AZ - Timothy Romans, 39, & Vincent Romero, 29, slain, St Johns, 5 Nov 2008 - #1

[mysteriew]

I live in AZ and have been following this through our newscasts and newspapers, and also on this board. I have heard this statement from the beginning over and over "The Child planned the murder of his father" or "this was premediated". How does LE know this? Has anything come out that proves this was planned in advance or premeditated? I have not heard anything, or have I missed it? Or are they saying that because they have proof or evidence that it was planned/premeditated but are not telling yet. Does anyone know?

Supposedly he admitted to the deputies that he planned the murders.

 

[liljim]

lae, i think that they are going to argue that he was "lying in wait" for the men when they got home, and also the reloading of the gun so many times, and the headshots which were possibly executions. (there is reason to believe that some or all of the headshots were while the men were already on the ground)

and maybe that he had some knowledge of needing to attack the two men seperately, with a single shot weapon and two adult males in front of him he is only getting one shot off.

 

[liljim]

where did you hear/see that mysteriew? i have not heard that said yet.

 

[mysteriew]

If the kid did kill both these men, he is not a sweet innocent child. To me there seems to be more evidence of guilt than of innocence, but time will tell. If the evidence is there, I'm thinking in the end he will make a plea of guilty and avoid a trial.

I agree with you. But that is a big "if". "If" he did it. I will admit I have a lot of predjudice in this case because LE interviewed the boy with no parent, guardian or attorney present. An 8 year old kid can be easily led. And an 8 year old kid internalizes a lot of things, mentally making themselves responsible for things they actually didn't do. Add to that deputies with guns and most kids will admit to anything they are told to admit to. If you tell your 8 year old that you saw a white dog in his yard, and tell it to him long enough- he will start telling that a white dog came in his yard. If praise him for being so brave for chasing that dog out of the yard- he will start telling you how he did it.

The thing about "I think" still bothers me. In the initial interview he didn't use "I think" when he was talking about coming home from school,when he was talking about finding his father. But in later interviews he starts saying "I think."

 

[oceanblueeyes]

You are correct, that opinions are encouraged, and I have a great deal of respect for opinions(as you should be able to see by my long time here at WS), but some (not you!) have called him a psychopath, an evil child, etc, with no professional evaluation. Some here have been downright mean and nasty about the boy, and it is out of line, IMO. It is one thing to have an opinion and another to attack someones character, no matter how old or young they are. Unless someone here has inside knowledge of the boy, the families, the DA, etc, they have 2nd and 3rd hand information, not VALID, irrefutable proof. With the gag order, the DA is not allowed to discuss the case, so we are left to assume, but have NO idea what their motive is for dismissing the case or wording it WITH PREDJUDICE. Perhaps they just do not have enough evidence, and therefore are "hoping" that they can collect enough evidence to later refile the charges? That may be one of MANY valid reasons why they filed with prejudice. Without the evidence being released, we just do not know. But I do respect your opinion, and perhaps you are correct. :blowkiss:
Perhaps I just so want to believe that this is an innocent boy and that he not guilty of this, but I do wait for the evidence.

I can certainly understand the emotions when it comes to this boy. It is very hard to admit or even think, that maybe just maybe, he did plan all of this and carried it out. It rocks most of us to the core. I just try hard to remove the emotional aspect and just look at it straight on about certain things we know or have read in the actual transcripts of the legal hearings that tends to make me lean one way or the other.

I just see so many things that point to him. Of course I could be very wrong and actually that would be a relief.

He said he got off of the bus and walked around the block 9-10 times. I just don't believe that is true and imo they have witnesses that saw this boy go home when he got off the bus. Around 4 people would be coming home from work. I think they do have witnesses to certain things in this case..... just not the murders themselves.

If there was another perp involved then why in the world would they leave an eye witness behind to tell? If a someone will kill two people in this brutal way one more wouldn't matter to them imo.

It just seems he was at the crime scene when this happened and two men are dead but he isn't harmed at all.

I do believe Mrs. Romans, she never accused this boy but she did want them to ask him what he saw and that is very understandable. I think we would do the same, if God forbid something like this happened to our loved one.

The spiel he gave his grandmother about that his dad did not die quickly because he was shot in the chest. How would he have known that already with his father's body laying face down and he still had his jacket and overalls on, when a police officer didn't even know he had been shot in the chest and he was right at the body looking at it closely and he is a professional? I can just imagine once the autopsy reports came back and it showed shots to the chest how that made the hairs stand up on the neck of the grandmother. She was so concerned about his statement that she told police.

I would love for this boy to be innocent but I just cant wrap my mind around some plausible theory that even remotely shows that.

Why would an adult use a youth rifle that had to be reloaded and reloaded over and over again. That just makes no sense to me. But I do know that someone will use a gun that they are very familiar with.

I am not picking on him anymore than I do with any other defendants that I have thought were guilty in the past. I do think he is guilty of the crime, no matter his age and hopefully he will get a juvenile sentence of 8-10 years and will be given extensive therapy.

Yes, you are correct we don't know the reason for the motion but we do know that if he is tried in juvey he gets the same amount of time no matter if he had murdered one or two. I think the DA finds that unacceptable and in the true interest of justice for Vincent Romero he is parting the two cases because really if he is found guilty on the two charges it means he got away with one for free. It is extremely rare to even have juveniles tried for double homicide so I can understand why the DA is in a quandary about what to do.

And there are so many other things but I am so dang tired now my brain is freezing up!


And I certainly respect your opinion too as I do each and everyone here at WS! Its the best!

imo

 

[mysteriew]

Then why would they leave an eye witness alive to see two homicides? One more wouldn't make any difference. If it was that simple why wouldn't he say he yelled for Tim's help because someone was inside the house and shot his dad and the bad guy then shot Tim?

imoo

Many people who will shoot an adult with no problem still won't shoot a kid. They take the chance that the kid will be too scared to id them or be too much help to LE. And I believe the kid did start out of by telling LE that he came to the home and they were both dead. But LE didn't believe him.

 

[Shock]

Mr. Roman either sat in his car, or just outside of it, talking to his wife on his cell phone. He may have lingered there to smoke, as it is reported he was not allowed to smoke in the house (Vincent Romero used second hand smoke from his wife as a reason he should have custody of his son during the divorce proceedings).

Mrs. Roman reported, as testified by the Sgt., that she heard <redacted> calling for Tim to come into the house. Something was wrong. This was verified by Mr. Roman&#8217;s alleged response. He ended the phone call.

According to St. Johns police Mr. Roman was shot in the arm (where less clothing allowed a trickle) 25&#8217; from the front door of the house, yet continued on course.

Eight year old <redacted> was able to eject a shell, load another, chamber the round, pull the firing pin rod back, aim, and shoot three more chest shots before Mr. Roman reached the door, where he collapsed. <redacted> could not have shot Mr. Roman in the chest again unless he rolled over then back again before death.

It takes approximately six seconds (for a very experienced and proficient adult shooter) to eject, load, chamber, chock, and most importantly, even imprecisely [point] aim, this little rifle. A slow walker can cover 24&#8217; in much less than 18 seconds. Someone in a hurry could do it in 4 seconds and confront his assailant, much faster than an accomplished shooter could fire the rifle again.
Did Mr. Roman casually stride to where he would be killed, then stand idle while the shooter did his three shot (18 seconds) dirty deed?

Had he been receiving fire from the front door would he not have sought shelter elsewhere? Why would he proceed into the line of fire?

 

[oceanblueeyes]

lae, i think that they are going to argue that he was "lying in wait" for the men when they got home, and also the reloading of the gun so many times, and the headshots which were possibly executions. (there is reason to believe that some or all of the headshots were while the men were already on the ground)

and maybe that he had some knowledge of needing to attack the two men seperately, with a single shot weapon and two adult males in front of him he is only getting one shot off.

Just the reloading the weapon time and time again would fit the definition of premeditation.

If he did this his intent was to keep shooting until they were dead so that is a preconceived intent. He had to formulate it in his mind.

I do agree they are going to say he lay in wait for each of the men. Most likely they will say he was in the house already armed and hiding and when his father went up the stairs he stepped out and shot him then he lured Romans to come closer to the home and he lay in wait and shot him too.

imoo

 

[liljim]

shock you need to edit out the boy's name since he is a minor.

thanx

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Many people who will shoot an adult with no problem still won't shoot a kid. They take the chance that the kid will be too scared to id them or be too much help to LE. And I believe the kid did start out of by telling LE that he came to the home and they were both dead. But LE didn't believe him.

I am not so sure about that. Perps are killing even small children just so they leave no eye witnesses behind.

imoo

 

[mysteriew]

Mr. Roman either sat in his car, or just outside of it, talking to his wife on his cell phone. He may have lingered there to smoke, as it is reported he was not allowed to smoke in the house (Vincent Romero used second hand smoke from his wife as a reason he should have custody of his son during the divorce proceedings).

Mrs. Roman reported, as testified by the Sgt., that she heard <redacted> calling for Tim to come into the house. Something was wrong. This was verified by Mr. Roman&#8217;s alleged response. He ended the phone call.

According to St. Johns police Mr. Roman was shot in the arm (where less clothing allowed a trickle) 25&#8217; from the front door of the house, yet continued on course.

Eight year old <redacted> was able to eject a shell, load another, chamber the round, pull the firing pin rod back, aim, and shoot three more chest shots before Mr. Roman reached the door, where he collapsed. <redacted> could not have shot Mr. Roman in the chest again unless he rolled over then back again before death.

It takes approximately six seconds (for a very experienced and proficient adult shooter) to eject, load, chamber, chock, and most importantly, even imprecisely [point] aim, this little rifle. A slow walker can cover 24&#8217; in much less than 18 seconds. Someone in a hurry could do it in 4 seconds and confront his assailant, much faster than an accomplished shooter could fire the rifle again.
Did Mr. Roman casually stride to where he would be killed, then stand idle while the shooter did his three shot (18 seconds) dirty deed?

Had he been receiving fire from the front door would he not have sought shelter elsewhere? Why would he proceed into the line of fire?

But wouldn't he have heard the father getting shot? Wouldn't he have mentioned that to his wife?

"Why would he proceed into the line of fire?" That is one thing that I think does point to the kid. If he was shot by the kid, he may have thought the kid was just playing around with the gun that he didn't really mean to shoot him. He may have thought that he could reach the kid and overpower him and get the gun away before the kid could shoot again.

I have a question. How many shots did the kid shoot and how many shots actually hit one of the men?

 

[Shock]

Perhaps Mr. Roman was first shot, in the arm, by a shooter from the side of the house then sought refuse inside the house, only to be shot repeatedly at the front door by another shooter.

The initial shooting was done with a semi-automatic rifle or handgun. <redacted> may have &#8216;ended their suffering and shaking&#8217; with bullets to the head, but the chest wounds came fast and furious from another weapon, stopping the victims in their tracks, leaving them both face down.
There is no public evidence that the victims staggered along, waiting 6 or more seconds to be struck again. Who would?

Semi-autos eject empty casings much more violently (quickly) than a bolt action. They often bounce around a long distance from where they were fired.

 

[Shock]

As far as Mr. Roman hearing the shots from the house, he may well have heard them and his wife did not (over the cell phone).
A 22LR shot in a rifle produces about 125 db. A typical car horn produces 120 db. At 45 feet (25&#8217; to the front door from where Mr. Roman was plus 20&#8217; to the stairs, inside the house) with the front door open, it would have been audible, even if Mr. Roman was seated inside the car, and talking on the phone. Chances are the disturbance he heard was the rapid fire of a semi-auto inside the house. Not five six second shots. Maybe that&#8217;s when he became concerned. Perhaps he hustled. Just to be shot down.

The situation with <redacted>'s dad is no different. He was also chest shot with the same time lapse between shots. Not possible. No one waits to be shot. It was a semi.

 

[liljim]

just trying to help you guys out - we are not allowed to use the boy's name here since he is a minor.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

"Had he been receiving fire from the front door would he not have sought shelter elsewhere? Why would he proceed into the line of fire?"

Shock, from what I ascertain all of his wounds were frontal shots except the head shots so yes, he would have been traveling toward the direction of the metal screen door from the truck. That door looks like one could see out much better than someone could see in.

We will never know why he tried to make it to the door. We dont know exactly where he was at when shot in the chest. They said all the bullet casings were found right around his body.

imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

As far as Mr. Roman hearing the shots from the house, he may well have heard them and his wife did not (over the cell phone).
A 22LR shot in a rifle produces about 125 db. A typical car horn produces 120 db. At 45 feet (25&#8217; to the front door from where Mr. Roman was plus 20&#8217; to the stairs, inside the house) with the front door open, it would have been audible, even if Mr. Roman was seated inside the car, and talking on the phone. Chances are the disturbance he heard was the rapid fire of a semi-auto inside the house. Not five six second shots. Maybe that&#8217;s when he became concerned. Perhaps he hustled. Just to be shot down.

The situation with <redacted>&#8217;s dad is no different. He was also chest shot with the same time lapse between shots. Not possible. No one waits to be shot. It was a semi.

We dont know if the door was open are shut when Mr. Romero was murdered.

There is nothing anywhere that says it was a semi automatic.

And no one knows how fast Romero was shot either. No one heard those shots only the ones that hit Romans.

imoo

 

[Shock]

According to Sgt. Rodriguez the door was opened and resting on Mr. Romans head. The shot through the screen door was from outside to inside.

As far as a semi-auto weapon is concerned, the point is that it is not humanly possible to shoot a person in the chest at six second intervals with a single-shot weapon without a great deal of movement by the victim.

 

[liljim]

it sounds like the father fell right where he was when he got shot the first time, i would imagine he was in a sort of shock when he realized his son was shooting at him (assuming it was the boy).

tim was also pretty surprised and possibly the first thing that came to mind was "he is 8 and has to reload, i can get to him" he could have been hit once in the chest and run/staggered quickly towards the boy and got shot a second time in the chest or one to the head right as he got to him, that could be the shot that went up thru his jaw.

i speculated earlier that it seemed crazy to think that an 8 year old could reload and score so many hits in that situation. but i have no idea how familiar he is with the weapon. so if we now assume for a minute that someone else was there, i dont think the boy sounded as if he had been scared into lying about things, like some random stranger did it and threatened him not to tell. so then we are left with the idea that the boy knew the other person that was there, and then wonder why he would cover for them...

i have some ideas but i think it would be in kind of poor taste to speculate on them now. im sure everyone could imagine a scenario where the boy would want his father gone and be covering for the other shooter...

 

[mysteriew]

Mr. Roman either sat in his car, or just outside of it, talking to his wife on his cell phone. He may have lingered there to smoke, as it is reported he was not allowed to smoke in the house (Vincent Romero used second hand smoke from his wife as a reason he should have custody of his son during the divorce proceedings).

Mrs. Roman reported, as testified by the Sgt., that she heard <redacted> calling for Tim to come into the house. Something was wrong. This was verified by Mr. Roman&#8217;s alleged response. He ended the phone call.

According to St. Johns police Mr. Roman was shot in the arm (where less clothing allowed a trickle) 25&#8217; from the front door of the house, yet continued on course.

Eight year old <redacted> was able to eject a shell, load another, chamber the round, pull the firing pin rod back, aim, and shoot three more chest shots before Mr. Roman reached the door, where he collapsed. Christian could not have shot Mr. Roman in the chest again unless he rolled over then back again before death.

It takes approximately six seconds (for a very experienced and proficient adult shooter) to eject, load, chamber, chock, and most importantly, even imprecisely [point] aim, this little rifle. A slow walker can cover 24&#8217; in much less than 18 seconds. Someone in a hurry could do it in 4 seconds and confront his assailant, much faster than an accomplished shooter could fire the rifle again.
Did Mr. Roman casually stride to where he would be killed, then stand idle while the shooter did his three shot (18 seconds) dirty deed?

Had he been receiving fire from the front door would he not have sought shelter elsewhere? Why would he proceed into the line of fire?

I forgot to say good point about the amount of time to load and fire vs. the amount of time for Romans to get from the truck to the door.

 

[Shock]

So you're saying Mr. Roman did, in fact, rush the boy then stood there and took three shots (18 seconds) to the chest?