Just because he was fooling around after school??? There really is nothing, unless his gun WAS the murder weapon, that points at all to the kid.

[PensiveOne]

In the transcript of his interrogation, CR said that after he found Tim he searched all over the first floor for his dad before he went upstairs. I don't see how tossing his book bag as he went into the kitchen would be suspicious.

OMG! Don't bring common sense to the board! I don't see what the book bag being under the table has to do with anything. If I have a purse when I come in the door, I put it on the counter. It is a habit. The book bag under the table is not evidence against the boy.

[IAMME]

I've proven my point.


You have also left out that this is an impulse disorder, this child is accused of "methodically planning" these murders and "laying in wait" for these men, which is NOT consistant with IED. Sorry but i beleive you are very very wrong.

[Hawk]

Children are often in their own twilight zone when playing outside.

Not alone. With a playmate, sure.

There's no creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter, etc.......... What held his interest for an hour and a half?
A short attention span and quick boredom leads to new adventure for an 8 year old boy.

[rusure?]

Did you pause to throw your backpack under a table and let your dog out of her cage?

I slashed three of my fingers to the bone washing a glass pitcher. I grabed a towel and my 8 year old daughter came in the kitchen. I had to remember phone numbers. She spoke to my future mother-in-law and mother-in-law would not stop talking. I told my daughter to tell her she had to go. Know what she said when she hung up the phone?
"Mommy, that was rude of you". She then called my pastor who lived up the road from us and was very shaken up. The pastor's wife came and was going to take me to where my future husband was. Ya know what my daughter did? She took her bottled water and poured in on the fire in our fireplace to put it out. Then when we got to my future husband, the pastors wife said she would look after my daughter for me while my fh and I went to ER. My daughter did not know her from Adam's house cat and went with her willingly.

Now, I don't find it a bit strange that the boy did as he said under the circumstances.

[bkwits]

If the confession is not used and you pretend you never heard/saw/read it. What do you have?
An 8 eight year old boy gets off the school bus at around 3:30pm. Walks around his neighborhood, unnoticed for an hour and a half. Gets home around 5:00pm to find a dead man draining blood on the front porch. He panics and runs inside while calling for his dad. He finds his dad dead on the upper stairs. What does he do?
Seems to me the logical thing would be call 911. His cell phone is a few feet away in his bedroom. But instead of using it he runs next door to a neighbors house. He isn't upset by what he's seen.

It's odd that we see things so differently. His running to the neighbors is one of the most convincing reasons that I doubt that he did it. If I came home alone and found a family member shot dead. I would leave the house immediately and go to my neighbor's house.

I would not want to be in the house with a dead body let alone two dead bodies. I would not want to wait in that house for the police. Someone might still be in the house or come back. I would be afraid and I would want the support of my neighbors.

Now, here we have a young child. If he wasn't afraid to shoot them, he would be more likely to think nothing of waiting in the house with dead bodies. IMO. He reaction to running for help is entirely consistent with being shocked by the bodies.

[FDInLaw]

It's odd that we see things so differently. His running to the neighbors is one of the most convincing reasons that I doubt that he did it. If I came home alone and found a family member shot dead. I would leave the house immediately and go to my neighbor's house.

I would not want to be in the house with a dead body let alone two dead bodies. I would not want to wait in that house for the police. Someone might still be in the house or come back. I would be afraid and I would want the support of my neighbors.

Now, here we have a young child. If he wasn't afraid to shoot them, he would be more likely to think nothing of waiting in the house with dead bodies. IMO. He reaction to running for help is entirely consistent with being shocked by the bodies.A sane and reasonable post. Thank you!

[Aradia5]

Distracted, but well able to quick load a 22 bolt action and kill two grown men... come on now Hawk.

If I had a backpack on when I cut my hand, who knows where I would have thrown it. I was in a panic, no one else home... the backpack deal means almost nothing.


Maybe after he saw Tim and was going through the house looking for dad, he threw it in the kitchen and it landed under the table. I could be wrong.

[dgfred]

Not alone. With a playmate, sure.

There's no creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter, etc.......... What held his interest for an hour and a half?
A short attention span and quick boredom leads to new adventure for an 8 year old boy.

So this is why he is your only suspect? Because we don't know exactly what he was doing after school? Are you saying he didn't walk around,
but instead lay in wait at home for his dad to come home at around
5pm? Really, I can't tell what you are saying here.

Throw out the confession and give us your theory of why he is the killer.

[rusure?]

You obviously do not know the meaning of the word "mean" in this context.:lol:

Of course I do. What about the part that says early adolesence?
8 years old is not early adolesence.

I won't argue with you any more on this point. Neither of us have met the boy and have not gone through the proper procedure of doing an assessment. You can presume all you like, but it is irrelevant at this point. I can presume all I like as well, but it also is irrelevant at this point.

[FDInLaw]

From what's been stated about the step-mom, if the boy pulled the trigger on his Dad and Tim, I would have expected him to stick around the house in the hopes of getting her too. . . why not? I doubt he likes her much. But he didn't wait for her to get home.

[Hawk]

No one KNOWS what they would do under these circumstances.

[FDInLaw]

No one KNOWS what they would do under these circumstances.
The best post you have had all day.

[dgfred]

No one KNOWS what they would do under these circumstances.

Are you ignoring me friend :blink: ?

I am really interested in your answers, honestly.

[rusure?]

I've proven my point.

In your mind you have. Not in mine.

[dgfred]

I sure do wish they would have asked him more about the white car and the person he saw during the interrogation :cursing: .

[Details]

Not alone. With a playmate, sure.

There's no creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter, etc.......... What held his interest for an hour and a half?
A short attention span and quick boredom leads to new adventure for an 8 year old boy.All children are different. I'd wander easily for an hour and a half, my own little made up adventures going on in my head, achieving great feats with the speed with which I made it through the neighborhood. No creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter - plain boring suburban neighborhood.

[IAMME]

In your mind you have. Not in mine.


ITA with you!

[rusure?]

You have also left out that this is an impulse disorder, this child is accused of "methodically planning" these murders and "laying in wait" for these men, which is NOT consistant with IED. Sorry but i beleive you are very very wrong.

You are absolutely correct IAMME

[Aradia5]

Between the ages of 9 and 12, I wouldn't go home after school. I got off the bus at 2:50pm. My older brother beat me everyday. My mom worked until 5pm. I walked around talking to nobody, or sometimes anybody that would be nice, it was a very small town. My mom insisted he never hurt me, but teachers brought my mom in to ask here where the bruises were coming from. So she told them it was my brother. They did nothing, but that was 20 yrs ago.

[FDInLaw]

All children are different. I'd wander easily for an hour and a half, my own little made up adventures going on in my head, achieving great feats with the speed with which I made it through the neighborhood. No creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter - plain boring suburban neighborhood. The child's tendency to stay away from home could be another clue that abuse was taking place. JMO

[dgfred]

All children are different. I'd wander easily for an hour and a half, my own little made up adventures going on in my head, achieving great feats with the speed with which I made it through the neighborhood. No creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter - plain boring suburban neighborhood.


Me too D. I played cowboys and indians and had my own little 'war games' all by my lonesome.

Not to mention the Superbowl and World Series that I played against me, myself and I.

[rusure?]

Not alone. With a playmate, sure.

There's no creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter, etc.......... What held his interest for an hour and a half?
A short attention span and quick boredom leads to new adventure for an 8 year old boy.

Oh really?? Tell that to my husband who was an only child and didn't have many kids to play with and played by himself. His mom tells of how he would pick up a stick and play with it for hours pretending it was a sword and being sword fights, fencing.

[IAMME]

All children are different. I'd wander easily for an hour and a half, my own little made up adventures going on in my head, achieving great feats with the speed with which I made it through the neighborhood. No creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter - plain boring suburban neighborhood.

All three of my kids did this as well, amuse themselves for hours on end by themselves, with no where to go and nothing to do....magical thinking...

[Details]

Oh, and as to not using a house phone to call 911 - I doubt I would either. After the initial shock, I'd be too scared to stay in the house - both for the idea the killer could be there, or could come back - because I'd really want someone to be with me, in case whoever it was came for me, and because it'd just be too creepy to sit there with dead bodies of people I knew and loved.

I recall hearing that tale before, a wife comes home to find her husband dead - runs to the neighbors to call police. Why didn't she stay and call? No one even has to ask - because it's a pretty natural thing - you don't know if the killer is there, lurking outside, looking for you, etc.

[FurthurBB]

OMG! Don't bring common sense to the board! I don't see what the book bag being under the table has to do with anything. If I have a purse when I come in the door, I put it on the counter. It is a habit. The book bag under the table is not evidence against the boy.


Kids are creatures of habit anyway. If he always threw his backpack there he would do it even in a stressful situation. IMO

[Hawk]

[QUOTE=rusure?;12736005]Of course I do. What about the part that says early adolesence?
8 years old is not early adolesence.

I won't argue with you any more on this point. Neither of us have met the boy and have not gone through the proper procedure of doing an assessment. You can presume all you like, but it is irrelevant at this point. I can presume all I like as well, but it also is irrelevant at this point.[/QUOTE

Presumption is what discussion boards are about. Everything we post is irrelevant. Far as I know there aren't any officers of the court posting.
What else are we to talk about? Has anyone here gone through a 'proper assessment' of the boy?

Reckon I can guess as well as anyone else.

No need to be hostile. I welcome opposing insight and opinions.

[dgfred]

I don't presume anything. I simply offered it as a possibility. Personally, I'm glad you're done with the subject. I proved you wrong and I hate beating a dead horse.

I would urge you to continue reading the latest research, I wasn't able to cut and paste many studies and peer reviewed journal articles as they were in pdf format. You will find cases of diagnosed 8 year olds, I assure you.

Before you attempt to discount a possibility, it helps to know and understand what you're talking about.:tongueside:

The entire subject was a dead horse IMO. The little boy seemed quite normal, unless preacher, neighbors and teachers were lying.

[Hawk]

Oh really?? Tell that to my husband who was an only child and didn't have many kids to play with and played by himself. His mom tells of how he would pick up a stick and play with it for hours pretending it was a sword and being sword fights, fencing.

The neighborhood is full of kids.

[FDInLaw]

Seriously, if the boy would had kept the backpack with him, those that are dead set on him being guilty would have seen it as a calculatingly and callus act somehow. “He was just trying to cover up what he did.”

Still waiting for discussion about physical evidence.

[dgfred]

You are correct, and I will not. It has no bearing on this case to me.

[FurthurBB]

All children are different. I'd wander easily for an hour and a half, my own little made up adventures going on in my head, achieving great feats with the speed with which I made it through the neighborhood. No creek, no lake, no playground, no woods, no shelter - plain boring suburban neighborhood.

I was raised by my grandparents and they were very strict. If I knew they were not going to be home on a certain day I would get off the bus and climb a tree with a book and read instead of doing my chores and homework. Sometimes I would completely lose track of time until I noticed it was starting to get dark. IMO

[Aradia5]

Seriously, if the boy would had kept the backpack with him, those that are dead set on him being guilty would have seen it as a calculatingly and callus act somehow. “He was just trying to cover up what he did.”

Still waiting for discussion about physical evidence.

You and me both.

[dgfred]

Seriously, if the boy would had kept the backpack with him, those that are dead set on him being guilty would have seen it as a calculatingly and callus act somehow. “He was just trying to cover up what he did.”

Still waiting for discussion about physical evidence.

Don't hold your breath, seems nobody has anything if you ignore the 'confession'.

[rusure?]

I don't presume anything. I simply offered it as a possibility. Personally, I'm glad you're done with the subject. I proved you wrong and I hate beating a dead horse.

I would urge you to continue reading the latest research, I wasn't able to cut and paste many studies and peer reviewed journal articles as they were in pdf format. You will find cases of diagnosed 8 year olds, I assure you.

Before you attempt to discount a possibility, it helps to know and understand what you're talking about.:tongueside:

I have studied it for the past year and a half. I don't think you hate beating a dead horse. You don't have to cut and past, just cite the sources of the diagnosed 8 year olds with IED. You may not know what you are talking, that is a very good possibility as well.

How can you say there is a possibility the boy is IED? Unless you are one of the psychs that evaluated him? If you were, by all means, tell the rest of us your findings.

I said I was done arguing with you about this because I'm tired of it. I know what the research is and I don't need you to tell me I don't.

Go ahead and have your last word, I'm not biting again. Go ahead and beat that dead horse bact to life!

[dgfred]

The judge did.:wink:

Of course most of it wasn't based on facts though. :wink:

What is your theory of what happened, minus the confession.

[FDInLaw]

Don't hold your breath, seems nobody has anything if you ignore the 'confession'.

And, as such, it kills me that so many are certain that this kid pulled the trigger. There isn't enough to hold this kid IMO let alone try him.

[rusure?]

:blink: someone didn't even bother to read the links:rolleyes:

And I even went through the trouble of bolding stuff.

I read the links. How in the heck do you think I was able to point out and quote what you left out? Bolding does not make anything more important than what you fail to take into consideration. Perhaps you didn't read your own links?????

You have to take everything in context.

[Hawk]

Are you ignoring me friend :blink: ?

I am really interested in your answers, honestly.

Sorry. I'm not ignoring you. All you folks think and type faster than I can.

For now, in my feeble mind, he is the only suspect. Try as we may to ignore it, all the publicly known evidence points to him. There is nothing that distracts from it. His description of events matches the crime scene. He had plenty of time. Access to the weapon.
Motive is missing.
But who knows what was in his mind? Abuse perceived is abuse in reality.

[IAMME]

The judge did.:wink:

I dont recall that. Can you post a link with the physical evidence the judge is aware of?

[rusure?]

Don't hold your breath, seems nobody has anything if you ignore the 'confession'.

Two shots to the chest of Roman 3 inches apart.

No cell phone records in the pros disclosure.

iirc, 2 copper coated bullets.

[FDInLaw]

I dont recall that. Can you post a link with the physical evidence the judge is aware of?Yes! Let's talk PHYSICAL EVIDENCE! :thumbsup:

[Details]

Seriously, if the boy would had kept the backpack with him, those that are dead set on him being guilty would have seen it as a calculatingly and callus act somehow. “He was just trying to cover up what he did.”

Still waiting for discussion about physical evidence.The physical evidence is massively against it being him, or the Chipmunk. No 22 bullets found on scene, no dropped shells, two shots into Tim's chest slanting downwards imply the killer was taller than Tim, and could shoot him twice in the chest before he had time to fall down (bad fit to a single shot like the Chipmunk), shots from both the top of the stairs and the middle don't fit well with it being the boy - suggest someone searching the house for witnesses, not a boy laying in wait - not to mention the idea of walking down those stairs with your father's body sprawled on it, carrying a rifle and a box of shells - as a small 8 year old.

Then you've got the one and only bit of forensics they've released - a tiny bit of GSR on poorly collected clothes, that does not well match the idea of the boy being a shooter.

Really bad case based on physical. Somehow an ordinary messy, disorganized little boy becomes a super neat killing machine, managing to reload and shoot 10 times with a single-shot before the men can respond to any degree, without dropping a shell, then reverts to an easily fooled little boy for the interrogation. During the interrogation he falls for every trick in the book (someone saw you, we have proof, etc.), confesses to the worst things possible - and still (if you believe police) lies about even something so minor as where he left the gun, and can't get any detail of the crime scene right - not how many shots, not where they were shot - nothing he says fits anything other than what the police feed him.


Oh yeah, two types of bullets (I keep meaning to go through, see what the pattern is to the copper coated shots and those that aren't).

[dgfred]

Sorry. I'm not ignoring you. All you folks think and type faster than I can.

For now, in my feeble mind, he is the only suspect. Try as we may to ignore it, all the publicly known evidence points to him. There is nothing that distracts from it. His description of events matches the crime scene. He had plenty of time. Access to the weapon.
Motive is missing.
But who knows what was in his mind? Abuse perceived is abuse in reality.


Far from feeble your mind is :wink: .

How did his discription match the crime scene?

Access to the weapon? Anybody going in the house had access.

I really don't see anything except the 'confession'. Of course my eyesight isn't what it used to be :blush: .

[Hawk]

Yes! Let's talk PHYSICAL EVIDENCE! :thumbsup:

It's all on the reports. Nothing points away from the boy.

[rusure?]

Sorry. I'm not ignoring you. All you folks think and type faster than I can.

For now, in my feeble mind, he is the only suspect. Try as we may to ignore it, all the publicly known evidence points to him. There is nothing that distracts from it. His description of events matches the crime scene. He had plenty of time. Access to the weapon.
Motive is missing.
But who knows what was in his mind? Abuse perceived is abuse in reality.

What descripton of events that match the crime scene? He didn't say they were shot 10 times. He also said he put the gun in the closet.
So which of his description describes the crime scene except that they were both dead??

[dgfred]

It's all on the reports. Nothing points away from the boy.

But nothing really points to him either. dgfred stomps his feet!

[Details]

Sorry. I'm not ignoring you. All you folks think and type faster than I can.

For now, in my feeble mind, he is the only suspect. Try as we may to ignore it, all the publicly known evidence points to him. There is nothing that distracts from it. His description of events matches the crime scene. He had plenty of time. Access to the weapon.
Motive is missing.
But who knows what was in his mind? Abuse perceived is abuse in reality.I'm not ignoring anything - his description does not match the crime scene. His father was not shot in the chest, was not shot just 2 times, Tim was not shot just 2 times, we don't know who was shot first, we don't know what weapon was used, etc.

And really - what is your explanation why he can't even so much as get he location he left the gun right? An actual confession, even if you could maybe claim he was trying to minimize it by saying he shot less than he did - there's just no motive to lie about where he left the gun. It just does not fit.

There really is next to no known evidence in this crime, so to say he matches it - says very little. He matches no better than a random person from the street - actually he matches worse than a random person from the street, because they'd have better odds of being tall enough to make those two chest shots that slant downwards.

We don't have the gun - heck, we don't know even the make, let alone if it was one gun or two. We don't have fingerprints, other than his on things that he was known to have handled. We don't have DNA anything, whether from a homework paper or his clothes. We've got nothing but the autopsy, and the autopsy does not match this boy as the killer, nor the Chipmunk as the weapon.

[Hawk]

What descripton of events that match the crime scene? He didn't say they were shot 10 times. He also said he put the gun in the closet.
So which of his description describes the crime scene except that they were both dead??

That he shot his dad, then Mr. Romans, then his dad again. It matches what LE found. After the fact.

[FDInLaw]

It's all on the reports. Nothing points away from the boy.

I can't even respond. . . you've got to be kidding? Nothing, huh?

I am so looking forward to more evidence being released on this case. This in not as clean and clear cut as LE would have us to believe IMO. I predict that things are going to get interesting.

[rusure?]

I dont recall that. Can you post a link with the physical evidence the judge is aware of?

They hadn't gotten all that back yet, did they? At least that is what they were telling Brewer. Or, did the pros purger himself?

[Hawk]

I can't even respond. . . you've got to be kidding? Nothing, huh?

I am so looking forward to more evidence being released on this case. This in not as clean and clear cut as LE would have us to believe IMO. I predict that things are going to get interesting.

The shell casing locations match the boy's story. Arguing isn't going to change that.

[rusure?]

The physical evidence is massively against it being him, or the Chipmunk. No 22 bullets found on scene, no dropped shells, two shots into Tim's chest slanting downwards imply the killer was taller than Tim, and could shoot him twice in the chest before he had time to fall down (bad fit to a single shot like the Chipmunk), shots from both the top of the stairs and the middle don't fit well with it being the boy - suggest someone searching the house for witnesses, not a boy laying in wait - not to mention the idea of walking down those stairs with your father's body sprawled on it, carrying a rifle and a box of shells - as a small 8 year old.

Then you've got the one and only bit of forensics they've released - a tiny bit of GSR on poorly collected clothes, that does not well match the idea of the boy being a shooter.

Really bad case based on physical. Somehow an ordinary messy, disorganized little boy becomes a super neat killing machine, managing to reload and shoot 10 times with a single-shot before the men can respond to any degree, without dropping a shell, then reverts to an easily fooled little boy for the interrogation. During the interrogation he falls for every trick in the book (someone saw you, we have proof, etc.), confesses to the worst things possible - and still (if you believe police) lies about even something so minor as where he left the gun, and can't get any detail of the crime scene right - not how many shots, not where they were shot - nothing he says fits anything other than what the police feed him.


Oh yeah, two types of bullets (I keep meaning to go through, see what the pattern is to the copper coated shots and those that aren't).

But, they didn't have the gsr report back when they threw the boy out to the wolves. They didn't have bullistic reports back yet.

[dgfred]

That he shot his dad, then Mr. Romans, then his dad again. It matches what LE found. After the fact.

But if he saw his dad with 'blood all over his face' his dad had probably
already suffered the head shots... thus already dead. Nothing really matches until they suggest it first... after a lie or two.

[dgfred]

The shell casing locations match the boy's story. Arguing isn't going to change that.

How? They could match up to 100s of different scenarios too.

[Hawk]

There wasn't two types of bullets used.

[FDInLaw]

The shell casing locations match the boy's story. Arguing isn't going to change that.
Just like the father being shot in the chest. . . oh, but they found that not to be true. Bummer.

[rusure?]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean

:lol: I'm done! :lol:

really...I'm done.

If you have a link to disprove anything I've bolded, please provide it.

wikipedia is not a reliable source.
any one doing research knows that.

[Hawk]

How? They could match up to 100s of different scenarios too.

Not a hundred. Two, maybe.

[Details]

The shell casing locations match the boy's story. Arguing isn't going to change that.No they don't. There are too many of them (10, not 4), and they don't tell any particular story, let alone one matching any of his details.

[Details]

There wasn't two types of bullets used.Autopsy says differently. Two types of bullets, copper coated and not.

[Hawk]

Just like the father being shot in the chest. . . oh, but they found that not to be true. Bummer.

Due to Mr. Romero's natural nerve response, arms going inward towards the chest, the shooter may well have though it was a chest shot.

[dgfred]

Not a hundred. Two, maybe.

Come on, they could have been kicked, thrown or been bouncing all over. No way to tell what really happened by the casings.

[Details]

It's all on the reports. Nothing points away from the boy.Really? I thought you were also having a problem with two downward angled chest shots. Do you now think he had a chair? Or that somehow two gunshots both hit bone without leaving any mark the medical examiner cared to note, in the exact same way as to let them slant downwards? Or that Tim sat there kneeling as the boy shot, reloaded and shot again? You're the one who posted how devastating a 22 shot to the chest is - how did Tim sit there as the killer reloaded?

[dgfred]

Autopsy says differently. Two types of bullets, copper coated and not.

Hey the kid planned that to throw them off his trail. The missing gun is one of the biggest problems for me with the boy being the shooter.

[rusure?]

That he shot his dad, then Mr. Romans, then his dad again. It matches what LE found. After the fact.

How did LE find that the boy shot both victims in that order? How did LE find that the boy even did it? Did they have a video camera in the house at the time of the murders? (If they did, I doubt DN could get the video off it). Was LE actually there as witnesses? Man, if they were I wish they'd spill their beans, unless if they let on they were there during the murders, heaven forbid, they are arrested and charged with murder.

[Hawk]

Autopsy says differently. Two types of bullets, copper coated and not.

It's the same bullet. Coating may be different. Depends on the manufacturer. The usual procedure for avid sport shooters is to dump your remaining .22 cartridges into a common box after a hunt or target shoot.
Very common practice.

[rusure?]

The shell casing locations match the boy's story. Arguing isn't going to change that.

How??? There were 10 shell casings. He said he only shot 2 times in each victim and once at the car.

[rusure?]

There wasn't two types of bullets used.

Really??? The autopsy named 2 that were cooper.

[Details]

It's the same bullet. Coating may be different. Depends on the manufacturer. The usual procedure for avid sport shooters is to dump your remaining .22 cartridges into a common box after a hunt or target shoot.
Very common practice.That's still two types of bullets. And it could come from a box created from a mix of old and new - but they're still different. And no such box was found, no 22 ammunition was found.

[rusure?]

Hey the kid planned that to throw them off his trail. The missing gun is one of the biggest problems for me with the boy being the shooter.

Well, I think the boy took that and threw it away somewhere, he had loads of time to do it.:ohmy:

[Hawk]

How??? There were 10 shell casings. He said he only shot 2 times in each victim and once at the car.

What he said and what is fact may not coincide.

[rusure?]

What he said and what is fact may not coincide.

So how can what the boy say coinside with the crime scene? iirc, that was your initial reaction.

[IAMME]

They hadn't gotten all that back yet, did they? At least that is what they were telling Brewer. Or, did the pros purger himself?


No and No, They only had to have probable cause to hold him, which is entirely different than burden of proof, they can arrest you and indict you on almost anything: hearsy, circumstantial evidence ect. but the must have clear and concise evidence to meet their burden of proof, so what the judge knew to hold this boy doesnt have to amount to anything, and if you will notice now that the physical evidence IS coming in, the boy is out. I am betting that the charges will be dismissed bc of failure to meet the burden of proof, but that is just IMO...

[Hawk]

That's still two types of bullets. And it could come from a box created from a mix of old and new - but they're still different. And no such box was found, no 22 ammunition was found.

They aren't different. They are the same, except for the lead covered coating. They can be shot in a Chipmunk .22 rifle. The cartridges were a collection of left overs from previous usage. People usually buy whatever .22's are on sale, use what they need, then mix them with previously bought .22's.

[FDInLaw]

What he said and what is fact may not coincide. That's right, what the boy said might not have happened at all.

[rusure?]

No and No, They only had to have probable cause to hold him, which is entirely different than burden of proof, they can arrest you and indict you on almost anything: hearsy, circumstantial evidence ect. but the must have clear and concise evidence to meet their burden of proof, so what the judge knew to hold this boy doesnt have to amount to anything, and if you will notice now that the physical evidence IS coming in, the boy is out. I am betting that the charges will be dismissed bc of failure to meet the burden of proof, but that is just IMO...

I've been thinking the same thing for quite some time now. I still would like to see the cell phone records. They weren't listed on the disclosure and they need them to prove their timeline.

[IAMME]

It's the same bullet. Coating may be different. Depends on the manufacturer. The usual procedure for avid sport shooters is to dump your remaining .22 cartridges into a common box after a hunt or target shoot.
Very common practice.

Would the copper coated bullets explain the "different looking" casing? And i wasnt aware they found a box of 22s.....a box of 17s, but no proof they found ANY 22s. Or am I wrong?

[rusure?]

Would the copper coated bullets explain the "different looking" casing? And i wasnt aware they found a box of 22s.....a box of 17s, but no proof they found ANY 22s. Or am I wrong?

They got a box that said 17's. Rodrigez wrote on the evidence list, box of 22's. I don't know if that means he doesn't know the difference between the number 17 and 22 or not. Surely LEO would know their numbers?

From the crime scene photos, I thought the casing in the doorway looked odd, compared to the others. It looked bigger around to me.

[rusure?]

It just dawned on me that the next hearing is in two days.
Maybe we'll get some answers.

[Hawk]

Would the copper coated bullets explain the "different looking" casing? And i wasnt aware they found a box of 22s.....a box of 17s, but no proof they found ANY 22s. Or am I wrong?

The .17 HMR box is made of durable plastic, a natural, and handy, storage place for unused .22's if the .22's came in a cardboard box, as most do.
Regardless of the bullet coating the brass casings would be the same.
We don't know what was in the box Sgt. Rodriguez took into evidence.

[dgfred]

I believe someone that has or has hid a Mossburg Rifle better be laying low the next good while.
Maybe a coat of paint and some rims might be in order for that white car too.

[Jacobtk]

I do too and I think the boy was the one that made his dad's face covered in blood.

IMO, he saw him alright, because he was the shooter.

Vincent's face would not be covered in blood that quickly. It takes several minutes for blood to ooze from that kind of wound (something that was a major issue in the Tyler Edmunds case). So if the boy saw blood, he had to have happened on the scene.

[Hawk]

So how can what the boy say coinside with the crime scene? iirc, that was your initial reaction.

The empty casings are in positions that indicate what the boy said is what happened.

[Details]

What he said and what is fact may not coincide.And that's the best predictor of a false confession - when it fails to match any of the facts. Number of shots, where they were shot, where the gun was left - not a single detail he provided independently matches anything that we know (rather than what we might suppose, guess, theorize, etc) about the crime scene.

[dgfred]

The empty casings are in positions that indicate what the boy said is what happened.

How's that? Wouldn't the casings be near the headshot victims anyway since they were probably fired from a nearer range?

I think you can make up any scenario to 'fit' where the casings were found, but that really doesn't verify anything as they could have been
moved.

[Hawk]

And that's the best predictor of a false confession - when it fails to match any of the facts. Number of shots, where they were shot, where the gun was left - not a single detail he provided independently matches anything that we know (rather than what we might suppose, guess, theorize, etc) about the crime scene.

It matches. That's why he was arrested.

[IAMME]

The .17 HMR box is made of durable plastic, a natural, and handy, storage place for unused .22's if the .22's came in a cardboard box, as most do.
Regardless of the bullet coating the brass casings would be the same.
We don't know what was in the box Sgt. Rodriguez took into evidence.


Thank you hawk!

[dgfred]

It matches. That's why he was arrested.


Not really, he was arrested more on suspicion and what the officers 'felt'. Not what was found at the crime scene... even then they at first suspected he was just a witness.

[Details]

They aren't different. They are the same, except for the lead covered coating. They can be shot in a Chipmunk .22 rifle. The cartridges were a collection of left overs from previous usage. People usually buy whatever .22's are on sale, use what they need, then mix them with previously bought .22's.That makes them different. Which means it could be two mixed boxes - or two shooters. But without any box of mixed 22 cartridges, without any box of 22 cartridges period, we've got no way to know.

The bullets are different. Same caliber, same type - but from different batches, likely different manufacturers. So, where are the boxes? Why aren't there any more? And while sometimes bullets are mixed - it is just as probable that this indicates two different guns - we've got zero data to tell us whether this is happenstance, or a relevant fact in this crime.

[Hawk]

How's that? Wouldn't the casings be near the headshot victims anyway since they were probably fired from a nearer range?

I think you can make up any scenario to 'fit' where the casings were found, but that really doesn't verify anything as they could have been
moved.

You can't make any scenario. A semi-automatic leaves the empty casings a short distance from where they were fired. A single shot leaves them where you reload.

Why would anyone in LE move the evidence? And if they did it would have to match the confession that was given the next day.

[Details]

It matches. That's why he was arrested.He was arrested because he confessed - not because it matched - it simply does not. Nor do the police claim it did match - they don't claim the two men were shot twice, they don't claim the gun was found in the closet - they don't even claim to know what order the two men were shot.

[rusure?]

You can't make any scenario. A semi-automatic leaves the empty casings a short distance from where they were fired. A single shot leaves them where you reload.

Why would anyone in LE move the evidence?

For the same reason LE got information wrong and didn't do somethings and did somethings they shouldn't have.

[Details]

You can't make any scenario. A semi-automatic leaves the empty casings a short distance from where they were fired. A single shot leaves them where you reload.

Why would anyone in LE move the evidence?If they're to be believed, there was a puppy running around, LE entered not knowing if the killer was still there, could have kicked a casing, not to mention the killer could have hit them as he left, not to mention the gun can kick them out any which direction - but - I don't buy your idea that the casings tell that strong of a story. Many stories, different types of guns fit the casing locations, assuming they are all exactly as they were left.

[rusure?]

You can't make any scenario. A semi-automatic leaves the empty casings a short distance from where they were fired. A single shot leaves them where you reload.

Why would anyone in LE move the evidence? And if they did it would have to match the confession that was given the next day.

And we don't know if it was a semi-auto weapon or a single shot weapon, do we now? Just because LE says it was the chipmunk, doesn't make it so, does it?

[dgfred]

You can't make any scenario. A semi-automatic leaves the empty casings a short distance from where they were fired. A single shot leaves them where you reload.

Why would anyone in LE move the evidence?

I didn't say on purpose. If a kid is moving about the crime scene it is very likely something(s) got moved about.

A short distance in this situation could mean anywhere- down the steps, over the rail, reload a distance from where the shot was made, etc.

[IAMME]

I vote we start a pool for bail money, and whoever lives closest breaks into the pros. office and gets us some evidence!!!! J/K of course....now watch it will get broke into and ill go to jail....

[Hawk]

That makes them different. Which means it could be two mixed boxes - or two shooters. But without any box of mixed 22 cartridges, without any box of 22 cartridges period, we've got no way to know.

The bullets are different. Same caliber, same type - but from different batches, likely different manufacturers. So, where are the boxes? Why aren't there any more? And while sometimes bullets are mixed - it is just as probable that this indicates two different guns - we've got zero data to tell us whether this is happenstance, or a relevant fact in this crime.

They are the same bullets.
Simple fire-pin comparisons will determine if the Chipmunk was used. If it was, who fired it? Even if there was two killers?

[Hawk]

And we don't know if it was a semi-auto weapon or a single shot weapon, do we now? Just because LE says it was the chipmunk, doesn't make it so, does it?

The reverse is also true.

[dgfred]

One little ballistic report and a detail or two and I believe this forum could solve this.
Come on, give us a little bit of new stuff... please LE, judge or somebody!

[Hawk]

He was arrested because he confessed - not because it matched - it simply does not. Nor do the police claim it did match - they don't claim the two men were shot twice, they don't claim the gun was found in the closet - they don't even claim to know what order the two men were shot.

That isn't true. It was a combination of both. They match.

[rusure?]

The reverse is also true.

I agree, however, we don't know what weapon was used. The bullistics report came and then they sent for more bullistics from a different lab. So, they didn't know what weapon was used either. But the boy was still arrested based on a coerced false confession.

Houston, we've got a problem.

[rusure?]

That isn't true. It was a combination of both. They match.

IMO, and IMO, I think the coerced confession did it. They got the false confession and called everyone off their interviews of co-workers etc. All bets were off after the false confession.

[Hawk]

If they're to be believed, there was a puppy running around, LE entered not knowing if the killer was still there, could have kicked a casing, not to mention the killer could have hit them as he left, not to mention the gun can kick them out any which direction - but - I don't buy your idea that the casings tell that strong of a story. Many stories, different types of guns fit the casing locations, assuming they are all exactly as they were left.

Sgt Rodriguez was the first person inside, after the killer. These casings are tiny. It ain't likely they got kicked about.

The casings are the only way to determine the firing sequence. What else is there?
A medical expert will only be able to guess at which wound fell these men.

[rusure?]

Sgt Rodriguez was the first person inside, after the killer. These casings are tiny. It ain't likely they got kicked about.

The casings are the only way to determine the firing sequence. What else is there?
A medical expert will only be able to guess at which wound fell these men.

Why wouldn't they get kick because they are tiny?

Why did Rodrigez enter the home by himself. Don't they usually go in pairs?

[Hawk]

I agree, however, we don't know what weapon was used. The bullistics report came and then they sent for more bullistics from a different lab. So, they didn't know what weapon was used either. But the boy was still arrested based on a coerced false confession.

Houston, we've got a problem.


You're right. I hope the Chipmunk is excluded. I'm just filling space waiting on the lab results and going on what we already know (or think we know).

There may not be any exculpatory evidence.

[IAMME]

Sgt Rodriguez was the first person inside, after the killer. These casings are tiny. It ain't likely they got kicked about.

The casings are the only way to determine the firing sequence. What else is there?
A medical expert will only be able to guess at which wound fell these men.

Hmmm, I am not sure about that...if there was a delay in the shootings...shot Vincent a couple times then went and shot tim a couple then back to vincent, then back to tim The medical examiner MIGHT be able to tell which shots were first.....but im not sure how long a time lapse that would have to be between shots.....Any one have a guess? I think the amount of bleeding in and around the wounds would tell how long that shot was there before the cardiac system shut down.....which might give some clues....but again not sure how much time would have to elapse between shots to show that...

[dgfred]

Sgt Rodriguez was the first person inside, after the killer. These casings are tiny. It ain't likely they got kicked about.

The casings are the only way to determine the firing sequence. What else is there?
A medical expert will only be able to guess at which wound fell these men.

Show me how you can figure out firing sequence from where the casings are.

The medical expert will guess but you can figure out which wound and what shot was made and from where?

[Jacobtk]

That isn't true. It was a combination of both. They match.

What is the combination? Both Avila and Neckels admitted in their interviews with Brewer that the facts of scene did not match the boy's statements at all. What are you seeing that they did not?

[Hawk]

Show me how you can figure out firing sequence from where the casings are.

The medical expert will guess but you can figure out which wound and what shot was made and from where?

I can only guess, like the rest of you.

[IAMME]

Why wouldn't they get kick because they are tiny?

Why did Rodrigez enter the home by himself. Don't they usually go in pairs?

My god! Do you blame him? I would rather go it alone than have the female Barney Fife as my backup!!

[Hawk]

What is the combination? Both Avila and Neckels admitted in their interviews with Brewer that the facts of scene did not match the boy's statements at all. What are you seeing that they did not?

I've posted that so many times that interest has waned.

[Details]

They are the same bullets.
Simple fire-pin comparisons will determine if the Chipmunk was used. If it was, who fired it? Even if there was two killers?Were it so simple, and came to the right conclusion - where's the evidence? It'd hardly need to be sent on to a second lab, right?

[dgfred]

I can only guess, like the rest of you.

So guessing shows you that the kid fits as the shooter? Wow.

[rusure?]

Actually, you proved my point again. You didn't understand the definition of "mean" in a statistical context and you obviously still don't.

Have a good day! Keep :read: studying!

I'm still waiting on even a single link to disprove anything I had bolded.

Keep waiting.
I didn't read your link to wikipedia because wikipedia is not a reliable source.

Mean in statistical context= the value obtained when the sum of the scores is divided by the number of scores. BTW, I got an A+ in statistics.

Now then, this is completely O/T and I for one do not want to be banned so....

[IAMME]

http://www.azfamily.com/perl/common/slideshow/sspop.pl?recid=12959&nextimage=7

Is that Tiffany in the tan jacket? In the crime scene??? I believe it is in pictures 4 and 8......WTH?

[rusure?]

My god! Do you blame him? I would rather go it alone than have the female Barney Fife as my backup!!

Well, no, I don't blame him, but anyone would be better than just by himself. Going alone could leave the back door open to accusations that he tampered with the evidence while wondering around in there.

[Details]

Hmmm, I am not sure about that...if there was a delay in the shootings...shot Vincent a couple times then went and shot tim a couple then back to vincent, then back to tim The medical examiner MIGHT be able to tell which shots were first.....but im not sure how long a time lapse that would have to be between shots.....Any one have a guess? I think the amount of bleeding in and around the wounds would tell how long that shot was there before the cardiac system shut down.....which might give some clues....but again not sure how much time would have to elapse between shots to show that...In the autopsy, no information about that was listed, he doesn't seem to have seen a significant difference between the varying wounds, except that on each man all but one were not close contact.

Cardiac system shuts down pretty fast with a shot to the head, but that was no doubt last. Still, there can't have been too long, and there's no signs of struggle marked down.

[Details]

What is the combination? Both Avila and Neckels admitted in their interviews with Brewer that the facts of scene did not match the boy's statements at all. What are you seeing that they did not?Hmm - Hawk, do you know better than they do? Or do you think they lied to the judge so the judge would think they did match?

[muska]

They got a box that said 17's. Rodrigez wrote on the evidence list, box of 22's. I don't know if that means he doesn't know the difference between the number 17 and 22 or not. Surely LEO would know their numbers?

From the crime scene photos, I thought the casing in the doorway looked odd, compared to the others. It looked bigger around to me.

In the Rodriquez transcript, they talk about how one casing looked different and that different one was found between TR's head and arm........not sure if that is the same one as the one in the doorway.
(around p103 or 104) They also talk about 4 of the 5 casings were found outside in the same general area.

[rusure?]

http://www.azfamily.com/perl/common/slideshow/sspop.pl?recid=12959&nextimage=7

Is that Tiffany in the tan jacket? In the crime scene??? I believe it is in pictures 4 and 8......WTH?

wonder if the boy was out riding that 4 wheeler?

[Hawk]

Were it so simple, and came to the right conclusion - where's the evidence? It'd hardly need to be sent on to a second lab, right?

Details, you yourself, or me, or anyone else, could compare the firing pin marks with aid of a simple locking vise and low power microscope. Unless there was a dispute (too close to call) there would be no need for a second opinion.
They usually take photographs and download them into a computer to zoom in. then overlap the images.

Could be that the first lab declared a miss-match so they sent the stuff somewhere else hoping for match conformation.

[dgfred]

Linda- Here is the link for the weather that day http://weather.wvec.com/auto/wvec/history/airport/KSJN/2008/11/5/DailyHistory.html?req_city=NA&req_state=NA&req_statename=NA

It was a high of 48 degrees. From 2:45 or 3:00 to 5pm it surely dropped. There was a wind speed of 18mph with gusts up to 40mph. Per the previous post with Coronado School the bus would have arrived from 2:45 to 3pm per their transportation department. It is my opinion he would have had to walk around the block 2 hours to 2 hours and 15 minutes with the wind blowing in a cold temperature with no one seeing the boy walking around the block with his backpack maybe 10-15 times, without getting a snack, without going to the bathroom, without getting his dog. No one has come forward saying they saw him. IMO the boy lied again. His story doesn't fit. IMO


So the boy is tuff enough to plan and shoot his dad and another in the head, but not tuff enough to stay out in the not even semi-cold for 2 hrs?

[Hawk]

So guessing shows you that the kid fits as the shooter? Wow.

All investigation, including jurors, are guessing.

[rusure?]

I will then presume that you concede as you remain unable to source anything that refutes the information I provided to you, at your request.

O/T
I do not conceed. I posted my sources and comments. If that is not to your satisfaction, then too bad. I am not wasting my time on this anymore, nor anyone elses on this board. You can if you wish.

[IAMME]

Excellent!:thumbup:

There is no way this child did as he claimed.

imo


Because it was 48 degrees? I have yet to meet a child who is bothered enough by the cold to not be willing to play outside..... It was 34 degrees IN MY HOUSE last week and my 7 yo wanted to go play in the ice on the puddles outside.....

[Details]

Details, you yourself, or me, or anyone else, could compare the firing pin marks with aid of a simple locking vise and low power microscope. Unless there was a dispute (too close to call) there would be no need for a second opinion.
They usually take photographs and download them into a computer to zoom in. then overlap the images.

Could be that the first lab declared a miss-match so they sent the stuff somewhere else hoping for match conformation.I know. I've seen it done often enough, reality crime shows. It's not that difficult - but being precise and sure is the key - the reason you or I don't do it.

So - something simple, and they need a second opinion, either they didn't get a match, they got told the gun type was not a Chipmunk (that's also supposed to be pretty easy to find out), or some other issue. All possible reasons seem to point to one thing - the gun wasn't what they thought it was, according to the first set of results.

[Hawk]

Hmm - Hawk, do you know better than they do? Or do you think they lied to the judge so the judge would think they did match?

They matched.

[rusure?]

In the Rodriquez transcript, they talk about how one casing looked different and that different one was found between TR's head and arm........not sure if that is the same one as the one in the doorway.
(around p103 or 104) They also talk about 4 of the 5 casings were found outside in the same general area.

I wonder what their explanation was about there being one casing different from the others?

[Jacobtk]

Could be that the first lab declared a miss-match so they sent the stuff somewhere else hoping for match conformation.

I think that might have been what happened, however, it would severely hurt their case if they did that. It certainly borders on misconduct, particularly since they told the defense in open court that they sent it to one lab and were just waiting for results. If another lab found a match after a mismatch, it would raise questions about how they suddenly got a match (if they have one).

[Hawk]

I know. I've seen it done often enough, reality crime shows. It's not that difficult - but being precise and sure is the key - the reason you or I don't do it.

So - something simple, and they need a second opinion, either they didn't get a match, they got told the gun type was not a Chipmunk (that's also supposed to be pretty easy to find out), or some other issue. All possible reasons seem to point to one thing - the gun wasn't what they thought it was, according to the first set of results.

I hope so. There's a reason for everything.

[IAMME]

Details, you yourself, or me, or anyone else, could compare the firing pin marks with aid of a simple locking vise and low power microscope. Unless there was a dispute (too close to call) there would be no need for a second opinion.
They usually take photographs and download them into a computer to zoom in. then overlap the images.

Could be that the first lab declared a miss-match so they sent the stuff somewhere else hoping for match conformation.

ITA with that last sentence! If the facts dont fit attempt to change the facts.....imo

[rusure?]

Could be that the first lab declared a miss-match so they sent the stuff somewhere else hoping for match conformation.

Exactly the point. Hoping for match conformation when the first lab declared a miss-match.

Does a miss-match mean it didn't match the gun or that it was inconclusive. I'm not sure.

[Details]

They matched.So the police lied when they said they did not match?

[rusure?]

Because it was 48 degrees? I have yet to meet a child who is bothered enough by the cold to not be willing to play outside..... It was 34 degrees IN MY HOUSE last week and my 7 yo wanted to go play in the ice on the puddles outside.....

Heck, my oldest daughter wanted to play in the cold rain once and got mad because I wouldn't let her. Couldn't understand it was cold and wet outside. Kids, ya gotta love em.

[rusure?]

You're still wrong.

good grief. breaking my fingers

[dgfred]

No, not only because of the weather.

Was the boy wearing a jacket when he went to the neighbors?
Where is that jacket?

Well they might have got it the next day from a pile of clothes about like they did his other clothes.

[dgfred]

I agree

If there wasn't a match the defense would have made an immediate motion to dismiss


imo

So if there is no match or an inconclusive, does that mean to you the boy is innocent?

[rusure?]

No, not only because of the weather.

Was the boy wearing a jacket when he went to the neighbors?
Where is that jacket?

I've asked about that jacket. No one knows. If he did have one on, LE didn't collect it with his clothes. I would have thought Tiffany, grandparents, somebody would have had him put on a jacket after they arrived on the scene. The crime scene photos shows most with jackets on. If the boy did have a jacket on then, how did gsr get on his shirt?

[Hawk]

So the police lied when they said they did not match?

Don't think they lied. The match is apparent. Comparing what the boy said happened to the evidence.

[rusure?]

I agree

If there wasn't a match the defense would have made an immediate motion to dismiss


imo

How could they. They didn't get anything from the pros. Defense had to file a motion to get stuff from pros.

[dgfred]

I want to know if he was wearing it when he went to the neighbors.

I think it's an important piece of the puzzle and we have no idea if he was, or if he wasn't wearing it.

Not important to me. It wasn't really cold, and anyway a couple of shirts would be fine in 48 degree weather.

[Hawk]

So if there is no match or an inconclusive, does that mean to you the boy is innocent?

If there is no match the boy is innocent.
In my opinion.

[dgfred]

If it's proven the boy's gun wasn't the murder weapon and someone else's fingerprints are all over the casings then I would believe he's innocent.

If it's inconclusive...nope.

What about no fingerprints and not the boys gun?

[IAMME]

I want to know if he was wearing it when he went to the neighbors.

I think it's an important piece of the puzzle and we have no idea if he was, or if he wasn't wearing it.


Wasn't he wearing a heavy sweat shirt? I thought he was wearing a hoodie, in 48 degree weather that would be adequate if he had on a shirt on under it. IMO

[Details]

Don't think they lied. The match is apparent. Comparing what the boy said happened to the evidence.Why do they say differently?

And why does no one else see it? Two shots, not 4 or 6, gun in closet, and only what you admit is just your own guess to say that his story matches at all - even you say the only thing that matches is the order in which the men were shot, and you admit that is your guess, not fact, nor the only possible story.

[IAMME]

If it's proven the boy's gun wasn't the murder weapon and someone else's fingerprints are all over the casings then I would believe he's innocent.

If it's inconclusive...nope.

What if the gun was used but someone else's finger prints on the casings?

[Jacobtk]

Don't think they lied. The match is apparent. Comparing what the boy said happened to the evidence.

There is no comparison. The only thing the boy got correct was the placement of the bodies. He gave incorrect information about the number of shots, where his gun was and where his father was shot. More so, none of that information was something he gave up freely. He only stated those things after Avila grilled him and led him to make those statements. That makes the statements in and of themselves suspect, let alone the fact that they do not match the crime scene at all.

[IAMME]

Is that the shirt they tested for GSR?

IIRC yes it was!

[Hawk]

If it's proven the boy's gun wasn't the murder weapon and someone else's fingerprints are all over the casings then I would believe he's innocent.

If it's inconclusive...nope.

It would be hard for the firing pin marks not be conclusive. A rimfire is designed for the firing pin to strike the rim (thus the name). Two identical marks from two separate guns, rifle or pistol, is nearly impossible due to to the lax tolerances gun bolts are manufactured at. The firing pin has to have some lateral movement so it doesn't 'stick' inside the bolt.

[dgfred]

If there is no match the boy is innocent.
In my opinion.

Sounds good to me :thumbsup: . Now go find out for us, pronto!

[Hawk]

What if the gun was used but someone else's finger prints on the casings?

If the Chipmunk was used, and the boy wasn't the shooter, then we're back to a crackhead, or a complicated 'framing' by ..............

[Crispy]

If the Chipmunk was used, and the boy wasn't the shooter, then we're back to a crackhead, or a complicated 'framing' by ..............

I vote crack head!

[Hawk]

There is no comparison. The only thing the boy got correct was the placement of the bodies. He gave incorrect information about the number of shots, where his gun was and where his father was shot. More so, none of that information was something he gave up freely. He only stated those things after Avila grilled him and led him to make those statements. That makes the statements in and of themselves suspect, let alone the fact that they do not match the crime scene at all.

Casing locations dispute that.

[rusure?]

Wasn't he wearing a heavy sweat shirt? I thought he was wearing a hoodie, in 48 degree weather that would be adequate if he had on a shirt on under it. IMO

Why didn't LE collect that to test for gsr? Maybe the gsr transfered from his jacket.

[dgfred]

If the Chipmunk was used, and the boy wasn't the shooter, then we're back to a crackhead, or a complicated 'framing' by ..............

I'm thinking two guns were used anyway, that or not the Chipmunk at all and only one (automatic) used. No way was the Chipmunk the only means of knocking off two grown men imo.

[rusure?]

Why do they say differently?

And why does no one else see it? Two shots, not 4 or 6, gun in closet, and only what you admit is just your own guess to say that his story matches at all - even you say the only thing that matches is the order in which the men were shot, and you admit that is your guess, not fact, nor the only possible story.

I saw it. I still see it. I will always see it.

[Hawk]

I vote crack head!

You'd vote for the mailman, if it pointed away from the boy!
GOD bless you. Wish we could be on the jury (if there was one).

[GentleBreeze]

Don't forget that he would have had to have placed his book bag under the kitchen table somewhere in the middle of all of that!

Also had the wherewithal to let Nellie out of her cage after seeing dead men laying on the porch and on the stairs.

Yet never thinks of Nellie when he is supposedly out on his multiple trips around the block with her locked up all that extra time.

imoo

[Jacobtk]

Casing locations dispute that.

The boy never mentioned anything about casings. Likewise, the casings' location do not tell the exact order the shots were fired. The casings can at best give a general idea of what happened. There was not a path of casings leading from Romans to Romero or vice versa. There were casings by Romero (4) and casings by Romans (6). All that tells is that the shooter(s) were relatively close to the men when they were shot. They do not implicate the boy or anyone else.

[muska]

Wasn't he wearing a heavy sweat shirt? I thought he was wearing a hoodie, in 48 degree weather that would be adequate if he had on a shirt on under it. IMO

They took some kind of black,thermal shirt for testing. No jacket was taken....just shirt, pants, and tennis shoes.

[rusure?]

You'd vote for the mailman, if it pointed away from the boy!
GOD bless you. Wish we could be on the jury (if there was one).

Lord, thank goodness we won't be on a jury. We'd end up in the jury room for the rest of our lives because of being a hung jury. :lol:

[Hawk]

The boy never mentioned anything about casings. Likewise, the casings' location do not tell the exact order the shots were fired. The casings can at best give a general idea of what happened. There was not a path of casings leading from Romans to Romero or vice versa. There were casings by Romero (4) and casings by Romans (6). All that tells is that the shooter(s) were relatively close to the men when they were shot. They do not implicate the boy or anyone else.

There was a distinctive path that tells the story.

[Hawk]

Lord, thank goodness we won't be on a jury. We'd end up in the jury room for the rest of our lives because of being a hung jury. :lol:

Well, I ain't hung, but I'd vote and argue for, acquittal!

[rusure?]

There was a distinctive path that tells the story.

But a distinctive path cannot definatively point to an individual as being the or a sole shooter.

[rusure?]

Well, I ain't hung, but I'd vote and argue for, acquittal!

Well, Hawk. Doesn't acquittal mean not-guilty?

[Hawk]

But a distinctive path cannot definatively point to an individual as being the or a sole shooter.

And that's the truth.

[dgfred]

Also had the wherewithal to let Nellie out of her cage after seeing dead men laying on the porch and on the stairs.

Yet never thinks of Nellie when he is supposedly out on his multiple trips around the block with her locked up all that extra time.

imoo

Don't ya think the dog was probably going bonkers with all that shooting going on all around him?

I like how y'all pick when and where he shows 'wherewithal' to help it fit your scenario, but completely dismiss it at other times.

[rusure?]

Very true!

Personally, If I came home to a dead man at my front door..I would have bolted straight to the neighbors

Why Linda, I thought you would go to your room and call from your cell phone.:huh:

[GentleBreeze]

Very true!

Personally, If I came home to a dead man at my front door..I would have bolted straight to the neighbors

Me too, I would be so afraid the killer may be inside my home.

:chicken:

[dgfred]

Very true!

Personally, If I came home to a dead man at my front door..I would have bolted straight to the neighbors

You better call 911 or some are gonna think you did it, or so they say.

[rusure?]

Me too, I would be so afraid the killer may be inside my home.

:chicken:

But a reasonable person would run to their room and call 911 from their cell phone, wouldn't they?:blink:

[GentleBreeze]

Why Linda, I thought you would go to your room and call from your cell phone.:huh:

If I did go into the home, which I don't think I ever would, and a cell phone was close by then I would use the cell phone to call 911. Or grab it and run outside and call.

imoo

[dgfred]

Very true!

Personally, If I came home to a dead man at my front door..I would have bolted straight to the neighbors

I'm not sure if the worry for your dad might overpower your fear.

[rusure?]

So he walked around the block 10+ times in only a thermal shirt?

I think he came home from school, let the dog out of her cage, put his book bag where it was found, took off his jacket...killed two men and went to the neighbors.

or was he wearing a jacket when he went to the neighbors?

We don't know for sure, but, if he was, I want to know why they didn't collect it with his clothes for testing.

[Hawk]

Well, Hawk. Doesn't acquittal mean not-guilty?


I knew better than stay on this post arguing with women (who are by nature smarter than me). How dumb can an old man be?

Okay. You got me.
I'd still vote for acquittal. And pray for the rest of my life that the boy got serious religion and realistic human counseling.

[dgfred]

So he walked around the block 10+ times in only a thermal shirt?

I think he came home from school, let the dog out of her cage, put his book bag where it was found, took off his jacket...killed two men and went to the neighbors.

or was he wearing a jacket when he went to the neighbors?

Dang, it is Arizona (48+) not Siberia!

[Crispy]

You'd vote for the mailman, if it pointed away from the boy!
GOD bless you. Wish we could be on the jury (if there was one).

Where was the mailman? What time did he deliver the mail?

JOKING!! (or am I?)

Seriously we need ballistics reports ASAP!!

[Details]

It's not that cold - especially if you're active, walking around. I went to London during winter - it was colder than that. Pretty soon it became apparent all the cold weather clothing I'd brought (long underwear, etc. - I'm a San Diegan - wasn't sure how I'd deal with the weather) was massive overkill.

[dgfred]

I knew better than stay on this post arguing with women (who are by nature smarter than me). How dumb can an old man be?

Okay. You got me.
I'd still vote for acquittal. And pray for the rest of my life that the boy got serious religion and realistic human counseling.

Us old men need to stick together better Hawk :biggrin: .

I could be an impartial juror, but not with the stuff they have shown us so far.

[GentleBreeze]

But a reasonable person would run to their room and call 911 from their cell phone, wouldn't they?:blink:

Only if they went in the home and the room was very close by like it was in this case.

I don't think entering the home is reasonable unless the person entering knows there is no other shooter but them. Then of course they wouldn't have reason to be afraid to enter the home.

imo

[Hawk]

Us old men need to stick together better Hawk :biggrin: .

I could be an impartial juror, but not with the stuff they have shown us so far.

We will then.
You handle rusure and I'll take on the rest.
(We might be outclassed though).

[GentleBreeze]

Dang, it is Arizona (48+) not Siberia!

With 33 mph wind gust it makes it downright chilly.

Look at how Tim and Vinnie were dressed. Lots of layered clothing.

They had on jackets.

imoo

[Aradia5]

The shell casing locations match the boy's story. Arguing isn't going to change that.

What if that is what the kid saw happen?

[Aradia5]

NO WAY would I ever move a dead man's head to get in my door. I would be banging on neighbor's doors.

I have a hard time believing anyone stumbling upon a murder scene would do anything else.


There would be no nudging of bloody bodies either!
I would, I could and I could.

[dgfred]

With 33 mph wind gust it makes it downright chilly.

Look at how Tim and Vinnie were dressed. Lots of layered clothing.

They had on jackets.

imoo

A thermal shirt will do just fine.

[IAMME]

Is that the shirt they tested for GSR?

BB: And what was he wearing? 14
TA: You know, I believe, blue jeans and, maybe a, long sleeve, navy blue, black, type, s, pullover shirt.
BB: What kinda shoes, you remember?
TA: I know he had tennies, but I don’t remember what they looked like.

http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/Avilla.pdf
page 14-15

[Hawk]

Where was the mailman? What time did he deliver the mail?

JOKING!! (or am I?)

Seriously we need ballistics reports ASAP!!

Who knows! The mailman might have been pis... that Tiffany wasn't home on her loafing day from work!
A mail truck seen by witnesses is easily forgotten. A common occurrence.

[Details]

I'm not sure if the worry for your dad might overpower your fear.If anyone I loved might be in the house, I'd go in first. Not even thinking of anything but that they might be in danger. After I found out they were dead, then my own safety would be the next priority (oh bleep, I gotta get out of here, they might still be here!).

[rusure?]

I NEVER said that.

You didn't refute the quote either. Your post 936. Read Hawk's quote that you replied to.

[Jacobtk]

I don't think entering the home is reasonable unless the person entering knows there is no other shooter but them.

It is not reasonable, however, trauma has the effect of causing people to behaving unreasonably. When I was told my uncle had died, I called his cell phone. That was a completely unreasonable and utterly stupid thing to do, but I did it anyway. I honestly cannot remember what prompted me to do it, either. All I recall is being in total disbelief.

However, why would an 8-year-old even think about someone still being in the house or particularly care at that point? Is it really that improbable that a child would want to see if his father was okay?

[dgfred]

We will then.
You handle rusure and I'll take on the rest.
(We might be outclassed though).


OK, but you got Linda and G B :blink: to get straight!

I hope they have another witness to the white car somewhere. Maybe they have some suspects and we just don't have a clue.

[rusure?]

Who knows! A mail truck seen by witnesses is easily forgotten. A common occurrence.

Perhaps a common occurrence like a kid walking in the neighborhood on Wednesdays and Fridays after school for an hour or two.

[Hawk]

OK, but you got Linda and G B :blink: to get straight!

I hope they have another witness to the white car somewhere. Maybe they have some suspects and we just don't have a clue.

Okay. You got the hard spot!

[rusure?]

NO WAY would I ever move a dead man's head to get in my door. I would be banging on neighbor's doors.

I have a hard time believing anyone stumbling upon a murder scene would do anything else.


There would be no nudging of bloody bodies either!

But you are an adult and the one accused is a child. Children like to mess with slimy frogs and snakes and puppy dogs tails. There are adults who would dare cause it grosses them out.

[Hawk]

If anyone I loved might be in the house, I'd go in first. Not even thinking of anything but that they might be in danger. After I found out they were dead, then my own safety would be the next priority (oh bleep, I gotta get out of here, they might still be here!).

But you'd stop to let the dog out?

[Aradia5]

If anyone I loved might be in the house, I'd go in first. Not even thinking of anything but that they might be in danger. After I found out they were dead, then my own safety would be the next priority (oh bleep, I gotta get out of here, they might still be here!).

I'm right behind you.

[rusure?]

It is not reasonable, however, trauma has the effect of causing people to behaving unreasonably. When I was told my uncle had died, I called his cell phone. That was a completely unreasonable and utterly stupid thing to do, but I did it anyway. I honestly cannot remember what prompted me to do it, either. All I recall is being in total disbelief.

However, why would an 8-year-old even think about someone still being in the house or particularly care at that point? Is it really that improbable that a child would want to see if his father was okay?

Not improbable in the least, especially if the boy loved him like folks around town said he did.

I was talking to my husband on my cell phone after being in a 4 car accident. I was talking and then paniced because I couldn't find my cell phone. Silly me, I was talking on it.:blushing:

[Details]

But you'd stop to let the dog out?I don't know - fear, shock, and rationality don't go together well. Maybe he was on autopilot. Maybe he wanted the feeling of protection and/or company of having the dog. Maybe he didn't let the dog out, just had a false memory where a previous arrival home gets mixed in with this one.

Me - as a rational adult, I might well let the dog out. Takes a split second to do, if someone is in the house, it might warn me, if my loved one is alive they might find them. Dog kennels are not hard at all to open, it is a literal split second.

Likewise for throwing his bookbag under the table - that was an automatic reflex for me, walk in the door, backpack slides off the shoulders, thrown to it's place - again, not something you spend time and thought on, a fast reflex - and one that if you are thinking rationally, allows you to move faster.