AZ - Timothy Romans, 39, & Vincent Romero, 29, slain, St Johns, 5 Nov 2008 - #5

[SoobsinMI]

Respectfully, Fairy, I will never believe that.

An attorney who thinks his client is innocent or that the State doesn't have the evidence, would never let him plea to a deal, that they know all too well, this boy will tote around with him for the rest of his life. imo

Sorry OBE, but you are wrong. An defense attorneys job isn't to "get to the truth," that's the state's job. I know several attorneys, am related to many, and have worked with a few. An attorney's job is to get the best possible outcome for their client. Sometimes that includes the "truth" but it rarely or never happens if it will do more harm to the client, whether that be financially or emotionally.

I am unsure why you disregard the fact that people do take pleas, even when they are innocent.

 

[fran]

fran,

"PPPS...OTOH, and ON topic,... We had a LOT of firearms in our house, ALL the kids knew how to shoot and they NEVER once handled the guns when they weren't supposed to. With regard to HOW this crime is alleged to have evolved, even my husband who could hit 99 out of 100 in skeet (singles, doubles, any which way), couldn't have pulled this crime with a single, bolt action 22 like LE wants us to believe this child did. No way! and that's saying a lot!!! fran"

Strange how people see things so differently isn't it?

My hubby has been an avid hunter practically all of his life. When I told him in detail how this crime happened, he still has his .22 youth model single bolt action rifle in the gun safe. He took the unloaded gun down and we went to his mom's farm and he took the weapon along. He followed through showing how easy it was to load, eject, reload, aim and fire each time. It took only a few seconds each time to go through the entire steps.

Then he told me that I have to figure in the surprise of the attack and that it came without any warning because that too gives the shooter an advantage. I am sure he is not as quick as he once was when he was younger, but I was amazed at what little time it actually took to go through all the steps each time. About 6 seconds for him to do it.

Our grandsons competition shoot and they use their single bolt action .22s and can squeeze off more than 10 shots in a short period of time and they are around this boy's age.

I knew this gun was easy to shoot. I had one when I was 7 years old but I gave that gun to my brother and haven't shot that type of gun in years. Watching my husband go through the simple steps made it much clearer for me again. This gun's intended purpose is to be a very simple mechanism made especially for youths.

imo

Well, I lost my husband 1 1/2 years ago so I can't have him demonstrate. (you're lucky) I'm sure your husband may have been able to fire fairly rapidly. But watching demonstrations of persons firing this gun, I counted at the least, 6-7 seconds between each round. These were people demonstrating how quickly they could shoot. These were boys much older than the child in this case and they thought they were doing pretty well. PLUS, they weren't under duress of shooting at a live person

Even the least of 6 seconds is wayyyy to long in between rounds to have been able to take over one person, much less two. The victim is not going to stand there and wait for the person to reload. They're either going to be running towards or away from the line of fire. IF it were the child, it's possible their first reaction would have been towards the person firing and it wouldn't take 6 seconds to reach their goal.

There's no way this child would be able to get this off.....sorry, I just can't buy it.

JMHO
fran

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Sorry OBE, but you are wrong. An defense attorneys job isn't to "get to the truth," that's the state's job. I know several attorneys, am related to many, and have worked with a few. An attorney's job is to get the best possible outcome for their client. Sometimes that includes the "truth" but it rarely or never happens if it will do more harm to the client, whether that be financially or emotionally.

I am unsure why you disregard the fact that people do take pleas, even when they are innocent.

I can see a defendant taking a plea if they were going for the death penalty. Imo, the risk would be too high to roll the dice in court but this kid was being tried as a juvenile and the most time he could have gotten for both murders had it gone to trial would be to the age of 18, then he is cut loose.

I do agree. I do think that attorneys really know if their client is guilty or not. They are the ones that look closely at the true evidence handed over in any case, even though many don't directly ask their client. I truly think that his attorneys thought this was the best deal possible for him and to insure that he did not do major time later on when he became an adult.

imo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Well, I lost my husband 1 1/2 years ago so I can't have him demonstrate. (you're lucky) I'm sure your husband may have been able to fire fairly rapidly. But watching demonstrations of persons firing this gun, I counted at the least, 6-7 seconds between each round. These were people demonstrating how quickly they could shoot. These were boys much older than the child in this case and they thought they were doing pretty well. PLUS, they weren't under duress of shooting at a live person

Even the least of 6 seconds is wayyyy to long in between rounds to have been able to take over one person, much less two. The victim is not going to stand there and wait for the person to reload. They're either going to be running towards or away from the line of fire. IF it were the child, it's possible their first reaction would have been towards the person firing and it wouldn't take 6 seconds to reach their goal.

There's no way this child would be able to get this off.....sorry, I just can't buy it.

JMHO
fran

I am so sorry for the loss of your husband. Yes, I am extremely blessed to have my husband and I appreciate that blessing everyday.

If the shooter was on the top landing of the stairwell, shooting down toward Vinnie, then since he died on the upper landing maybe he was trying to advance but only got that far before becoming incapacitated.

We do know that Tim was trying to advance toward the home. Imo he was trying to get up against the home and out of the firing line of fire. He tried and failed too. But humans cant stop bullets that are coming every 6 seconds or so. These men were no different than anyone else who became victims, when they had no weapon to protect themselves from being a target, with multiple shots being fired into their head and body.

imo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/mental_preparation.htm

Adrenalin
Modern technology is a wonderful thing. With it we have been able to explore the wonders of how the human brain works. And we have begun to better understand the relationship between the brain and the body.

There exists a huge and complex body of work about how the human brain and body react in crisis. Epinephrine (often called adrenalin) is a powerful factor in our actions during crisis. So too is what part of the brain is 'driving' in a crisis. Different parts serve different functions and there is a proven connection between what is happening outside and what part is 'active' inside. What are also known is the psychological/perceptual/physiological changes that our bodies undergo in a crisis.

This massively complex cocktail of factors is collectively known as the adrenal stress response.

We change in a crisis -- and not always for the better. Our physical and mental acuity are greatly reduced and we are functioning in a very primitive and raw state.

Not only is functioning more difficult, but our perceptions are altered. That is to say our internal 'reality' may not be an accurate reflection of the external 'actuality.' Unfortunately, in this condition what we are going to be reacting to is our internal reality. This is why so many people, although they are convinced they are legally defending themselves are in fact, fighting.

The adrenal response can easily create two totally different problems. One is that it renders you incapable of action. Two is it causes you to go berserk on someone ... neither is good.

Survival Mindset
What are the issue effecting your ability to stay alive? They probably aren't what you think they are.

 

[fran]

Just as the victim's mind might change during a crisis, so would a murderer, and most especially a child of 8 yo. These were two grown men who'd most likely been in peril before on some level, not necessarily life-threatening. But to ASSUME that in a life and death situation this 8 yo child would have more wits about him than these two men, well, sorry, doesn't make logical sense.

No matter what the academic level is of this child, he's not experienced in life at all. If he was forced to reload more swiftly because a victim was coming at him in self-defense, no matter what anyone might say, his first reaction would be to back up while he was still reloading, in his own self-defense, thus increasing the time it would take to reload.

There's indication on both victims that at least one shot each was not critical, ie arm or whatever. At the least, that would have given the victim more time to over-take their assailant.

I don't see any possible way this crime could have occurred except with an automatic or at the least, semi-automatic. There's a reason there weren't any unspent shells on the floor downstairs where the majority of the shooting occurred. IMO, it's because the gun was already loaded with a clip of 10 rounds.

They still haven't been able to place the gun in the child's hands. Fingerprint technology is the oldest of the forensic testing done in this case. Even after four months, they still have UNIDENTIFIED prints on the alleged murder weapon. At the very least, there's no way anyone will ever convince me that not only did this child murder both men in cold blood with a single, bolt action 22, but that he wiped his fingerprints off the gun as well.

This is just not how real life works. This child is not a genious, he's just a typical now 9 yo child.

JMHO
fran

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Just as the victim's mind might change during a crisis, so would a murderer, and most especially a child of 8 yo. These were two grown men who'd most likely been in peril before on some level, not necessarily life-threatening. But to ASSUME that in a life and death situation this 8 yo child would have more wits about him than these two men, well, sorry, doesn't make logical sense.

No matter what the academic level is of this child, he's not experienced in life at all. If he was forced to reload more swiftly because a victim was coming at him in self-defense, no matter what anyone might say, his first reaction would be to back up while he was still reloading, in his own self-defense, thus increasing the time it would take to reload.

There's indication on both victims that at least one shot each was not critical, ie arm or whatever. At the least, that would have given the victim more time to over-take their assailant.

I don't see any possible way this crime could have occurred except with an automatic or at the least, semi-automatic. There's a reason there weren't any unspent shells on the floor downstairs where the majority of the shooting occurred. IMO, it's because the gun was already loaded with a clip of 10 rounds.

They still haven't been able to place the gun in the child's hands. Fingerprint technology is the oldest of the forensic testing done in this case. Even after four months, they still have UNIDENTIFIED prints on the alleged murder weapon. At the very least, there's no way anyone will ever convince me that not only did this child murder both men in cold blood with a single, bolt action 22, but that he wiped his fingerprints off the gun as well.

This is just not how real life works. This child is not a genious, he's just a typical now 9 yo child.

JMHO
fran

Overtake him? Just run toward a barrel of a gun that is shooting bullets into their bodies and heads? We don't even know how far away he was from the victims when he fired each shot except the one to Tim's head that was a close up shot. IMO, it is logical to believe that Tim by then was no longer able to the think about defending himself.

We don't even know if Tim knew right away where the shooter was standing. He could have been using the ivy bushes as a blind. Tim would know they were coming from the home/patio area but not exactly where imo.

Who said he had to be a genius? He didn't even have to have expert skill to shoot at two large targets.

You need to read up on fingerprints on weapons. There are times when they cannot retrieve fingerprints off of a weapon. It is never a 100% success.

imoo

 

[Salem]

(((((Fran))))) I'm sorry for your loss.

Salem

 

[Salem]

Respectfully snipped for length ~

We don't even know if Tim knew right away where the shooter was standing. He could have been using the ivy bushes as a blind. Tim would know they were coming from the home/patio area but not exactly where imo.

imoo

We don't know where the child was when he was shooting at Tim - but if the child was on the stairwell shooting at this father - then he HAD to come out of that house and hide in the ivy without Tim seeing him. The whole pattern of the shots does not make sense. This is where the reconstructor guy would be very helpful. As I said, I have pondered this for many an evening, discussing with both my husband and son, even drawing myself pictures. Doesn't make sense. It just doesn't make sense that the kid could fire that many shots, while moving around the scene in the time given based on the cell phone call and the 911 call.

OBE - you say several times that the unknown fingerprint could just be a smudge. I agree it could be. BUT it also could be from someone else. WHY does the unknown fingerprint - as Fran said the oldest form of foresnic evidence - not raise any doubt in your mind? Just the fingerprint?

Salem

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Respectfully snipped for length ~

We don't know where the child was when he was shooting at Tim - but if the child was on the stairwell shooting at this father - then he HAD to come out of that house and hide in the ivy without Tim seeing him. The whole pattern of the shots does not make sense. This is where the reconstructor guy would be very helpful. As I said, I have pondered this for many an evening, discussing with both my husband and son, even drawing myself pictures. Doesn't make sense. It just doesn't make sense that the kid could fire that many shots, while moving around the scene in the time given based on the cell phone call and the 911 call.

OBE - you say several times that the unknown fingerprint could just be a smudge. I agree it could be. BUT it also could be from someone else. WHY does the unknown fingerprint - as Fran said the oldest form of forensic evidence - not raise any doubt in your mind? Just the fingerprint?

Salem

Because I have seen so many cases over the years where the experts couldn't retrieve the fingerprints off of a murder weapon. There are many variables why that can happen.

Did they say it was an unknown print belonging to someone else or an unidentifiable print where they needed clearer prints from the suspect?

I respect that people can see things differently. But for me, I can easily see how he was able to do this and not really have any skill either.

Yes, it would have been nice to see what the defense reenactment expert's conclusions were. The state of Az paid for those tests and I wish there was someway it could be made public but unfortunately they won't be, IMO.

imoo

 

[southcitymom]

Yep

JMHO
fran

Thanks!

 

[southcitymom]

......To believe that this def attorney, this pros, and this judge would not take this plea deal even IF they knew the child is innocent, is being naive, IMO......

(respectfully snipped)

It's just so interesting that MY perspective is that the belief that this def attorney, this pros, this judge would take this plea deal even if they knew the child was innocent is such a stretch that it seems like pure fantasy.

You are absolutely correct that pleas are made every day that don't necessarily reflect EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED given the law and the facts of any given situation (ie - first degree murder gets pled down to manslaughter, etc...etc...), but it is very rare that a person who has no guilt whatsoever and no evidence pointing to him/her enters into a plea for something they didn't do.....it is even rarer that such a person would be allowed to enter the plea if there were evidence available to all those closest to the case that indicated the person wasn't guilty.

The idea that this child was somehow bamboozled by numerous officers of the Court into taking the rap for two murders he didn't commit is just not, IMHO, grounded in reality.

I understand a lot of your frustration in not being able to feel satisfied with the outcome probably stems from a dearth of information and a bundle of unanswered questions. But we are never going to have that information.

I can surely understand thinking, "You know - we just don't know enough - and I cannot decide if I buy any of this without knowing more." I don't necessarily understand getting from that point to the point where I might think, "You know - we just don't know enough and I think all those people, including his own atty, framed this child because it was just easier to call an 8-year-old a double murderer than to spend some time following other leads to the real murderers."

 

[SoobsinMI]

(respectfully snipped)

but it is very rare that a person who has no guilt whatsoever and no evidence pointing to him/her enters into a plea for something they didn't do.....it is even rarer that such a person would be allowed to enter the plea if there were evidence available to all those closest to the case that indicated the person wasn't guilty.

The idea that this child was somehow bamboozled by numerous officers of the Court into taking the rap for two murders he didn't commit is just not, IMHO, grounded in reality.

I guess the link I provided the other day, that specifically addresses these issues, doesn't follow the party line, therefore no one chose to check it out. Or, no one gives a rip.

It's very frustrating to keep hearing that a) innocent people don't make plea deals on murder charges, and b) that officers of the court would never allow it to happen. The fact that the link provided specifically spoke of a teenager (14 years old) who was charged with multiple murder, made a FALSE confession with "facts" that did not match the murder scene, took a plea and was sentenced to a minimum of 20 years, and now is appealing as there is evidence that someone else actually murdered them, is NOT inconsequential.

 

[southcitymom]

I guess the link I provided the other day, that specifically addresses these issues, doesn't follow the party line, therefore no one chose to check it out. Or, no one gives a rip.

It's very frustrating to keep hearing that a) innocent people don't make plea deals on murder charges, and b) that officers of the court would never allow it to happen. The fact that the link provided specifically spoke of a teenager (14 years old) who was charged with multiple murder, made a FALSE confession with "facts" that did not match the murder scene, took a plea and was sentenced to a minimum of 20 years, and now is appealing as there is evidence that someone else actually murdered them, is NOT inconsequential.

Soobs, I do not recall looking at that link, but please don't take it personally. I can barely keep up with this thread as it is and have been doubly distracted by some of the other hullabaloo.

If you have the link handy, please repost it. If not - send me in the right direction and I will look for it.

Please know that I do understand that what you described happens sometimes, but I think it is rare. That said - I'd be happy to take a look. There is one case I am fairly familiar with where a false confession was obtained (and I think the kid was 14) and the kid was found guilty - but that was a trial and not a plea, so it's probably different from the case you are referencing.

 

[SoobsinMI]

Soobs, I do not recall looking at that link, but please don't take it personally. I can barely keep up with this thread as it is and have been doubly distracted by some of the other hullabaloo.

If you have the link handy, please repost it. If not - send me in the right direction and I will look for it.

Please know that I do understand that what you described happens sometimes, but I think it is rare. That said - I'd be happy to take a look. There is one case I am fairly familiar with where a false confession was obtained (and I think the kid was 14) and the kid was found guilty - but that was a trial and not a plea, so it's probably different from the case you are referencing.

You weren't the only one to disregard it, SCM. LOL Here's the link - http://www.freep.com/article/20090228/NEWS05/902280367

 

[southcitymom]

You weren't the only one to disregard it, SCM. LOL Here's the link - http://www.freep.com/article/20090228/NEWS05/902280367

Thanks, Soobs. You are right - it happens. I still think it's rare! And I also believe that more "care" would be taken with an 8- year-old elementary student from a tiny town that doesn't have a lot of murder going on than a teenager from Detroit. (that may not be fair, but I think it's the truth) And by care I mean - it's a LOT harder to believe an 8-year-old could kill two grown men and so the evidence has to be, IMHO, more persuasive. By care I also mean, 8 year olds don't show up in Court every day with double Murder 1 counts against them - we see it more with teens.

But thank you for the link!

 

[Formynextnovel]

I personally see no reason, either morally or legally, the State should seal the records of this investigation. Up to this time, the State had NO PROBLEM plastering everything they WANTED on the internet for everyone and his brother to read. They didn't even redact the child's name, plastering his name all over the world.

They say the child is guilty. They've got him to plea guilty. They got their way.

What they have put on the internet so far, shows only a small portion of what SHOULD have been a double murder investigation. IF they have nothing to hide, they would go ahead and file ALL they have. By NOT FILING it, that make them LOOK, APPEAR, as if they don't want everyone to see how they completed their investigation.

It's my understanding, that in order for a judge to ACCEPT a plea deal, he must first be certain a complete and thorough investigation has been done.

They started this............putting everything out there. Now let them finish it, prove it.

To seal the files at this point, IMHO, is ridiculous and making them look as if they're hiding something.

JMHO
fran

Actually, the only reason I can think they would have to seal this info is to protect this kid. Yes, an 8-year-old, (in my experience) would not be comptent to stand trial, because he/she COULD NOT understand the full implication any action/decision in this matter might have for the rest of his/her life. I can't help but intuit that in this case, those who know the most are protecting this child from the ramifications of an action he could not fully understand, or therefore, take fully to his responsibilty.

 

[Formynextnovel]

You weren't the only one to disregard it, SCM. LOL Here's the link - http://www.freep.com/article/20090228/NEWS05/902280367

Thanx soobs, I will take a look in the AM when I am more awakies.

 

[Salem]

You weren't the only one to disregard it, SCM. LOL Here's the link - http://www.freep.com/article/20090228/NEWS05/902280367

Here's another false confession story - these boys were 7 and 8. http://www.injusticeline.com/confess.html

~ After hours of interrogation, each boy had agreed with the officers that he had indeed been involved in the murder, and that their intention was to steal her bike. ~ end snip

These boys were interrogated for hours before confessing. I agree that the CR was not, however, the boy was told that someone saw him. So obviously, if someone saw him then it must be true, he must have committed this crime - ergo he confesses. St. Johns LE set this kid up to confess and the evidence is in the video tape that LE released to convince us that the child was guilty.

I'm not buying it. I think what happened to CR is exactly like what happened to the two boys in the article so I don't think there is any truth in that confession. I feel very badly for this boy that there is no one to stand up for him and see to it that a thorough investigation is done and that the child not agree to anything until it can be shown that the child was actually involved. My thought is that at this point, the child probably doesn't even know what is true and what is not and this plea deal is only going to further confuse the reality for him.

Salem

 

[shadowraiths]

Imo, they're backpedaling big time. When this case first broke, they were (metaphorically) pounding their chests... "we have a confession. we're going to try him as an adult for two counts of murder one. he coldly planned an executed these murders in such a sophisticated manner the case is open and shut... blah, blah, blah... "

The problem is, had they gone forward as they originally announced to the nation, he would have been found IST and no means to restore competency within the required time frame, the case would have been thrown out, and they would have had egg on their face for making promises they could not possibly keep. And, afaics, the judge recognized the faux pas in the making and hence, put forth the gag order.

As for the plea? I am still surprised his council accepted. And fwiw, no, the boy did not accept it. Regardless of what people think. He is not old enough to even know what a plea is, much less to accept one.

Imho, the case was handled unprofessionally by all involved. Regardless of whether or not this child murdered those men. But hey, these aren't the first to let the potential for publicity cloud their better judgment. And I doubt they will be the last. In fact, the first case where people were fired for the stunts they pulled, playing to the media, was the Wuornos case. And yes, she most certainly was guilty. Even amidst the circus that ensued.