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

[liljim]

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

no, that isnt what i said at all.

 

[mysteriew]

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

No I am just saying that if Romans couldn't see who was shooting him, or could see the shooter was an adult I don't think he would have moved toward the shooter. But if he could see the shooter was the kid I think he was more likely to move toward him.

 

[Shock]

I'm simply pointing out that a human being cannot be shot three or four times in the torso with a slow loading 22 cal weapon without moving. The person would have to remain standing or kneeling, facing the shooter, in order for that to happen. Had the head shots came first and the bodies fallen face down then it is impossible to have chest wounds without rolling the body over in order to shoot it again.

 

[mysteriew]

I'm simply pointing out that a human being cannot be shot three or four times in the torso with a slow loading 22 cal weapon without moving. The person would have to remain standing or kneeling, facing the shooter, in order for that to happen. Had the head shots came first and the bodies fallen face down then it is impossible to have chest wounds without rolling the body over in order to shoot it again.

No but there is this hypothetical scenario:

Romans hangs up the phone and starts toward the house. He feels pain in his arm and looks down seeing blood. It would take him seconds just to realize that he had been shot. He looks up to the doorway and sees the kid ejecting and reloading. Or maybe he doesn't see the reloading, maybe the kid closed the screen again. "What the.... put that gun down you shot me." But the kid shoots again. Romans moves forward and the kid is reloading. Remember he has been shot once in the arm and once in the chest by now. He isn't running. Just as he reaches the door and opens it, the kid shoots again and he goes down.

Remember we are looking back and know how it ends. But for Romans, he didn't know. It would take him some period of time for it to sink in, to realize and accept that he was being shot out of the blue. He was an experienced hunter right? So he might have recognized the gunshot, but mentally putting that together with the pain in his arm might have taken several seconds. Recognizing that it wasn't an accident and that the kid was deliberately trying to kill him may never have sank in or at least not until the second shot.

 

[Shock]

No matter who you are, or how experienced, no one knowingly walks into a direct line of gunfire without exceptional valor. There was none to be had here.
Adrenaline flow might overtake a victim. It might cause a shooter to shake uncontrollably. Yet the natural instinct of self preservation will over rule all thought. You cover your head and dive for safety.
A fireman may rush a burning building. But not when he's being shot at.

 

[liljim]

i hear what you are saying, and there are a lot of things that seem very unlikely about this case. but you cannot say that it absolutely did not happen a certain way.

i wont be surprised to hear that someone else was there with another weapon, but the way that the officer testified as to how he thought it happened is certainly possible.

and whoever said that this boy couldnt be tried as an adult - the prosecution is still looking into trying him as an adult and is expected to make arguments that they will do just that.

 

[mysteriew]

There is a possible scenario for how he may have known that his father had been shot in the chest.

In his first statement he said something about he had moved his father to see if he was alive. Now he didn't tell the LE (but in a state of shock at finding his father dead I don't know how trustworthy his memory is), but lets say he tried to turn his father over. 8 years old moving dead weight, he probably couldn't turn him over. But he may have managed to raise a shoulder, maybe even enough to see his chest. But when he let go the father's body may have returned to the face first position.

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi

Quote
i wont be surprised to hear that someone else was there with another weapon, but the way that the officer testified as to how he thought it happened is certainly possible.

Can you please show me what the officer testified happened and another poster said the casings?were found near Mr Romans body.Can you please show me this also?

suzanne

 

[Trino]

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. 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.

There is absolutely no evidence that any gun except a .22 rifle was used.

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
Do we know that yet?The ME would know that right?

suzanne

 

[SoobsinMI]

and whoever said that this boy couldnt be tried as an adult - the prosecution is still looking into trying him as an adult and is expected to make arguments that they will do just that.

They can continue to "look into it" but legally, according to AZ penal code statute 13-501 (http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00501.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS) he doesn't fit the criteria. He isn't 15, 16 or 17 as required in section A, nor is he at least 14 years old, as required in section B, nor does he qualify for section C -

A criminal prosecution shall be brought against a juvenile in the same manner as an adult if the juvenile has been accused of a criminal offense and has a historical prior felony conviction.

He has no prior felony conviction.

He falls under section E - "If the court does not find that the juvenile is a chronic felony offender, the court shall transfer the juvenile to the juvenile court pursuant to section 8-302. "

 

[SoobsinMI]

nor does he qualify for section C - He has no prior felony conviction.

Although.....this MAY be why the DA has dismissed charges of 1st degree murder for the father. IF they convict on Romans, then they can refile for the father, and point to a PRIOR felony conviction (Romans) and the child would qualify on Section C, to be tried as an adult. I'm not sure that it would work, considering the murders happened at the same time. However, it worked in the Joseph Duncan trial.

In any case, I think it's a shame that we'll be trying an 8 year old as an adult, even for murder.

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
Were there different types of shell casings at the scene?

suzanne

 

[oceanblueeyes]

No I am just saying that if Romans couldn't see who was shooting him, or could see the shooter was an adult I don't think he would have moved toward the shooter. But if he could see the shooter was the kid I think he was more likely to move toward him.

Good Morning, Mysterview.

I think it is very hard to explain how it all unfolded for Mr. Romans. The hearing transcripts really doesn't give us things we need to know anything for sure.

The thing that is an important factor to me is this weapon was used in close proximity to each victim. Imo because of that each shot would have been much more damaging to them than had it been fired at the victims far away and not within feet.

I do think it is possible if the perp was right on top of VR when they began firing and do believe that he may have been able to stay upright a few seconds to be shot again before he went down. Sometimes there is a delay in the person even comprehending they have been shot. Sometimes they dont even feel any pain. We don't know if he was able to make it up any more steps before he died in the position found or if he retreated back some and then died.

With Mr. Romans we don't know if at the time of all the shots if the door was open in the position found where Romans' head rested up against it. I have gone back and looked at the metal screen lattice crime scene picture and have wonder if the slot openings with the design of the door would be enough to put the barrel of a rifle through it. It seems to be a door where one can see much clearer from the inside of the home to the outside than those trying to see in. I have seen these privacy metal doors before.

Until a forensic expert can lay out where the men's positions were exactly when each shot was fired we are only left to guess. The upward or downward, left to right etc. trajectory pattern will tell them much about where the perp's position was when firing each shot and where the victim was located at the time they were fired upon. All we know all of these shots to the chest were done with the perp facing the victims. That would seem to mean in VRs case that the perp was already up the stairs and maybe on the second floor already waiting with weapon ready for him to come up the stairs after work.

It seems whomever did this had to use a weapon from inside that house. The officer testified that a opened box of 22 bullets were found on a table by the stairs iirc. If an adult perpetrator did this then why didn't he chose one of the other guns Romero had which were much more powerful, like a deer rifle, that did not require to be reloaded each time nor require so many shots to be fired, if he entered the home with no gun of his own? It is things like this that nag at me because I cant make it logically fit.

I hope they release the autopsy reports. They may seal Romero's for the time being though. Then we will know exactly where they were shot and how many times. The officer was not affirmative when he said Romans was either shot in the chest two or three times. Until the ME examines the body they would not really know for sure and he was just going by what he could see at the time.

Also I wonder what type of 22 bullet was used and whether it was hollow points. Those are meant to fragment upon impact when they hit the target and do much more damage.

imoo

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
Does it say on the states witness list the step mom was not a witness?That's interesting.

suzanne

 

[oceanblueeyes]

They can continue to "look into it" but legally, according to AZ penal code statute 13-501 (http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/13/00501.htm&Title=13&DocType=ARS) he doesn't fit the criteria. He isn't 15, 16 or 17 as required in section A, nor is he at least 14 years old, as required in section B, nor does he qualify for section C - He has no prior felony conviction.

He falls under section E - "If the court does not find that the juvenile is a chronic felony offender, the court shall transfer the juvenile to the juvenile court pursuant to section 8-302. "

Thanks Soobs for the information.

I read somewhere and now I wish I had kept the link but I didn't, but anyway they were saying what can change that though is he was charged with killing more than one person and that makes it where they can ask that he be tried as an adult but I think the DA already knows this case will be handled by the juvenile system whether it is one murder or two.

The juvenile justice system really wasn't set up to handle murder cases like this one. It was intended to rehabilitate minor offenders that committed minor or non violent crimes.

imoo

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Hi
Does it say on the states witness list the step mom was not a witness?That's interesting.

suzanne

Hi,

What state witness list? Have they put out a new list? I know she did not testify in the probable cause hearing but then she wouldn't have as she wasn't at the scene of the crime when it happened.

imoo

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
Ok,Thankyou.That makes sense to me.

suzanne

 

[Ms Suzanne]

Hi
Where did they say the step mom was during the killings?

suzanne

 

[SoobsinMI]

is he was charged with killing more than one person and that makes it where they can ask that he be tried as an adult

I don't see that qualification in the statute. However, now I think I may need to change my opinion that they could use the Romans conviction as a prior felony to qualify for the habitual prior felony conviction, after reading this:

2. "Chronic felony offender" means a juvenile who has had two prior and separate adjudications and dispositions for conduct that would constitute a historical prior felony conviction if the juvenile had been tried as an adult.

Although, this section may satisfy that requirement:

(b) Aggravated assault pursuant to section 13-1204, subsection A, paragraph 2 involving the use of a deadly weapon.